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 />Use Plan include protecting, conserving. and efficiently managing the county's public lands; <br />and to encourage the preservation of sustainable ecosystems. Recovery Program efforts are <br />made using an ecosystem approach that parallels the Mesa County land use plan. <br /> <br />- There were several concerns related to the potential for piecemealing compliance with NEP A <br />since additional passageways may be needed upstream at the Price-Stubb Dam and Government <br />Highline Canal Diversion. This EA describes the proposed construction of an experimental riffle <br />and pool fish passage at the GVIC Diversion, In this EA it is recognized that future fish <br />passageways may be constructed At this time, however, the need has not been fully agreed upon <br />and plans and designs ate not in sufficient detail to analyze, This present EA recognizes some <br />of the concerns that could be associated with future passageways and environmental <br />commitments for these future possibilities are suggested, Site specific EA 's will be prepared for <br />any upstream passageways if plans proceed. <br /> <br />- One comment was received expressing concern that high selenium levels in the river may <br />prevent recovery of the fish. Selenium, a nonmetallic element, is essential in normal animal <br />nutrition but levels not far above required levels in diets may produce toxic effects (Lemly and <br />Smith 1987). The Grand Valley is a major source of selenium loading to the Colorado River. <br />Ongoing studies have been designed to determine selenium toxicity to the endangered fish; this <br />work is not complete, but selenium concentrations may be adversely affecting the fish. The riffle <br />and pool design described in this EA is experimental, but may lead to additional passageways <br />that would allow fish to move further upstream where selenium levels are lower and, <br />theoretically, less of a potential problem. <br /> <br />- Water users requested a commitment from the Recovery Program that stocking captive-reared <br />endangered fish will not be impeded by construction of a passageway. The Recovery Program <br />has agreed to use stocking as a management tool in recovery efforts. Ongoing stocking <br />experiments are being conducted and these studies will determine the relationship between size <br />of captive-reared endangered fish at the time of stocking and survival, Propagation facilities <br />(hatcheries) continue to be constructed, and stocking of captive-reared endangeredfishes will <br />continue, <br /> <br />-One comment expressed concern, that during certain low flow periods, water intended for use <br />through the fish passage would be lost through the Orchard Mesa check canal, and a new control <br />gate may be needed in the check canal to prevent this loss, This would be a concern at some <br />specific flow levels in the Colorado River. When the check canal is open and water is not being <br />"checked" back upstream, some water will flow downstream through the canal bypassing the <br />fish passage. At some low river flows. this may cause the fish passage to become unusable. <br />However, it is acceptable if the fish passage is not useable 100 percent of the time, lfthe <br />frequency of these flow conditions and the ability to use the passage becomes unacceptable, it <br />may become necessary to control the bypass water, An existing check canal structure with stop <br />logs could be used to control the bypass flows: but it is cumbersome to use. Frequent cycles of <br />installing and removing the stop logs would be labor intensive, Since it is the intent of the <br /> <br />28 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.