Record Details
page 216
Digital Collections at BYU
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Title | page 216 Final supplement to the final environmental impact statement : Diamond Fork System, Bonneville Unit, Central Utah Project, page 216 |
| Coverage | Electronic reproduction; |
| Format | 216 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; resources of strawberry reservoir utah lake the jordan river and utah valley streams be addressed in an environmental impact statement on that project if plans for that system proceed alternative C corresponds to a no action alternative for the I 1 & 0 system an environmental comparison of alternative C with plans addressed in the 1984 environmental statement is possible however the net effects 01 01 alternatives A and B are not addressed in the subject document consequently comparisons of the total impacts of these latter two alternatives can not be made at this time pages 2223 22 23 the following foil foll foli owing statement needs to be clarified with alternative A and the 1984 FES plan only 6.500 6500 acre feet would be collected from the uinta basin tributaries tributa ries therefore with alternative B 37900 acre feet of additional water would remain in the uinta basin the 6.500 6500 acre feet of water specified in an april 12 1965 resolution hresc resc iution lution aution by the state of utah plus an additional 37900 acre feet that w wu1d wund vid uld ald vld be provided with the reduced transbasin trans basin diversion if alternatives B or C ie i e selected would equal the 44400 acre foot amount specified in the streamflow Stream flow agreement the minimum amount of water that would be available for the uinta basin tinder under terms of the streamflow Stream flow agreement is 22.300 22300 acre feet this is the minimum that should be assured with plans considered in 1984 pages 3335 33 35 comparative analysis of impacts Impact 5 As previously stated an analysis of the impacts of alternatives A and B on strawberry reservoir utah lake the jordan river and utah valley streams is not included in the subject document con consequently equently sequently a comparison of the overall advantages or disadvantages is absent also it would be appropriate to compare the effects of Ater axer axen alternative native A to alternatives B and C on the uinta basin streams addressed in the 1980 streamflow Stream flow agreement pages 4547 45 47 utah lake and jordan river no impacts on utah lakeor lakerr lake or the jordan river are anticipated with alternative C the impacts to these resources with alternatives A and B are tl t be addressed in a future environmental impact statement on the I 1 & 0 hysam sysam A potential future without or with the project condition that is not desa dest desibed desired desi bed in the subject document is a wildlife refuge on uta utai lake one proposal refuge would encompass about 50.700 50700 acres of lands and waters in vicinity of provo and goshen bays and benjaman slough the purchase of up to 54.000 54000 acre acne feet test teet feat of water for annual operations of this facility is also part of the proposed plans page 53 again it is mentioned that impacts of alternative B on strawberry reservoir utah lake utah valley streams and the jordan river will be discussed in the draft environmental statement on the I 1 & D system i comments made previously on the need for this evaluation to com con compare pare the alternative alternatives alternativesare sane sare sene are ane applicable 216 W |
| Identifier | http://cdm15999.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/WesternWatersProject/id/12968 |
