| Title |
Central Utah Project Litigation Documents |
| Description |
Correspondence and documents concerning litigation for the Bonneville Unit of the Central Utah Project; from the The Dorothy Harvey papers (1902-2005), a collection of materials focusing on the Central Utah Project (CUP), a water resource development program to use Utah's alloted share of the Colorado River. Includes correspondence, federal documents, project litigation materials. |
| Subject |
Central Utah Project. Bonneville Unit; Colorado River Storage Project (U.S.); Ute Indians--Claims; Water resources development--Environmental aspects--Utah; Natural resources--Environmental aspects--Utah; Natural resources--Management--Utah; Strawberry Aqueduct; Western Bands of Shoshoni Indians--Claims |
| Contributor |
Ruckel, H. Anthony; Oberhansly, Curtis K.; Owens, Wayne; Raskin, David C.; Leshy, John D.; Olsen, Dennis F.; Phillips, Howard K.; Barker, Robert W.; Hatch, Orrin G.; Blackwelder, Brent; Carlson, Peter; Lynn, Laurence E.; Horton, Jack O.; Reed, Nathaniel P.; Black, Kenneth E. |
| Additional Information |
Includes: Letters and documents concerning Sierra Club, et al. v. Gilbert Stamm, et al.; Water Resources Development Act of 1974; Letters from the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council, the Environmental Policy Center; United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit case No. 74-1425 Sierra Club, etc., et al. v. Gilbert Stamm, etc., et al.; Case before the Indian Claims Commission: Western Shoshone Identifiable Group etc., et al. v. United States of America; Memo from Department of the Interior on the Central Utah Project, Bonneville Unit; Study from Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife: Stream Flows Recommended For the Uinta Mountain Streams, Central Utah Project; U.S. Dept. of Interior Water Projects Review Office Preliminary Information and Data Sheets for Bonneville Unit |
| Spatial Coverage |
Uinta Basin (Utah and Colo.); Little Dell Reservoir (Utah); Currant Creek Dam (Utah); Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation (Utah); Utah Lake (Utah); Provo River (Utah); Bonneville Basin (Utah); Salt Lake County (Utah); Jordanelle Reservoir (Utah); Uinta Mountains (Utah and Wyo.); Colorado River Watershed (Colo.-Mexico) |
| Collection Number and Name |
Accn2232 Bx 118 Fd 2; Dorothy Harvey papers |
| Rights Management |
Digital Image © 2010 University of Utah. All Rights Reserved. |
| Holding Institution |
J. Willard Marriott Library, University of Utah |
| Date |
1973; 1974; 1975; 1977; 1978; 1979; 1980 |
| Digitization Specifications |
Original scanned on Epson Expression 10000 XL and saved as 400 ppi TIFF. Display image generated in Contentdm. |
| Publisher |
Digitized by J. Willard Marriott Library, University of Utah |
| Type |
Text |
| ARK |
ark:/87278/s6hh6j1p |
| Setname |
wwdl_neh |
| ID |
1155349 |
| Reference URL |
https://collections.lib.utah.edu/ark:/87278/s6hh6j1p |
| Title |
Page 120 |
| Setname |
wwdl_neh |
| ID |
1155313 |
| OCR Text |
Show Uinta Basin Stream Flows. The present plan for the Bonneville Unit "pr^HG^s'^bTnyTTBoo a.f." of"bypass flows for the purposes of maintaining fisheries in the Uinta Basin streams. It would require an additional bypass of 30,000 - 35,000 a.f."to meet the Forest'Service and Utah State Division of Wildlife recommendations for UintaBasin stream flows. However, even these flows are considered minimum and they would notsupporta quality fishery. BSFW states that additional bypass flows of over 80,000 a.f. are needed to support the existing high quality fisheries." The BSFW proposed bypasses"would produce 130,000 stream fisherman days per year while the Bureau of Reclamation bypass flows would produce only"30,000 stream fisherman days per year. If either level of increased flows were met, it appears that posslhWjthe repayment"IxTntract and almost certainly the Indian DeferraT^greement (discussed below) would have to br amended because of the_reduction in project water"^vFrTabTe to the Bonneville Basin. . " •" *r Environmental concerns are always difficult to balance with other more tangible considerations; we^r^£gntu\nai£U in this^xase^Jtot^lte^ative water sources are available tcrprovide Salt Lak^_£gim1xilM--V^ater and eliminate the need to build the Strawberry Aqueduct for that purpose. [Indian Deferral Agreement\ The Indian Deferral Agreement is a four-. party agreement between the Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Ute Indian Tribe and the Central Utah Water Conservancy District.'" In this agreement, the non-Indian parties recognized the Indian lands totaling 36,450 acres as served or to be served from the Duchesne River and the Indians agreed to defer until 2005 the development of the 15,242 acres of the total which is not now. irrigated This Deferral Agreement permitted construction of the Bonneville Unit without objection from-the Ute Tribe or the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The Ute Indians got the following assurances from this agreement. Irrigation of _g£-th£~II Project. deferred until development fZnr^l^~TinTt QjLjtfaeultifflate phase~of theXenffal Utah' the Indian land would bt A recognition by the State of the 15,242 acres of Indian land which'had-no prior history of irrigation, but with respect to which the Indians claimed a water right under the Winter's Doctrine. - It was further agreed that facilities would be provided to - mitigate for losses of the fish, wildlife and recreation on lands owned by the Ute Indian Tribe. * * ' ' '. the p~ |
| Reference URL |
https://collections.lib.utah.edu/ark:/87278/s6hh6j1p/1155313 |