Record Details
page 3-7
Digital Collections at BYU
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Title | page 3-7 Final environmental impact statement on the Wasatch County Water Efficiency Project and Daniel Replacement Project, page 3-7 |
| Coverage | Electronic reproduction; |
| Format | 3-7 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; replacement supply is water conserved by the proposed action from the CUP agricultural supply of heber valley flows in local heber valley streams would increase as a result of reductions in local diversions and an increase in provo river diversions to supplement the flows of five heber valley streams water consumed by crops would increase slightly under the proposed action water consumed through other evapotranspiration would be reduced by an average of approximately 3000 acre feet as a result of the reduction in agricultural runoff to adjacent lands consumption of shallow groundwater by vegetation and direct evaporation of groundwater in seepage areas this represents approximately 12 percent of the change in applied irrigation water that is not consumed by crops because the proposed action would reduce the amount of water diverted for irrigation in heber valley it would reduce water losses in the valley this reduction or savings of 3000 acre feet effectively offsets the loss of 2900 acre feet from the provo river system associated with termination of the transbasin trans basin diversions from the strawberry river drainage this loss would be further offset by the return flows from the DIC replacement supply which would be applied to lands in the DIC service area 322.3 3223 3223 water supply and distribution under the DRP with pipeline alternative this section describes the information presented in water resources technical report figure 410 4 10 which displays the estimated distribution of water in heber valley under the DRP with pipeline alternative and water resources technical report figure 411 4 11 which displays the changes in water distribution between the DRP with pipeline alternative and baseline transbasin Trans basin diversions from the strawberry river basin to daniels creek would be terminated the CUP agricultural supply to the heber valley excluding DIC would be reduced by 2900 acre feet CUP agricultural water would be delivered to DIC as a replacement supply irrigation practices in heber valley would not change under this alternative therefore no conservation would occur and no supplemental water would be delivered to local streams 322.4 3224 3224 water supply and distribution under the DRP with canal alternative this section describes the information presented in water resources technical report figure 412 4 12 which displays the estimated distribution of water in heber valley under the DRP with canal alternative and water resources technical report figure 413 4 13 which displays the changes in water distribution between the DRP with canal alternative and baseline the water supply conditions under this alternative altema tive would be the same as under the DRP with pipeline alternative except the amount of DRP water diverted for delivery to DIC would increase from 2900 acre feet to 3400 acre feet and the remaining CUP agricultural supply to the heber valley would be reduced to approximately 8700 acre feet the increase in DRP diversions would be required because approximately 500 acre feet of DRP water would be lost to seepage in the enlarged timpanogos Timpano gos canal deliveries to DIC would be 2900 acre feet 3.3 33 33 comment letters and responses this section contains the comment letters and responses As stated in section 3.1 31 31 CUWCD received 30 letters addressing the WCWEP and DRP DEIS each letter was assigned a reference number see table 33 3 3 and reviewed responses were prepared for substantive comments those that presented new data raised new issues or disagreed with the impact conclusions when appropriate DEIS sections were revised through an errata summary see section 4 of the FEIS those comments presenting only opinions were also recognized all comment letters have been reprinted verbatim in this section each comment in the letter was identified with a number the response to each comment is numbered with the same number as the comment and printed on the opposite page from the comment letter two letters number 22 from NRCS and number 26 from USGS contained comments on the PRRP DEIS these comments are identified by shading and are not responded to in this FEIS they will be responded to in the PRRP FEIS 37 3 7 |
| Identifier | http://cdm15999.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/WesternWatersProject/id/4175 |
