- Salt Creek Foundation makes request to restore fishery in the creek
|
By Myrna Trauntvein
Times-News Correspondent
Taxpayer funds should not only benefit farmers but all taxpayers of Nephi according to some Nephi residents.
Richard Paxman and Shawn Brooks, representing Salt Creek Foundation, desired that the city council consider requesting a restoration of the fishery which, for generations, was a part of the city with trout and other sports fish making the creek home.
Nephi City Council agreed to send a letter to the CUWCD (Central Utah Water Conservancy District) in response to the April 23 scoping meeting held in Nephi as: “an official request to CUWCD in response to the April 23rd scoping meeting that no taxpayer funds be spent unless they fund projects that not only help the farmers but benefit all taxpayers of Nephi, not just the farmers, by guaranteeing the restoration and preservation of a fishery in the Salt Creek.”
When Paxman and Brooks asked if any of the council members would support their requested action by making a motion, Justin Seely, council member, complied. Brent Bowles, council member, seconded the motion and only Wayne Jarrett, council member, chose to vote against the proposal.
“Salt Creek Foundation is not against the proposed two projects,” said Paxman, a former city council member.
The scoping meeting held in April explained the proposed East Juab Water Efficiency Project (EJWEP), Phase 2.
Prior to the scoping meeting, members of the foundation had met with officials conducting the EA and found that four proposals were being considered. Only two of those proposals are actually being considered, said Paxman.
“Two of the proposals were dropped,” he said.
The proposed action is intended to achieve the following purposes which will address the underlying need for the project to: complete the EJWEP to make the system more water efficient; increase on-farm water use efficiency; reduce irrigation water shortages by reducing distribution or conveyance system losses; restore well pumping capacity to the full existing water right; provide a minimum of 25 pounds per square inch (psi) of pressure to allow all
water users to convert existing flood irrigation methods to sprinkler irrigation; and recharge local surface water supplies to augment the yield of the local ground water basin.
“I was born and raised within a block of Salt Creek,” said Paxman.
Except for a period spent in the armed forces and a short stint in Salt Lake City, he had lived all of his life in the area of the creek. He had taken his children fishing there just as he had fished there himself.
“My children caught their first fish at Salt Creek,” he said.
Paxman said that a fishery should be restored on Salt Creek in addition to the farmers getting their project which was being paid for by taxpayers. The screens east of the city should be removed to allow fish to freely swim up and down the waters from the canyon through the town.
Last year, he said, taxpayers from Nephi City paid $43,947 into the East Juab Water Conservancy and $53,301 into the CUWCD.
Based on an environmental analysis, the responsible officials for CUWCD and DOI will decide if DOI and CUWCD should assist the East Juab Water Conservancy District in funding and constructing phase 2 of the EJWEP.
The Central Utah Water Conservancy District was established on March 2, 1964 as the legal entity to represent the citizens of the participating counties and to contract with the federal government for the repayment obligations of the project.
Juab County was part of the CUWCD and was to participate in a pipeline that was to bring water, via pipeline, to Juab County.
For many years, residents of Nephi have been paying into the fund for water development.
Paxman said that plans had been made that EJCWCD would construct Salt Creek facilities consisting of a Salt Creek Diversion Dam, the Salt Creek Pipeline and the Nephi Pumping Plant. Even in those plans, a fishery was considered important, said Paxman.
He quoted from a document entitled Related Actions: Proposed Action 1,9,3,1, Salt Creek Facilities: “Water would not be diverted into the Salt Creek Pipeline when the flow in the Salt Creek Ditch is less than 16 cfs to avoid an adverse effect on fishing.”
“There are alteration permit requirements that were not adhered to,” said Paxman.
The stream channel Permit, 98-53-03SA, dated Oct. 15, 1998, was sent to East Juab Water Conservancy District from the State of Utah Department of Natural Resources Division of Water Rights.
“This authorization is for the diversion structure only. This office considers Salt Creek a natural stream from the diversion through town (labeled as Salt Creek on the 7.5 minute quadrangle map) and where it flows south along the railroad tracks and then to the west. Actions affecting the bed or banks of the stream through that reach also will need to be permitted. Flows sufficient to maintain the fishery (through town) and associated riparian vegetation in this reach must not be compromised as a result of this or other actions,” wrote Robert L. Morgan, P.E., Utah State Engineer.
At one time plans were to build a diversion dam and an equalization pond that would be in the location of the cemetery that would mix with CUP water from the proposed pipeline.
Of course, the CUP project is no more and a lot of promises have been broken.
“We don’t have a diversion dam, we don’t have an equalization pond and we don’t have a fishery,” said Paxman.
The Fish and Game once stocked Salt Creek and, if irrigators did not drain the pond, would do so again, he said.
Members of the Salt Creek Foundation are not opposed to the irrigation improvement projects, said Paxman, but they also think it is only fair that taxpayer money also be spent to restore the fishery.
He called for council members to send a letter to the scoping committee telling them that the city supported that end and did not want taxpayer funds to be spent unless they fund projects that not only help the farmers but benefit all taxpayers of the community.
Brooks said that the foundation members had collected signatures from over 500 households in Nephi indicating that they supported having Salt Creek kept open.
In a town as small as Nephi, he said, that number showed significant support.
“Politicians have to make a choice, whether to serve constituents or serve special interests,” said Brooks.
Jarrett, a farmer in addition to being a council member, questioned whether the council should make such a request.
“You would be playing with people’s property rights,” said Jarrett.
“We support the farmers on their projects but we think the general public should also be benefited,” said Brooks. “Public money is being used on private business.”
Taxpayer money is being used to pay for the improvement of private enterprise—farming land is not owned by the public but by individual property owners. Taxpayer money, being used to improve the livelihood of farmers, was being used to help private enterprise.
“We should have a win/win situation, not a win/lose one,” said Paxman.
Brent Bowles, council member, said he had also grown up within a block of the creek.
Brooks began the evening’s presentation by telling the council they had appreciated the help the city had given with cleaning up Salt Creek. As part of the clean-up, debris had been pulled from the creek channel and signs had been posted warning people not to use the waterway for a dumping ground.
The Central Utah Project Completion Act (CUPCA) enacted on October 30, 1992, removed responsibility for completing the Central Utah Project (CUP), a federal water project, from the United States Bureau of Reclamation. The Central Utah Project Completion Act then distributed responsibility for the project: construction of the remainder of the Central Utah Project became the responsibility of the local water district—the Central Utah Water Conservancy District (CUWCD); the Central Utah Project Completion Act established the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Commission to oversee facilities to mitigate for the environmental effects of the Central Utah Project; and the Central Utah Project Completion Act placed responsibility for oversight of the project with the Secretary of the United States Department of the Interior.
|
