My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Steamboat Springs Meeting Minutes
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
3001-4000
>
Steamboat Springs Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2010 1:11:12 PM
Creation date
6/11/2010 4:03:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
RICD Meetings and Notes
State
CO
Basin
Yampa/White/Green
Water Division
6
Date
8/7/2001
Title
Steamboat Springs Meeting Minutes
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
RK this gives us direction on how to work with applicant and factors to consider. And those can <br />be comments to 404 decision. Golden is one that didn't get caught. Don't think at time board was <br />reviewing. We are now. Have a corps staff member on loans so have office designed to work <br />with us on 404 permits. <br />Al feel system adequately in place to keep municp from building before. Can't build w/o permit <br />RK isn't a requirement that they file before. But do need permit. Is an important step. Corps will <br />respond to our concerns at that stage. Had we been involved at 3 forks and siltation. Used road as <br />highway. <br />DC driving around and fishing. Hardly a stream w/o dredge and fill for piscatory. Many are on <br />private land. Are they being permitted? <br />Dave I believe they are. <br />DC one on white river. That is extensive. Headcuts in river. Flooding surrounding land. Same on <br />trout creek. See these all over the state. Should the be permitted? <br />TK nation wide permit. May be where fit under nation wide permit. <br />DC fit under where have a backhoe and money and a good attorney. I look with a shovel and run <br />for cover. Have to all get on the same playing field. In areas with no control stream scours and <br />then minimum late in summer /winter. These people are tring to change environment. Why can <br />municpalities do what golden's done, etc. yet we have all meetings and oversight groups <br />unaware or unable. <br />Dave had this discussion at last board meeting and made big effort to get corps involvd. Prior to <br />this not been happening. Entity to themselves <br />Rk getting far from subject. With in channel divisions. Identify hopefully at 404 permit stage and <br />work with at that stage. Seen abuses that are literally appalling. Slap suit. Remedy with cwcb is <br />put state in that position and ags to fight that. <br />DC do they have to do EISs? We have to run for cover. <br />RK did get a 404 permit. In Clear Creek from headwaters down been so manipuated for so long <br />that natural water course long gone. <br />AL see that you appealed golden case? <br />RK yes unanimous decision by board. B/c Hays gave Golden everything asked for. Set <br />precedent. If case were to stand what incentive for applicant to come to work with us for <br />something leg has told us is less than all water in stream. Would all be go to court. Letter of law <br />and nothing more. <br />rd <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.