My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPC55
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
20000-20849
>
WSPC55
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:15:38 PM
Creation date
4/22/2007 10:13:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8230.400.21
Description
Colorado River Litigation - State, Division 4 Water Court Cases - Steamboat RICD
State
CO
Basin
Yampa/White
Water Division
6
Date
5/18/2004
Author
Unknown
Title
Report to Glenn Porzak regarding Steamboat Springs Boating Park - Response to comments by Richard E McLaughlin and Tom Browning
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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 />',' f) f. <br />..!-. t~.a;..J <br /> <br />other statements appear to contradict statements made by Mr. McLaughlin in other cases <br />and before the CWCB Board in which he came to the blanket conclusion, based largely <br />on evidence from foreign, concrete, out-of-channel whitewater parks, that flows of <br />greater than 350 cfs are not warranted for any whitewater park. <br /> <br />It is my opinion that flow rates for a particular boating park should be based on many <br />factors including the existing streambed dimensions, expected range of flowrates, flood <br />constraints, and expected range of uses by the community. In this case the Boating Park <br />is situated in the Yampa River in a central part of Steamboat Springs. The Boating Park <br />was primarily designed as a freestyle play park because community input suggested that <br />this would be the primary user group locally and would create the largest attraction to <br />visiting tourists. The Boating Park was also designed with deep pools excavated into the <br />existing streambed which serve several purposes. These pools allow the continuation of <br />slalom boat practice after the existing slalom course, situated upstream of the Boating <br />Park, has become too shallow to use. The pools also allow for swimming and recovery <br />after boaters of all types exit the Charlie's Hole and D-Hole structures. The structures- <br />particularly at higher levels-enhance both the rafting experience and rafting exposure in <br />a central part of the City of Steamboat Springs. The location and quality of whitewater <br />experience at these structures showcases the local rafting industry and has had a positive <br /> <br />impact on the City's tourism. <br /> <br />As the designer of these structures and based on my extensive experience with the <br />perfonnance of this type of structure design at varying flow levels, it is my opinion that <br />the requested flows serve as the minimum flows necessary to provide the recreational. <br />experience intended by the City of Steamboat Springs. The Charlie's Hole and D-Hole <br />structures provide boat passage and beginner level boating at lower levels, but will <br />simply not serve as an attraction to out-of-town and expert boaters until the higher flow <br />rates requested in the RICD. Comparison of Figure 4 of Mr. McLaughlin's letter with <br />Figures 1 and 2 of this letter clearly demonstrates that the hydraulic feature created at the <br />lower flows documented by McLaughlin's photo at Figure 4 are inferior to that created at <br />the highest requested flow rate of 1700 cfs shown in Figures 1 and 2 above. <br /> <br />17 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.