| OCR Text |
Show TABLE OF CONTENTS ( Continued) Page I. CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION WITH OTHERS ( Continued) 4. Disposition of Comments Received on the Draft Environmental Statement ( Continued) Issue No. Issue 23. The Draft Environmental Statement did not adequately deal with the impacts of completed features 676 24. Cumulative environmental impacts of the entire Central Utah Project were not completely ascertained and discussed in the Draft Environmental Statement 677 25. The Bureau of Reclamation has shown a lack of sensitivity for adverse environmental impacts of the Bonneville Unit and has viewed the environmental statement as an unnecessary and annoying expense 678 26. The projected water requirement for the Wasatch Front area has been overestimated because it was based upon out- dated population estimates. Need for additional water for municipal and industrial power and irrigation uses is questioned 679 27. The availability of additional water in the Wasatch Front area provided by Bonneville Unit would foster and encourage additional growth and development with associated problems of air and water pollution, housing, transportation, and crime, all of which would contribute to a general decline in the quality of life . . . 681 28. The Bonneville Unit plan does not assure adequate and timely development of recreation facilities associated both directly and indirectly with Unit features . . 682 29. The Draft Environmental Statement did not adequately consider the historical and archeological implication of the Bonneville Unit 685 5. Bibliography 686 ATTACHMENTS . . . , . x |
