WSP10892 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Martineau: David?: e e we feel we have something to contribute both in terms of the interest of our constituents as well as possible financial contributions or water rights contributions to the ultimate solutions. So we ask that in this process the staff keep Mr. Fuller advised of what exactly what's going on, we be provided with reports and information, we be afforded an opportunity to participate so that you will not hear me stand up at the time when you seek to adopt this and dissemble the process, we do not want to do that but if this process results in more than 10,000 being drawn from Ruedi Reservoir without a meaningful long term solution to the problems of meeting the supplies in the 15 Mile Reach I will urge on my clients to take the position that the Board may not accept water from any source to establish a flow higher than 581. Thank you. David When the service made their recommendation to us or their request to us the first time, when we first started to move on this there was a discussion specifically on the question whether 581 was sufficient, they were recommending more, we were concerned about doing more on the current state of the evidence and when we decided to go to preliminary notification on this it was my understanding and it was my intent at the time of my participation that 581 was the first step, there mayor may not be any second steps but 581 did not preclude any additional water from being appropriated or contracted for late on and that those decision would be made as the time arose and as the evidence supported it. I am not prepared today to make this--to see the Board make a finding, the 581 is it in the context of no agreement. Now I appreciate what John Musick has said about the need to reach an overall agreement and hopefully these lawyer like debates are not going to be very important in the long run but in the event they are I would hope our action today is very clear that we're 11