| OCR Text |
Show 2. We are in need of your help in obtaining these answers. It is my belief that our cost questionnaire did not "fall through the cracks, unnoticed" but that past and continuing delay has benefited the Bureau during the pre-election period as it will during budget procedures. Water developers have effectively silenced Utah's newspaper media, since 1965, in either discussing environmental issues or costs of CUP. (Letter to the Editor may or may not be accepted.) The State Division of Wildlife Resources has also been silenced since the Governor Rampton Proclamation of 1965 stating there would be no water for instream flows.* Since water rights contracts are now being renogiated, I have learned that Mr. Plummer will attempt to get increased flows, although no one expects him to approach the 48,000 a f figures requested/required by Fish and Wildlife Service. CRCUP members met with Governor Matheson on November 17, with State Division of Wildlife Resources fisheries biologist and the Director of Natural Resources, Gordon Harmston (who is totally committed to resource development of the State),requesting stream flow increase. (Shortly after Mr. Plummer was appointed Regional Director, members of the Sierra Club and CRCUP met in July with him to discuss our concerns about CUP development.) I am uneasy that even though increased stream flows may be obtained, and they will never be adequate to protect entire stream ecosystems, we will be told by the Bureau and the Governor, "This is what you asked for. Now be satisfied." And the whole issue of CUP costs and failure of the State to deal with efficient water management alternatives, will not be publicly addressed at this time. It will also be more difficult then to press for implementation of the Administration Water Policy, Administrative" Directives to Agencies for this, as well as Executive Orders to protect Wetlands and Floodplains.**• I have enclosed a copy of our cost questionnaire and CRCUP responses to Mr. Plummer regarding a meeting. Thanks for your help. Any other suggestions we might follow, please pass them along. Very truly yours, AAAj^j Dorothy Harvey Co-Chairman Citizens for a Responsible CUP *As a sop to those who were concerned about stream resources, the Water Conservancy District then allowed 6,500 a f of water annually for some streams in the Strawberry Collection System. U.S.Fish & Wildlife Service initially requested 89,000 a f and now requests 48,000. **208 Water Quality Studies completed for the Uintah Basin, completely ignore impacts from proposed CUP developments. We are inquiring about recently released State stream classifications and clause on noh-degradation for National Forest streams. |
