OCR Text |
Show UINTAH BASIN STANDARD. November 13. 1986 for future large scale industrial uses could not be supplied Continued from page 11 without depriving irrigation. Strawberry enlargement can bo Therefore, the Central Utah anticipated baaed on its present Project will bring a large usage. All project enjoyment to of water from the Gram quantity the fullest extent possible. Picnic River into the Basin to help meet area, boat launching facflitias and Industrial needs, further supplecamping areas will be provided. ; ment presently irrigated lends end fully supply part of all of the Q. What about water, quality? water to irrigate the more than have A. Utah is fortuants to scree of new, Indian and 140,000 of available a large quantity . lends in the Basin. water of the quality that prevails Q. How would the Vernal Unit in the Green River. The runoff of be operated? Green River for the moat pert A. Operation of the Vernal cornea from snowfall in the high Unit will continue to be under the mountain ranges in Wyoming supervision of the Uintah Water and is of excellent quality. .This Conservancy District pursuant to high quality water will be stored agreement with the Central Utah in Flaming Gorge Reaervior. The Water Conservancy District water diverted from Flaming CenQ. How would the Uintah Unit under the Reservoir Gorge be handled? of be would tral Utah Project A. The proposed Uintah Unit excellent quality for irrigation that is now bring considered for and for most of the industrial early development under the uses. Demands for extremely Utah Project would be Central Uintah high quality water in the constructed under a contract with Basin could continue to be met the Central Utah Water Confrom the Uintah Basin tribuservancy District Part of the taries. The concentration Unit ana ia outride of the Uintah diverted dissolved solids in water Uintah Water Conservancy Disfrom Flaming Gorge Reservoir trict boundary, and existence of wiQ be much lower than nOw the overall Central Utah Confound in many of the irrigation servancy District would greatly waters presently used in the Uintah Basin, such aa in the facilitate investigation and construction of the Uintah Unit lower Vernal area on Ahaley Creek, lower Brush Creek, the lower Uinta River, including Grey Continued from page 11 Mountain, Myton Townsite, and the Ouray area and the lower local water available well into the Duchesne River. Historical meacentury without building surements of water quality, have the Jordanelle Dam. Same time in been and will continue to be, the distant future we may require maintained on streams in the additional storage on the Provo Uinta Basin so that any advene River, but that time is a long way effects of using ' Green River off. water can be detected and But what do we hear from the corrected. proponents of the Bonneville Q. How important ia the Unit? In spite of the evidence of Central Utah Project to the abundant local water supplies, Uintah Basin? Robert Hubert, Chairmen of the A Substantial and crippling Central Utah Water Conservancy , water supply shortages exist District Board of Directors says, throughout the Basin. Under the Its not a matter of developing ; Central Utah - Project, Upalco, one supply or the other. We need Uintah, Vernal and Jensen Units, to develop all of them." Well, I the Lake Fork, Yellowstone, say it1 is a matter of one or the Uinta River, Whiterocka, Aahley other, when the othq- supplies are Creek and Brush Creek streams enough, and cheaper. As if this will to myopia and misrepresentation of be fully developed in the the foots werent enough, Hilbert supplement irrigation Uintah Basin. (Water later has also said, on many occasions, diverted to the Bonneville Basin We would use every drop of Green CUP water if the project were will be replaced from River.) Under the Bonneville nfimplatori this year." We need to Unit, about 26,000 acne of lend ask Mr.Hfibert what he would do with the present supply that is along the Duchesne River will receive supplemental water. Even available at well under half the there coat of Bonneville Unit water, if with this development, would still remain substantial it waa available this year. This ia needs for water that cannot be an example of rhetorical axcaaa, ' supplied by the Uintah Basin for political purpoaea, maaquar-adinstreams to provide a full supply aa information to the for more than 166,000 acne of voters. It is the exietence of this irrigated land. Water presently type of misinformation that led M.a. .! .a Pigs 12. means CUP . non-Indi- an - l . Why 'No' ifc . . . . j - . g w . T , . a- - ' .MW V . in amount line with other consumer goods. If you do the calculation correctly, it comae out to an increase of 7.1 times, about what has happened to natural gaa. Such a difference between the reported cost increase and the actual cost increase cannot be with involved this complex attributed to rounding error. It me just talk about one project-l- et in fact, a deliberate attempt to is, more thing, the Jordan Aquemislead and misinform the'voter; duct and all to glaring npU of the The Jordan Aqueduct ia the side of the polities of infordark which water can be pipe though mation. transported from the Provo River life After A "No" Vote to Salt Lake County. It has me does with a abort Let been always part of the Bonneville Unit, end payment for it was summary of life after a No vote included in the original 1B65 on the supplemental repayment repayment contract. It ia almost contract. A No vote will force us completed, and it. will be a to reexamine our water policy,-anwelcome addition to our water provide the necessary catfacilities; its a way we can hartic force to' abandon an deliver the surplus water that outdated version of the Bonnealready exists in Dap-- Creek ville Unit My conception of a Reeervior, and other Provo River revised and improved Bonneville water, to Salt , Lake County Unit involves completion of the (provided we can keep the Jordan Aqueduct end, hi addiaqueduct pitched up!) An impor- tion, completion of the collection tant thing to realize about the facilities" in the Uintah Banin. Jordan Aqueduct is that we can With these facilities in place, our hi our have it without the AtiHrri Colorado water ia excess baggage of the Bonneville bucket," to be put to uae the Intermountain Water Alliance,, an. organisation for which I am proud to serve as a board member, to establish the CUP informs tkm Campaign. ' Jordan Aqnedact There are so many . Citizen's group sites CUP errors fwf We do not find it etrange that the Central Utah Water Conser-- ' vancy Diatrict is making attempts to discredit the study hy Dr. Thomas Power, University of Montana economics professor, which is critical of error end padding1 in the Central Utah Project. Attempts have been made in the past to discredit anything which disagrees with the Bureau of Reclamation on the Central Utah Project, including studies by the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources requesting higher minimum project flows, and similar studies by the US. Forest Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bonneville Chapter of the American Fisheries Society, U.S. Department of Interior, Council on Environmental Quality and many other statements and studies by 'know-- . lsdgeebla biologists, and citizen . primarily in the Uintah Basin, and transferred to the Wasatch rapidly escalating coat of muni- Front only after lower cost water supplies have been Utilized here. cipal and industrial water, proWe need' to eliminate the ponents of the Bonneville Unit began to worry about advene premature, costly, and geologivoter reaction, and began on cally suspect Jordanelle Dim and several fronts to shift coats here Reaervior, holding for a future and there, jiggle this, joggle that date development of e smaller, ' in an attempt to lower the more sensible increment in perceived coat of water by the storage on the Provo River. I would support recent Bureau voters. One of these actions was of Reclamation proposals to ell- to pared1 out part of inmate the senseless diking on repayment for the Jordan Aqueduct to local water districts, the Utah Lake. JVe could also eliminate the iininsewary Bureau Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District,' and the Met- of Reclamation involvement in ropolitan Water District of Salt power production in Diamond' Lake City. IMs amount of Fork Canyon, leaving such of actions up to local entities if money, somewhat in 636 million, is not fadmUd in the necessary. e This correction in amount to be voted on November 19. But man important the the Bonneville Unit is long misrepresentation of water coat overdue, and I hope you help that is occurring is the point bring it about with e No vote on these separate contracts have November 19. been signed, and we will have the Jordan Aqueduct, even with a No vote on the main supplemental repayment contract. Coat Inforaaikm MialnaiWeg Since I mentioned the rise in the cost of Bonneville Unit NEWS municipal and industrial water, ITEMS and the lengths the water districts are going to cover it up, DEADLINE I should give an example. In the FRIDAY Fall issue of its newsletter, the Central Utah Water Conservancy p.m. District compares cost increases for Bonneville Unit water with those of other wwniw items, and condudee that the coat has risen only 8.1 times since 1964, Unit A few years ago, with the ; H mid-cours- , . 5 jp difficult to believe groups. That waa part of the letter sent : to Cedi Andrus, Secretary, U.S. ' Department of Interior, by Citizens for the Responsible CUP (CRCUP). The group had earlier died 11 anas of error andor contained in Dr. padding Powers CUP study, and released in the 206 page Issues Paper, the Central Utah Project, Part 1". The Central Utah Water. Conservancy Districts chargee against Power's study as absurd, totally erroneous, recklessly researched are no different that the districts other charges which refute that which does not agree with its own ftuliiigi and value Dr. Reimherr, judgments, CRCUP said. Citizens for the Responsible CUP wrote Secretary. Andrus that the Power's study is responsible report and deserves more from water district officials than broad, irresponsible refutation. At the very least, the conservancy district shimM an-- . war the citizen groups concerns .. with more facts and less ' emotion." ' The fact' that Audubon funded a University professor to do a study is no different than the water district funding Uni-vanity personnel to cany on a study for its own uae, Rrimherr aid. Dr. Power was no more beholding to the Audubon1 Society then any of the water. . districts study personnel wee to it to find out whet the water . district wanted. ha added. It la . . - co-cha-ir . Reunherr concluded, "In short, the water' district is refuting, ell attempts to improve and upgrade , the CUP aa if whatever ia good for the Central Utah Conservancy : . District ia not only good fin Utah, hut all of the United States. The water, district is to discuss the problems, end the possible alternatives such as reducing the size of the project, and making available unused . water from numerous other ' .eourcee. . - piMiplfwL i f i t ' - v tr- i ' t f A 4 J ' I A ' t '1 f ' t sASil Refreshments Friday & ends ... g I. r; FREE Drawing sold during grand opening receives a package, of Diapers NFL Strategy GAME Self 14.99 rW''' - ,"t 1 hsiitV'Tf v- -- Trail Master Train Dolls 2H 099 .Ul ; Cabbage $33.99 contained Head Set Radio "i' v Stefc Cassette Player & Recorder Radios Action Racing Reg. $55.95 i Items Cabbage Patch Kids Care Bear ; Reg. $7.49 NOW for 20 different prize Limited to supply on hand Drawing will be held Saturday Reg. , V1 j J My Little Pony ! Plush Saturday Both week Reg. , , t V Register M The ultimate of FOOTBALL Reg. Pacman Value 1Q99 Reg. $43.49 Husker Du? & Smurf Card Games MEMORY Reg. $1.09 Game game Reg. $4.99 $29.00 Radio Controlled ' 1 NY it IW. Rog. $19.99 '. - suw 'i'iiiwiiu . Skeletor Power sword, magic sceptor, belt, and shield. t1 ''5. 1 . Includes batteries, charger, etc. Reg. 169.0 Reg. $12.99 0jA99 I torn i . Y i ' ;vitikVu t at a J. . .. . , in the letter to Secretory Andrue the water district statement that Dr. Power apparently obtained information from environmental , groups which have set out to The letter destroy the CUP. states that Dr. Power had ample information available from the Bureau of Reclamation end Central Utah Water Conservancy District annual reports, the many project plane available to the public, and the voluminous environmental impact statement. The letter further states that Dr. Power need such data end came to the conclusion that the CUP benefits were grossly exaggerated. ' In its message to Andrus, CRCUP also stated that the water district ia attempting to use "scare tactics by saying any concern or questions at all about the CUP will only cause a critical water shortage and raise the costa of water to future usee, suggesting that the water users bear the costa of the project. The letter refutee this, saying that studies show that there is sufficient water .available and that it ia not true that the costs' ate being home by each specific ; water user, but that each citizen is and has been sharing costs via ' mill levies whether or not he will receive any of the benefits of the f project. ; . that any organization would brand ' the entire exhaustive study aa totally inaccurate end inadequate, but it is typical in that the water district did just that with the other studies mentioned in our '.letter to the Seostary of Interior,' the CRCUP spokesman emphasized. CRCUP officials also included 'iVA' v . |