My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Arkansas River Compact Administration and U.S. Geological Survey Sate of Colorado Meeting May 11 1978
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
5001-6000
>
Arkansas River Compact Administration and U.S. Geological Survey Sate of Colorado Meeting May 11 1978
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2012 3:42:50 PM
Creation date
7/27/2012 1:51:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Arkansas River Compact Administration and U.S. Geological Survey Sate of Colorado Meeting May 11 1978
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Date
5/11/1978
Author
Newton, Patricia
Title
Arkansas River Compact Administration and U.S. Geological Survey Sate of Colorado Meeting May 11 1978
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
142
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
1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />Mr. Jesse could probably, off the top of his head, tell us <br />the effect, in general terms, of that transfer. <br />MR. JESSE: Again, we would be speculating on <br />what the court is going to do, but if we realize we are <br />speculating and if we attach the same conditions to the remaind <br />that is attached to the existing decree, why, there would be <br />13,425 less 30 percent transit loss, assuming another condition <br />existed and that would be that the Rule Creek flow was 70 <br />percent of the Muddy Creek flow, but that would be 14 less 30, <br />which is whatever that is. I don't know what that is right <br />offhand. <br />Assuming this other condition existed, that would <br />be 9,000? ?bout 9,000 or so acre -feet possible. That's assumin <br />it is given priority and assuming these other conditions happen. <br />MR. COOLEY: Muddy Creek was the one with the <br />breached darn; Rule Creek was the one. on the paved road where <br />we were bombed? <br />MR. JESSE: Yes, the one on the paved road is <br />below the confluence. If you remember looking upstream, Muddy <br />Creek went off to the right and Rule Creek went off to the <br />left, that is, looking upstream. <br />MR. COOLEY Any other questions of Mr. -- Yes. <br />MR, HOWLAND: I have some of my Board of Director <br />here and they have instructed me to make a few comments, so <br />with your permission, I would like to make a few comments. I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.