My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
South Platte Steering Committee Meeting Minutes
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
3001-4000
>
South Platte Steering Committee Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/23/2010 3:41:20 PM
Creation date
6/23/2010 1:06:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
South Platte Steering Committee
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Date
10/6/1961
Author
South Platte Steering Committee
Title
South Platte Steering Committee 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.
/
73
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
MR. OSBORNE: "We're in need of additional water during <br />July and August. Let's say it that way. I don't <br />think we are in need of very much supplemental <br />water providing we could get our efficiencies up. <br />I've considered all the angles of it. The first <br />thing is to go out and line the ditch and deliver <br />to more land, and make that carriage system more <br />efficient. We considered lining the intakes to <br />make them more efficient. Everything was consid- <br />ered, even the cost of putting a membrane across <br />the bottom of the reservoir to see whether it could <br />be done that way. Of course, the costs make it <br />prohibitive from those angles. <br />But if an onstream reservoir could be made - <br />I'm not saying 100% efficient, - I just am esti- <br />mating it at 80 %, you've got a different picture <br />entirely down the river from one end to the other. <br />You're in a position to take care of these lands <br />in short years. Even in 1955 and '56 there would <br />have been enough water, could we have put it in <br />jugs and held it at the time of need, to have <br />gotten us by without a critical shortage, not <br />counting this transmountain diversion, you under- <br />stand. So I don't think we're in need so much of <br />supplemental water as an increase in the effi- <br />ciency of our storage." <br />MR. BARRETT: "In other words, you need better regulation, <br />that's what you need." <br />MR. BARKLEY: "That's just what I was going to say. Joe, <br />can I make a stab at an answer too? <br />I take it you're considering the possible <br />losses of the inefficient Empire, Riverside, and <br />Bijou Reservoirs as being water which returns to <br />the stream and is therefore available at the <br />Narrows site. Now to me, this is only a matter <br />of timing and the question is somewhat moot. Be- <br />cause if you stored it at the Weld County site <br />(for the sake of example) all Cecil is really <br />saying is that you can control the release of <br />that water through a more efficient reservoir <br />where you cannot now control the seepage releases <br />from those reservoirs. Sure it accrues to the <br />decrees downstream but not in a pattern in which <br />-23- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.