My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
NP 05.22.2007minutes
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
Backfile
>
NP 05.22.2007minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 4:17:09 PM
Creation date
7/12/2007 11:48:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Basin Roundtables
Basin Roundtable
North Platte
Title
Minutes
Date
5/22/2007
Basin Roundtables - Doc Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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 />NOlih Platte Basin Roundtable Meeting Minutes, May 22,2007 <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br />Dave Meyring talked about how Michigan River Water Conservancy District had <br />applied to CWCB for improvements to Meadow Creed Reservoir but it hadn't gone <br />forward. It was a siphon to augment the outlet, but he doesn't know what happened. He <br />thinks the Michigan district didn't carry it forward. When it was built there was a CWCB <br />loan on that. Michigan District can come in as an application, Kent said, because there <br />are a lot of users. <br /> <br />Dave talked about costs for water projects, and how it's so extreme. Things become so <br />expensive; they don't become feasible for use. Bob P. talked about how there will never <br />be cost/benefit analysis to do these kinds of projects for just growing hay, they will never <br />come out. Engineering and operating costs make things astronomical. It has to be cost- <br />effective and feasible. Dave talked about surveys of capacities of reservoirs in the district <br />which were done in the early 1950s, and if there was a project to re-survey that which <br />may be feasible. It would be a good project, everyone agreed. Everyone thought the 50's <br />data is probably antiquated and needs to be updated. Bob P said a lot can be done from <br />boats. Kent said you could do it from remote sensing at a time of year when everything <br />is uJlI, like right now, to get surface area. <br /> <br />Dave M. said the gauge rods on the reservoirs are for the most part a joke, which might <br />be another project to consider. Sue P said you can't maintain them because of ice. Hal <br />asked if we could write some of these ideas up as task orders for our needs assessment. <br />Kent said they might not be needs assessments, but projects. Hal said these projects might <br />come out of the needs assessment. Kent said we could ask to quantify stored water <br />through a task order, but it might have to be a Senate Bill 179 project. Bob talked about <br />how task orders are limited. Task orders vs. projects were discussed. Kent said a task <br />order could be used to develop a work plan and cost estimate to do this work. Yes, that <br />would fall under a task order, Bob P. said. An estimated cost could lead to an <br />application. But right now we don't have any idea what that would cost. Bob said that <br />type of project would be easy to sell because it benefits a lot of the users in this basin <br /> <br />Kent asked Dave to put some of his thoughts on paper, Dave would rather run them <br />through the Jackson County Water Conservancy District and let them go through with the <br />project and communicate with the roundtable. <br /> <br />The meeting was adjourned. <br /> <br />Next meeting will be June 26th at 7:00 p.111. <br /> <br />Needs assessment meeting will be June 13th at 12:00 p.m. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.