| OCR Text |
Show 17. any water salvaged by conservation measures must be rediverted back into beneficial uses? GREAT! THE U.S. GOVERNMENT NOT ONLY PAYS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF WATER DEVELOPMENTS WHERE ANY BENEFIT ACCRUES TO THE NATION ON' ITS PUBLIC LANDS BUT THE MOTIVE FOR CONSERVATION IS TO FURTHER BENEFIT THE STATE IN USE OF WATER FOR ITS OWN PURPOSES OF GROWTH. Am I reading this right? Isn't this concept in direct conflict with purposes of the Water Policy?) 9. The parties will cooperate with each other in getting ^ y * any water hereafter developed or purchased or made available by ^T conservation practices transferred into the project reservoirs by ' 'Change or exchange applications, or otherwise, so that the water will be in storage and available on call to meet minimum stream flows and fishery needs. {In other words, instream flows for the Uinta rivers will be made available only through CUP development!^ The &» ,500 a f reserved under the resolution of April 12, 1965, is to be delivered through the project works. To the extent, if at all, the 15,800 a f additional minimum must come from project water, A S it too will be in the project reservoirs and on call. (Again, the U.S. pays for project constructions - not the State - where there is benefit to Federal holdings!) The Utah DWR and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, in consultation with the U.S.Forest Service and the Utah Div. Water Resources, shall jointly have the ultimate determination as to where the water reserved for stream flows and fisheries will be utilized. (On paper - this implies consensus in decision-making; in fact, the Forest Service - the major landholder affected - will G&ft-fmuA &s low man on the totem pole. Region IV U.S.Forest Service has more than once been accused to acting in the best interests of the States wherein public forests exist - c i i.reprej s'does i A the responsibilities of this Agency - not the State Fish & Game - rather than.representing national interests in forest resources. All this^does is support this policy. Habitat and recreation are not U.S.Fish & Wildlife Service - not Utah Water Resources Board - not the Water Conservancy District.- not the W & P R Services': Is the issue at stake here (a) the preservation of fish, per se or (2) preservation of their environment? The State F & G are responsible for the wildlife; the Forest Service for the habitat. The implication in this agreement supports Utah policy of complete ownership of quantity and quality of water in rivers in its boundaries. So s obiic^f ("avis rnusf the/prerogatives of the Forest Service necessarily be laid out in any agreement on instream flows. But these prerogatives |
