My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Transcripts of the Arkansas River Compact Commissions 08/28,29/1946
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
7001-8000
>
Transcripts of the Arkansas River Compact Commissions 08/28,29/1946
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/25/2014 4:07:29 PM
Creation date
11/17/2014 3:45:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Fourth Meeting of the Arkansas River Compact Commissions 08/28,29/1946
Basin
Arkansas
Author
Commissioners
Title
Fourth Meeting of the Arkansas River Compact Commissions 08/28,29/1946
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.
/
95
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
190 <br /> O <br /> 0 <br /> a <br /> dry lands sometimes portions are dry farmed; that there is <br /> a question who is going to stand the oast of the necessary <br /> 0 <br /> or proposed works to a000mplish waterflow retardation and <br /> soil erosion prevention, and to whatever extent that will <br /> 0 <br /> aid in flood control. It is all right to say it is possible <br /> to do it but this is a practical proposition, when it cones <br /> to Onngress,f "Who is going to pay for it?* "Is It worth <br /> what it is going to cost?" Sone say that question will be <br /> better determined and it will become a limiting factor on <br /> how much this theoretical program can be carried out. Never. <br /> tholes*, I think that both sides should encourage whatever <br /> work they find feasible along that line even though they <br /> night have some very minor effeot on surface flows. If it <br /> dose they will then benefit from the standpoint of ground- <br /> water contributions and increased runoff from that source. <br /> GUZMAN tuna: I sight add, *Penning primly <br /> in the role of a somber of the Committee on Engineering Data <br /> and studies, that is, In the role of an engineer rather than <br /> as Federal representative, it would be my engineering judgment <br /> that our studies should not take into account prospective <br /> benefits to be derived from programs outlined by the Depart.. <br /> 'sent of Agriculture. <br /> I agree with Mr. Knapp and sr. Patterson that the <br /> conservative assumptions we have made with respect to silts. <br /> tics should be retati s4. i tpubs4rItNti iugeviwe also to Er. ' <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.