Laserfiche WebLink
<br />SPECIFIC COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS <br />ON THE <br />DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT <br />FOR GLEN CANYON DAM <br /> <br />CHAPTER II <br /> <br />Page (Pg) 33, Column (C) 2, Paragraph (P) 1. According to Randy <br />Peterson of USBR, the timing of the 20,000 cfs release in April <br />does not allow USBR to manage the reservoir to allow flexibility <br />for April 1st forecast no space is left at that point. <br />Therefore, the frequency of ,spilling would increase. Is this true? <br />What are the ramifications of this condition? <br /> <br />'1 <br /> <br />Pg. 34, C. 1, P. 5. The concept of Adaptive Management is not new; <br />some would say it has always been used at Glen Canyon Dam. What <br />seems new is the concept that regulated river management should now <br />consider a variety of resources not previously included, like <br />recreation and ecology. Management of Dam operations has always <br />reflected and incorporated into the operating plans, those <br />resources represented as being worthy of consideration. Recreation <br />and ecology are resources deemed by the authors to be worthy of <br />consideration in management of Dam operations along with resources <br />previously considered such as water demands, hydropower operations <br />and flood, control. This seems reasonable but the trick is <br />achieving an acceptable balance of all resource considerations. Is <br />balancing considerations an intent? Will there be priorities? <br /> <br />Pg. 34, C. 2, P. 3. Given the disparity of agendas each committee <br />member is likely to pursue, this kind of arrangement would likely <br />result in dramatic swings in operations over time. Not only would <br />power contracts suffer from such large swings in operations, but <br />ecological conditions downstream would be harmed. <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />.. <br />" <br />.~ <br /> <br />-> <br /> <br />f <br /> <br />;. <br />".- <br /> <br />Non-operational mitigation should be used where operational <br />mitigation would be either ineffective or less cost-effective, <br />after considering costs to all resources. In either instance, to <br />maintain efficiency, non-operational mitigation should be part of <br />the overall management process. <br /> <br />Pg. 35, C. 1, P. 1. The information base described is too narrow <br />to provide a realistic data set for the Adaptive Management <br />program. All resource uses and impacts must be included in the <br />data base. This includes water and power supplies and demands. <br />This way, Adaptive Management decisions will reflect all society'S <br />choice on Dam operations rather than only one or two segments. <br /> <br />Long-term monitoring and research also should look at the power <br />system as an integral part of a total energy supply program, not <br /> <br />.;.' <br /> <br />,.' <br />~' <br />~ <br />..; <br /> <br />18 <br />