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 />,0- _ .-"" r) \':j (;1 <br />,;.. ,<~~. -.,~ <br /> <br />my experience that whitewater parks can be a great attraction to inner-tubers and that <br />these parks are filled with these users in the summer months at the mid to low range of <br />requested flows. <br /> <br />The Boating Park also serves to extend the season for inner-tubers because of increased <br />flow depths and deep pools. During most flows, and especially at low flows, tubers find <br />the Park to be such an attraction that they are commonly observed to be "cycling" <br />through the Park, returning the top ofthe Park by means of the streamside trail. <br /> <br />Mr. McLaughlin then goes on to describe minimum flow rates in other courses in the <br />United States and the world. In this section, Mr. McLaughlin cites two tables. The first <br />Table, labeled as Figure 7 in Mr. McLaughlin's letter, cites flow rates for a number of <br />courses; Of interest in this Table is that seven out of the eleven courses exceed the <br />amount of flow that Mr. McLaughlin now cites as the "minimum necessary for a <br />recreational experience." Of the remainder, Venne and Cardington are cited by Mr. <br />McLaughlin's own Table as not being a recreational attraction. It should also be noted, <br />contrary to Mr. McLaughlin's claim that "in many cases they require paid admission," <br />that none of the rivers cited in Table 7 require paid admission. In fact, admission to all of <br />these courses is allowed free of charge (Augsburg has occasionally instituted a fee <br />scheme during peak usage). Based on these facts, Mr. McLaughlin's Table 7 appears to <br />support the fact that flows greater than 350 cfs are needed to provide a minimum <br />recreational activity even on most of the rivers he cites. <br /> <br />Also of note in Mr. McLaughlin's Table is that all of the courses noted were created <br />primarily for slalom. This user group represents a small minority of expected users on <br />the Yampa River, a fairly small minority of whitewater users in the United States, and a <br />minority of the users Steamboat Springs seeks to attract with the higher claimed flow <br />rates. <br /> <br />19 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.