My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP08062
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
8001-9000
>
WSP08062
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:30:00 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 2:44:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8240.200.43.A.2
Description
Grand Valley/Orchard Mesa
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
8/1/1997
Title
Final Environmental Assessment - Providing Fish Passage at the Grand Valley Irrigation Company Diversion Dam on the Colorado River
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
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 />It is technically possible to screen river diversions with screens with extremely small openings; <br />however, as screen size decreases, both construction and operational costs increase. Therefore, it <br />is the desire of the program to determine the largest screen size that would balance loss of fish <br />with costs. <br /> <br />While this EA does not fully consider the possible construction of upstream passageways at the <br />Price-Stubb Dam and Government Highline Canal Diversion, the Service and Recovery Program <br />concur that if fish screens are needed at these facilities in the future, the funding and operation <br />and maintenance would be the responsibility of the Service and/or Recovery Program. Similarly, <br />loss of endangered fish at these structures would be handled the same as at the GVIC Diversion <br />Dam. This "incidental take" is discussed elsewhere in the EA. <br /> <br />Alternatives Discarded <br /> <br />Several alternatives were considered but dismissed for several reasons. One alternative was to <br />remove the GVIC Diversion Dam and install a pump to provide water to the CIVIC Canal. To <br />ensure the 640 cfs water right, it was apparent that the present gravity-flow system was more <br />reliable than a pump would be. The pump installation would be costly to construct and would <br />have high annual maintenance and operation costs, In addition, pump failures could have <br />significant adverse economic costs to farmers and other water users. <br /> <br />Another alternative, considered but dismissed, was related to streamflow management. <br />Streamf10ws could be kept at an elevation that would allow the endangered fishes to pass the <br />GVIC Diversion during even normally low water periods, Since the GVIC Diversion becomes <br />passable at streamflows of 12,000 cfs and the river flow is often in the 2,000 to 4,000 cfs range in <br />the summer and fall, the amount of water needed was considered excessive and would interfere <br />with existing and future water users. <br /> <br />13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.