WSP06185 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MAR-17-94 - THU 16:07 UPPER COLORADO RIVER 4/17/9 fj Post.lt- brand fax transmittal memo 7671 fat POi"' ~ .- e_b COMM P.01 ..- Co. I I kR n I'>c I-'-;~ "I I L E . {C'",MI-':;:' ..; . ~ ~. .... " CANYON DAM DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ;/ TESTIMONY ~ . . >~' ~,_y:. GLEN Good eveninJ. Hy nllle is Wayne E. Cook, ExecuUve Direct.or of the Upper Colorado River Commission, and I am appearinl before you tonight representing t.hat Commission. The Commission is an interstate compact administrative agency created by the Upper Colorado RiVer ~asin Compact of 1948. The member St.ates of the Commission are: Colorado, New Mexico, Ut.ah and Wyoming. Since its inception over 45 years ago, the Commission has actively participated in the develop. ment, utilization and conservat.ion of the vater reSources ot the Colorado River Basin. the Upper Colorado River Commission, on behalf of its member States, appreciates the opportunity to present testi~ony on the Glen Canyon Dam Draft Environmental Impact State~ent. Our comments today vill be brief to respect time constraints, and we viiI provide supplemental written comments. The Upper Division States have been involved in the Glen Canyon Environ- mental Studies since their inception and have followed with interest the EIS process. The States have been anxious with the selection of a preferred alternative and especially some of the common elements of all the alterna- tives. These common el~ents are flood frequency meaSures, adaptive manage- ment and beach habitat buildina flovs. The inclusion of measures to reduce flood frequencies downstream of Glen Canyon Dam vas of great concern if such measures vould further restrict the filling of Lake povell. We believe the only way Reclamation can accomplish this ;oal i$ to extend the spillvay gates t.o create a flood vater retention pool above the top of tho existing aates. In this vay, the Boals of reducing flood release frequencies as well as m3int3i~ini water eonso=vation purposes can be accomplished. The value of adaptive management and the organizational make-up being proposed is recognized as an appropriate management mechanism for future adjustments in operational criteria. This process must, however, remain free to be guided by actual science and not political tinkering. The acceptance in August 1991 of very conservative interim flov criteria by many entities vas based on mutual trust that modifications would be made vhen science demonstra- ted that modification of the criteria is varranted. Over tvo years of study demonstrated that adjustments to poverplant uprampinB and maximum daily flovs could b. made without jeopardizinl the purpose for which interim flovs vere implemented. The Grand Canyon Protection Act provides the mechanism for such chanses throush consultation with the States and others. Such consultation found the chanses vere supported scientifically and vas completed without objection only to have the changes blocked by some apparent political objec- tion.. These chanles are varranted, should be adopted immediately and must become a plrt of the recommended alternative in the Final lIS.