WSP05640 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

(Continlled from front page) letters indicates the concerns expressed in the written correspondence generally matches the oral presentations. A majority of the speakers suggested taking more time to complete the EIS and to extend the public comment period. In response to both the public concerns and those of our researchers, the time period has been extended one year to the end of 1992. Most of the speakers also stated they wanted interim flows from Glen Canyon Dam during the EIS preparation period. Secretary of the Interior Lujan has already stated he favors the implementation of interim flows following the completion of the necessary research flows. Those research flows are discussed in this newsletter. Many speakers also asked that Arizona Game and Fish Department become a cooperating agency in the EIS. Similar requests have come from the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Indian Tribe. Those requests were granted. In addition, the other two affected Indian tribes, the Havasupai and Hualapai, have been invited to become cooperating agencies. 2 Power interests tended to favor maximum or existing peaking power operations, structural mitigation downstream of Glen Canyon Dam such as a reregulating dam, beach stabilization, and sediment augmentation measures. They were joined by irrigation interests in expressing concerns about changes in power operations that may reduce the availability of funds from power revenues for other projects in the Upper Colorado River Basin. River running interests favor moderated release patterns from the dam and oppose structural alternatives in Grand Canyon. Beach issues and boater safety are their major concerns. Some provided specific sugsestions for flow recommendations, while many simply called for lower high flows and higher low flows. Trout fishing interests favor moderated release patterns to maximize trout reproduction. They are also concerned about fluctuating flows stranding fish. They strongly oppose structural alternatives. Environmental speakers emphasized the need for ecosystem protection. They stated a desire that river flows in Grand Canyon approximate pre-dam conditions. Some speakers did favor a EIS TEAM GLEN CANYON DAM multi-level outlet at the dam similar to one at Flaming Gorge Dam on the Green River in Utah. Such a structure allows water temperature be increased for the benefit of native fish. They strongly object to other structural alternatives. Many environmental speakers also favor an alternative that would consider reducing power demand through either conservation or pricing within Western Area Power Administration's jurisdiction. The desire is to reduce or eliminate peak power use patterns. Other issues were also raised by the speakers. Some asked the ElS be expanded to all of the Upper Colorado River system while some suggested the removal of Glen Canyon Dam. Power interests stated that a loss of generating capacity, especially peaking power, will cause other environmental conflicts as they strive to replace hydropower with other sources of power. It is quickly apparent that the issues and potential alternatives are llldeed diverse. All those who sent in cards and letters, or who attended meetings and filled out aregistrationcard,are being added to the public involvement mailing list. They will receive all newsletters and other information notices and updates.