My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Transcripts of the Arkansas River Compact Commissions 08/11,12/1947
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
7001-8000
>
Transcripts of the Arkansas River Compact Commissions 08/11,12/1947
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/18/2014 1:49:34 PM
Creation date
11/18/2014 11:13:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Tenth Meeting of the Arkansas River Compact Commissions 08/11,12/1947 Colorado Springs, Co.
State
CO
Author
Commissioners
Title
Tenth Meeting of the Arkansas River Compact Commissions 08/11,12/1947 Colorado Springs, Co.
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.
/
121
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
34 <br /> 0 <br /> 0 <br /> 0 <br /> D <br /> version information and matters connected ;iireotly there- <br /> with, that in the meantime our thinking is going into a <br /> formula, an engineering formula for apportionment that does 0 <br /> r <br /> not necessitate any further detailed analysis based on specs- <br /> fications or assumptions or any further reservoir operation <br /> studies. <br /> I think I might go just one step further on that, <br /> General, if-- <br /> CHAIRMAN KRAMER: Certainly. <br /> MR. PATTERSON: The basis for that conclusion is that <br /> the water of Caddoa Reservoir is interourrently and neces- <br /> sarily water of the Arkansas River, and that we are dividing <br /> it or approaching it now on the basis of only apportionment <br /> of Arkanaaa River water, rather than two separate apportion- <br /> ments, one of reservoir water and the other of natural flow, <br /> and for that reason, except that we may agree to make some <br /> analysis, as a sort of a high-sign oheoking of whatever for- <br /> mula is advised, these detailed analysis separately are not <br /> required. <br /> I do want to hear from George particularly, and then <br /> from other members of the Commission, because if the engineers <br /> here in connection with the word study, that we were more or <br /> less directed to do, are approaching something that we shouldn't, <br /> I would like again to ask for comments from the rest of the <br /> Commissioners. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.