 |
| Tinyurl.com./RESTORELLR Click through the green button CLICK FOR MANY SUGGESTIONS about what you can say in your email to oppose the project. HERE |
Sample letters are posted here for you to modify and use. Please send your comments by email to by emailing Ammon.Boswell@USDA.gov by June 22 at 5 pm.
https://tinyurl.com/LetterLRWP
Red is our commentary:
The LRWP asks for an ENORMOUS subsidy from taxpayers to
“protect unused and unneeded water rights”
by encouraging many more homeowners to irrigate A LOT
MORE.
That produces little-used, often over-watered turf.
The Great Salt Lake needs this water desperately.
The project will diminish summer water in the Little Logan River in a dozen public
greenspaces to zero or a trickle,
unless a miracle happens and our mega-drought droughts end.
Project Description from USDA web site
The Project proposes the following improvements to address agricultural water management, flood prevention, and public recreation (RED ARE comments on the plan):
- Reconstruct the Crockett Diversion [Few of the VITAL details are include in the main Draft Environmental IMPACT Statement about this. Instead we had to dig deep into the 2803 long document to discover that the plan would USE OUR hundreds of MILLIONS OF TAX DOLLARS TO legally turn our Little Logan River into a canal, to ignore our severe mega-drought, and to spend excessive public funds.
- There is a grave concerns that undisclosed in the plan is an engineering design that will disconnect the Little Logan River from its source forever --thereby converting our Little Logan River into a high and dry ditch that depends on the "largess" of "management" for flow of any water. That water might even be fish-free piped water delivered from a "pressurized pipe".]
- Install irrigation connection to First Dam.
- Construct downstream water storage with pump stations
- Install new pressurized irrigation systems [This is the most expansive, expensive, and most disruptive part of the plan that consumes most of the funding, report and impact. Oddly, stormwater flood prevention is listed as being 30 million dollar more expensive than the pressurized irrigation system which will mostly install one large pipe along 8.4 miles, and fill dry canals with water
- The public is not clearly informed about the costs of using this pressurized irrigation systems.
- It will charge EVERYONE in the three cities at least $84 per year.
- There is a large one time cost of converting. Shareholders who use flood irrigation will need to install a very expensive new irrigation system on their residential property or figure out how to avoid erosion with the pressurized system if they wish to fully benefit from the new irrigation method.
- We estimate that a modest lot will be required to spend $5-10,000 converting to a pressurized irrigation system.
- Sponsors showed a schematic sketch that assumes the price of culinary water will exceed the cost of secondary water in the future. One opponent of the project was insulted by this sketch. We are too.
- 120 miles of street will be torn up.
- What will be irrigated?
- Utah data show it will be mostly excess turf.
- Since the Great Salt Lake is vital to the state's health and economy, the cost of its inflowing river water should become much more expensive instead.]
- Improve existing canals
- [How? The public has no clarity about the plans for the open canals on or near their properties. Which canals will become dry open ditches and which will become buried pipes? Which canals risk having algae growing in them like the West Highline canal does now.
- The West Highline canal is so choked by algae that it is visible for 2 miles on aerial photographs.
- Construct recreational trails
[Recreation in our community will mostly be set back by the damage to the Little Logan River in ~13 public green spaces along it.
Tubing and swimming will be limited to small children. During hot dry summers a ribbon of algae, with some of it being toxic, could develop.
Adding ~3400 ft of trails is a trivial addition to the extensive trail system of Logan, Utah. The longer trail in Logan Bluff is redundant of three other walkways that already exist between 600 E and 200 East. Neither trail is wanted by the community. See the survey results pertaining to the Canyon road trail project: 60% of respondents do not want more trail along Canyon Road]
CLICK FOR MANY SUGGESTIONS about what you can say in your email to oppose the project. HERE
