Record Details
page 246
Digital Collections at BYU
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Title | page 246 Final supplement to the final environmental impact statement : Diamond Fork System, Bonneville Unit, Central Utah Project, page 246 |
| Coverage | Electronic reproduction; |
| Format | 246 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; 15 p 20 how will the 2800 acre feet of diamond fork water be replaced from water in utah lake p 20 24 28 it would be helpful if these project operation descriptions could be expan espan expanded ded beyond the average annual diversion with an additional description of the operations in maximum wet and dry periods and at various ranges of flows and water demand scenarios including the effects on treamflows streamflows tream stream flows under these varying conditions p 27 why is the capacity of the upper diamond fork pipeline rated at 350 cfs cs could this pipeline carry more water than that p 27 it should probably be pointed out that the reason for the lower energy value is because of the necessity of diverting less water to meet the toe 1980 instream in stream flow agreement commitment which was ignored in alternative A p 31 32 why are the pipeline and tunnel sizes in options I 1 1 and 2 8 feet and 8.5 85 85 feet respectively isnt this considerably larger than necessary what would be the smallest diameter pipe or tunnel necessary to pass the proposed water diversion through the fifth water reach p 33 the word alternatives should be replaced with alternative to be grammatically correct we hope additional alternatives will be considered in the FS as we have suggested I 1 above p 43 what is the expected average annual and maximum and minimum inflow in periods of high and low water to the expanded strawberry reservoir what portion is is due to 1 the strawberry collection system and 2 other tributary sources p 50 51 56 how with an expected peak daily release of 880 cfs cs does the bureau expect to maintain flows for a quality fishery in the diamond fork in the range of 22 to 180 cfs cs for alternative A and for similar values for the other alternatives obviously the instantaneous flows will rise much above that how much how often will major fluctuations be experienced what is the tolerance for such higher flows by both the trout and their progeny and their food sources and streambanks stream banks this illustrates the weakness of presenting only aver average acre long term monthly flows 246 BEST COPY AVAILABLE 053 53 |
| Identifier | http://cdm15999.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/WesternWatersProject/id/12972 |
