Record Details
page 98
Digital Collections at BYU
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Title | page 98 Central Utah Project, Bonneville Unit : Diamond Fork Power System : final Environmental Impact Statement, page 98 |
| Coverage | Electronic reproduction; |
| Format | 98 text/PDF |
| Rights | Brigham Young University; http://lib.byu.edu/about/copyright/generic.php Public Domain Public |
| Language | English; eng; en |
| Relation | Central Utah Project; Western Waters Digital Library; CHAPTER III 111 ili alternatives As shown in table 20 only the 1964 DPR alternative would have an adverse effect on stream fisheries the other alternatives would result in enhancement of the fisheries this enhancement would result from the diamond fork pipeline removing damaging excess f flows lows f from rom diamond fork andthereby and thereby offsetting all adverse impacts from project construction and operation except for the 1964 DPR alternative the power alternatives would essentially be equal in pounds of f fish ish per year without mitiga matiga tion the no power alternative would be about the same as the future without condition the 1964 DPR alternative would cause a loss of about 683 pounds annually this alternative would provide the largest reser voir fishery mainly because of the size of hayes reservoir standing crop of fish under the fifth water pumped storage alternative would be relatively high because of the size and habitat quality of fifth water reservoir vegetative communities provide stabilizing soil cover and are an integral part of habitat for wildlife permanent losses would result from construction of main roads powerplants power plants dams and reservoirs temporary losses would be caused by installation of buried pipelines excavation of borrow sites and high intensity use of construction camps the temporarily disturbed landscape would be contoured and the topsoil restored and re seeded shortly after construction work is fin ished dished ground cover suitable to stabilize soils is expected within several years but about 25 years would be required for conditions to approximate existing species diversity and age distribution the fifth water pumped storage alternative would cause the greatest impact on vegetation largely because of fifth water and monks hollow reservoirs the 1964 DPR alternative would have the next most significant effect mostly because of inundation by hayes reservoir the recommended plan and the sixth water pumped storage alternative would have similar im pacts which would be much less than either the fifth water pumped stor age or the 1964 DPR alternatives because the reservoirs would be smaller under these plans the no power alternative would have minimal effects on vegetation the fifth water pumped storage alternative would require the most land for wildlife mitigation of all the alternatives although if the preferred mitigation plan is fully implemented impacts would compare very favorably with the other alternatives the no power alternative consisting of a pipeline only would be least harmful to wildlife in general mule deer bobcat and golden eagles would benefit slightly while other species would experience losses no significant impacts on any threatened or endangered species would occur with any of the alternatives comparisons for water quality impacts include temperature dissolved oxygen and turbidity for streams and temperature dissolved oxygen and nutrients for reservoirs for stream temperatures the recommended plan would produce conditions that deviate from present conditions more than the fifth water pumped storage alternative but less than most of the 98 |
| Identifier | http://cdm15999.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/WesternWatersProject/id/3773 |
