Laserfiche WebLink
<br />r.. <br />-./' ' <br />o;D <br />-t <br /> <br />'.~-' <br /> <br />, j <br /> <br />r -, <br />,- <br /> <br />r--- <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />from the entitlements in the entire basin rather than in the project <br />state since the benefits accrue to all the basin state's. <br /> <br />Environmental protection is best achieved by conserving the use of <br />this water for in-stream uses, therefore EPA supports the option that <br />such water should not be used for additional consumptive uses in order <br />that the public's investment in salinity control be protected. <br /> <br />Additi ona 1 COrTl11ents <br /> <br />1) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recollJllends the acquisition of <br />4000 acres of wild1 ife habitat but the proposed plan only includes the <br />purchase of 2800 acres. EPA suggests that major canal lining be delayed <br />if not deleted in order to reduce the impacts on wildlife habitat. <br /> <br />2) Figure A-l shows a potential borrow site (B.A.2) along the <br />Colorado River. Such an activity may require a Section 404 permit from <br />the Corps of Engineers if it is necessary to place a fill such as a <br />temporary haul road. Unless there is some compelling reason to use this <br />site, EPA recommends that this borrow site not be selected in order to <br />minimize the effects on the river. <br /> <br />3) Page A-9 of the assessment briefly outlines the essential monitor- <br />ing program. Additional details of this program should be presented in <br />the EIS (as recommended preViously) such as the location of monitoring <br />stations and wells, data analysis procedures and the need for additional <br />basel ine data. <br /> <br />4) Tables C-7, C-9 and C-12 fail to mention the Bureau's Frying <br />Pan-Arkansas Project. This project should be included with the other <br />Colorado River projects. <br /> <br />5) , Page D-l indicates that under the non-development case that salt <br />loading will increase due to additional water use for lawns as the Grand <br />Valley area developes. Of course, such a situation would exist with or <br />without the project. What can be done to encourage more efficient use for <br />lawn irrigation? <br /> <br />6) Regarding selective retirement of land as presented on page D-9, <br />while it is not cost effective to retire all saline lands nor I'lould it be <br />SOcially acceptable,it may be reasonable for local comprehensive planning <br />to del ineate these areas for special uses such as open space. If such <br />land is converted to urban use, does sal t return decrease? Perhaps coordina- <br />tion with local planning efforts could encourage a modest program of selec- <br />tive retirement of small areas of very saline land. <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />~" <br /> <br />~ - <br /> <br />---- <br /> <br />. "", -'---- - <br />