OCR Text |
Show The Indian Deferral Agreement was negotiated originally on the assumption that it was necessary to eliminate fish flows to develop the necessary water supply for other purposes. The agreement provides for mitigation of such a loss. To provide for additional fish flows now would result in the loss of the Federal investment already made to mitigate such a loss and would raise questions as to the remaining commitment to the Indians under the Deferral Agreement. The viability of the Bonneville Unit itself could be removed because of its dependence on such an agreement. The alternative of fishery bypasses may not be politically viable because of its impact on the Indians and the water users. The total yield of Strawberry Reservoir ( diversion to Bonneville Basin) would be reduced from 136,600 acre- feet in the proposed plan to 73,700 acre- feet with bypasses for fishery minimum flows and 15,2^ 2 acres of Indian Group 5 lands, after allowing for reservoir losses. a. Proposed Plan with Nondevelopment of Provo Bay ( 1) Description of the Alternative Under this alternative all the features of the Bonneville Unit would remain the same as presented in the description of the Unit proposal, with the exception of Provo Bay development. None of the features connected with Provo Bay would be constructed. Provo Bay Dike, Provo Bay pumping plants, canals, drains, and laterals, Springville Bypass Canal, and two diversion dams on Hobble Creek would be eliminated from the proposed plan. The functions of these features would have been to separate Provo Bay from the main body of Utah Lake and keep the bay area free of water so it could be used for agricultural, residential, or industrial purposes. If flood control for Springville were considered important enough, it might be feasible to construct the Springville Bypass Canal under this alternative. The same minimum fishery flows would be made as in the proposed plan. When this alternative is compared to the proposed plan, the environmental effects of adding the Provo Bay development to the project may be determined. This alternative plan is illustrated in Figure H- ll. ( 2) Environmental Impacts of the Alternative The environmental impacts of the Bonneville Unit without the Provo Bay features would be about the same as for the proposed Bonneville Unit, except where it pertains to the bay area. Without development of Provo Bay, the wildlife habitat now existing there would not be disturbed. 557 |