Record Details
page 49
Digital Collections at BYU
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Title | page 49 Final environmental statement : authorized municipal and industrial system, Bonneville Unit, Central Utah Project, Utah, Vol. 2, page 49 |
| Coverage | Electronic reproduction; |
| Date | 13 |
| Format | 49 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; page 2 fork river systems the draft EIS presently under review states that no construction in the diamond fork drainage will be necessary to accomplish the exchange until about 1993 we have serious concerns that after other features of the bonneville unit are constructed the M and I 1 system will not be operated in the manner described in the draft EIS the draft EIS suggests that most of the impacts will occur in the provo river basin and impacts in the diamond fork river basin utah lake and sevier river basin areas could be mitigated after plans for those systems have been refined pages A 32 and A 33 even if it is possible to construct and operate the M and I 1 system independently of the other systems we are convinced that this is not the ultimate operational goal of the project we believe that the goal is to operate the M and I 1 system in conjunction with other systems in a manner si miliar to that which was described in the august 2 1973 bonneville Bonne vitle unit final EIS and that such operations will result in irreparable harm to fish and wildlife it is obvious to us that the intent of the NEPA would be better served by addressing all ali atl ati of the interrelated bonneville unit systems in a single EIS the final EIS on the M and I 1 system should state that the ultimate operational goal of the project is to operate the M and I 1 strawberry aqueduct and collection diamond fork and utah lake dikes and sevier basin systems in concert and it should describe the total impacts attributable to all of these features from this action page A 12 figure A 2 names such as eagle cliff eagle cliff recreation area and eagle cliff campground are objectionable we note that these names appear on figures A 2 A 4 and C 4 and on page A 18 d recreation development second paragraph the impropriety of such names was discussed in a report issued in december 1978 entitled analysis of potential impacts of central utah project features on golden eagles part I 1 jordanelle jordanehe Jor danelle daneHe reservoir area by dr joseph R murphy brigham young university provo utah these designations should be deleted from the EIS and all future reports the report by dr murphy points out that the project could conceivably have a variety of adverse impacts upon golden eagles including forestalling courtship incubation or raising of young during a given breeding season to overt harm to resident eagles and abandonment of the nesting territory any such disturbances would be in violi violition violation tion of the bald eagle protection act 16 US C 668 668d and the migratory bird treaty act 16 US C 701 718h if eagles are adversely impacted the action would constitute a violation of these acts we feel feet that precautionary measures recommended in dr murphy murphys mumphys Murp hys s report are appropriate the location of the proposed hailstone recreation area is shown on the figures A 2 A 4 and C 4 and the small stream that bisects the area is designated drain tunnel creek figure B 8 shows the name of this 49 |
| Identifier | http://cdm15999.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/WesternWatersProject/id/7537 |
