My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP07841
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
7001-8000
>
WSP07841
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:29:07 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 2:37:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.127
Description
Savery-Pot Hook Project
Basin
Yampa/White
Water Division
6
Date
1/1/1976
Title
Report on the Planning Coordinating Council Review of the Savery-Pot Hook Project & related Correspondence
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />00 <br />C\J <br />00 <br /> <br />- 6 - <br /> <br />Streamflow <br /> <br />Much discussion in the publ ic hearings surrounded the impact of Savery-Pot <br />Hook upon streamflows. The f>{C found that there wi 11 be al terat ions to current <br />strea.mFlow patterns in the Little Snake River and its tri9utaries. However, <br />there is no evidence that .these alterations will have a net negative impact. Also, <br />there is no evidence that these alterations wi II have a significant impact upon <br />the Yampa River or upon the endangered fish species to be found in that RiVer. <br /> <br />Social ~nd ~conomic Impacts <br /> <br />The PCC found that the construction of the Project, as well as the recreational <br />use of the reservoirs, will have a measurable socio-economic impact upon the <br />region. I t was noted that most of the construction workers are I ikely to 1 ive in <br />the Craig area, a municipal ity currently impacted by energy development. The <br />PCC recommends that the Bureau of Reclamation should work very closely with the <br />Energy Impact Assistance team that is functioni.ng in the Craig area so that impact <br />assistance mechanisms associated with energy development can also be coordinated <br />with the social and economic problems encountered in the construction of Savery-Pot <br />Hook. <br /> <br />With respect to recreational uses of the reservoirs, the Bureau of Reclamation <br />should work very closely with the State of Colorado in developing a recreational <br />plan for the area. We strongly suggest that the Bureau seek State concurrence <br />in the development and implementation of such a plan. Additionally, the <br />proper land use planning strategies and controls are developed for the area <br />surrounding the reservoirs. <br /> <br />Conclusion <br /> <br />The State of Colorado has long pursued a pol icy that the Savery-Pot Hook. <br />Project is a beneficial one for the agriculture economy of northwestern Colorado. <br />As a result of an extraordinary and extensive review by the interdepartmental <br />Planning Coordinating Council, we conclude that there has been no evidence <br />~presented that would lead us to reverse or disrupt that standing policy. <br />Further, a review of the Governor's Executive Growth and Development Policy <br />indicates a ~igh level of consistency between that policy and the goals of ~he <br />Savery-Pot Hook Project. <br /> <br />The State does have a concern that an assessment of the cumulative impacts <br />of the Colorado River projects should be accomplished in a manner that will not <br />necessarily jeopardize the four Colorado projects that have already received <br />congressional authorization and funding. In this regard, the PCC has asked the <br />Department of Natural Resources to work with the Bureau of Reclamation to devise <br />a mechanism that wi I I give a better understanding as to the nature and extent <br />of any cumulative impacts. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.