My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP11976
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
11000-11999
>
WSP11976
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 3:19:28 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 5:19:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.300.40.A
Description
Colorado River Compact
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
11/14/1922
Author
Co. R Compact Comm.
Title
Minutes of Colorado Compact Commission - Meeting #15
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
57
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />the measurement to be at the point of demccrlcation, the interest <br /> <br />. <br /> <br /> <br />we regard a certain portion of the water past Lee's Perry <br /> <br />as being a deposit in the bank, or held above. In other words, <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />the upper states may theoretioally have security storage to <br /> <br />enable them to carry out the assurances from the upper basin <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />by a deposit in the lower basin. If the whole settlement <br /> <br />were made oonditional upon the creation of that storage before <br /> <br />the compact became binding, then there would not seem to me, <br /> <br />any necessity for a guarantee flow for. anyone particular year, <br /> <br />so that we might, on that line of discussion, avoid the whole <br /> <br />necessity of guaranteeing a minimum flow for a whole year, which <br /> <br />seems to me to be pretty diffioult. <br /> <br />Lill. CARPEnTER, The only data we have to obtain the <br /> <br />minimum is from the lowest year. <br /> <br />It would be the minimum of <br /> <br />the lowest, not the three lowest. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />l,ill. NORVIEL, With reference to the sugeestion just made, <br /> <br />of the deposit in the bank, it would make Quite a bit of dif- <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />ference whether the deposit in the bank were in the upper or <br /> <br />lower division bocause there would be, a continual interest to <br /> <br />be paj"d on this deposit. If depo"ited in the lower, evaporat- <br /> <br />ion might be oounted the interest, and if the deposit is counted <br /> <br />in the lower basin that division in the lower basin would have <br /> <br />to pay that interest; and if deposited in the upper, of course, <br /> <br />would necessarily hdVE!.io be allportioned by the upper states, <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />so it does make a big difference, and if the deposit is mr,de <br /> <br />3 years in advanoe, or 4 years in advance, there would be 3 or <br /> <br />4 years of evaporation which is estimated at 6 fect on the <br />15th-S.P. <br />4 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.