Laserfiche WebLink
<br />-. <br /> <br />4 ,'~ C" G <br />~.;j,..O <br /> <br />MEMORANDUM <br /> <br />To: Files <br /> <br />Subject: Response to the Fish and Wildlife Service, June 12, 197~, <br />Letter of Comment on the Draft Environmental Statement - <br />Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, Colorado <br /> <br />1. Comment - Volume 1, Page 11-1, B. Purpose of the Project <br /> <br />This section capsulizes the history and objectives of the project. <br />It should also contain a synopsis of the quantities of water being <br />made available through the project and the amounts dedicated to each <br />purpose. While such information is presented in detail in subsequent <br />discussions, such a summary would furnish a clear instant overview <br />of what the project will actually accomplish. <br /> <br />Response: Paragraph II.C, General Concept Q'f the Project was added <br />to the Environmental Impact Statement. This paragraph shows the <br />present allocation of water to municipal and industrial use as <br />50 percent of the Project wacer or 40,500 acre-feet. <br /> <br />2. Co~ment - Volume 1, Page 11-197, (3) Post NEPA-Future <br /> <br />. In addition to the material on the proposed hatchery, this might <br />be che appropriate section to briefly discuss plans to provide <br />additional water to the existing Leadville Federal Fish Hatchery. <br />Present plans call for a minimum of 3000 gallons/minute to be de- <br />livered to this hatchery via a bifurcation from the proposed Mt. <br />Elbert Canal. <br /> <br />Response: Chapter II, Description of the Proposal has been rewritten <br />to combine all aspects of each principal feature in, one paragraph. <br />The informa~ion on the turnout to the Leadville National Fish Hatchery <br />is now in Chapter II, paragraph 12b. <br /> <br />3. Comment - Volume 3 Alternatives to the Proposed Action <br /> <br />In light of the overappropriation of the Arkansas River Basin in <br />the area under consideration and the increasing demands being placed <br />on Colorado River flows, the time may have arrived for evaluating <br />another previously unmentioned alternative. Because water may <br />constitute a partially limiting factor to extensive growth along the <br />front range of Colorado, it might now be appropriate to discuss the <br />reasons for and against pricing in-basin water supplies as another <br />alternat i Ve. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />XI-257 <br />