Deposition of Ted Kowalski

• Description: Case No. 00CW259 Vail RICD and Case No. 00CW281 Breckenridge RICD
• State: CO
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Water Division: 5
• Date: 3/12/2002
• Author: District Court, Water Division No. 5
• Title: Deposition of Ted Kowalski
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Court Documents

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CI
11
I
I
L
Application for Water Rights of the Eagle River Water & Sanitation
March 12, 2002
Ted Kowalski
Page 54
Page 56
1
present?
1
range, is my recollection.
2
A. No.
2
Q. You said there was a question in
3
Q. Were the facilities that constitute
3
your mind as to whether or not those course
4
the Vail white-water course structures?
4
structures changed the flow. Do you know one
5
MR. CYRAN: Objection to foundation.
5
way or another whether or not they do?
6
A. I don't know that I would call them
6
MR. CYRAN: Objection to foundation.
7
structures.
7
A. I think ultimately that's the -- may
8
Q. (BY MR. PORZAK) What would you call
8
be a decision of the Court.
9
them?
9
Q. (BY MR. PORZAK) I'm asking you from
10
A. I might call them I might call
10
a hydrologic or engineering or other factual
11
them drop structures.
11
standpoint.
12
Q. Are they -- do they operate as dams?
12
MR. CYRAN: Objection to foundation.
13
MR. CYRAN: Objection to foundation.
13
A. Yeah, I don't know from that
14
A. I don't believe that they operate as
14
standpoint.
15
dams.
15
Q. (BY MR. PORZAK) Do you know from
16
Q. (BY MR. PORZAK) And why not?
16
any standpoint?
17
MR. CYRAN: Objection to foundation.
17
A. I know from a physical observation
18
A. I believe dams impound water.
18
standpoint.
19
Q. (BY MR. PORZAK) Do the structures
19
Q. And what was your physical
20
that comprise the Vail white-water course change
20
observation?
21
the flow of water through the course?
21
A. My physical observation was the
22
MR. CYRAN: Objection to foundation.
22
channel seemed to be the same, in that the water
23
A. I believe that these drop structures
23
seemed to flow in the same direction at those
24
change the flow of water at some flow levels,
24
flow levels, yes.
25
yes.
25
Q. But that observation is not based on
Page 55
Page 57
I
Q. (BY MR. PORZAK) At what flow levels
1
any scientific or engineering basis?
2
do the course structures change the flow of
2
A. No, it's not based on any scientific
3
water through the course?
3
or engineering basis.
4
MR. CYRAN: Objection to foundation.
4
Q. Do you believe that the Vail course
5
A. I don't know all the flow levels at
5
structures modify the water so that it flows in
6
which they would change the direction of the
6
a different manner than it did in the natural
7
water or change -- what did you say? Change
7
channel?
8
the --
8
MR. CYRAN: Objection to foundation,
9
Q. Flow.
9
again.
10
A. -- flowofwater? Yeah, ldon't
10
THE DEPONENT: I'm sorry. Can you
11
know all the flow levels.
11
read that back.
12
Q. At what flows do the course
12
(The last question was read back.)
13
structures not change or deflect the flow of
13
A. No, I believe that the water flows
14
water through the course?
14
in the same manner.
15
MR. CYRAN: Objection to foundation,
15
Q. (BY MR. PORZAK) Do you have any
16
objection to form.
16
evidence that the control structures of the
17
A. I don't know all the flow levels at
17
Breck -- of the Vail white-water course are
18
which they do not change the flow of the water,
18
overtopped at the maximum flows claimed?
19
but there's a question in my mind as to the
19
MR. CYRAN: Objection to form.
20
flows when I visited the course in May and in
20
A. Just my physical observations.
21
June, as to whether those changed the flow of
21
Q. (BY MR. PORZAK) And what were your
22
the water at those flow levels.
22
physical observations?
23
Q. (BY MR. PORZAK) What flow levels
23
A. That they appeared to be overtopped.
24
existed when you observed the Vail course?
24
Q. Did the entirety of the structure
25
A. I think they were in the 400 cfs
25
overtop?
..........
15 (Pages 54 to 57)
Esquire Deposition Services
[phone]