My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Transcripts of the Arkansas River Compact Commissions 11/08,09,10/1948
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
7001-8000
>
Transcripts of the Arkansas River Compact Commissions 11/08,09,10/1948
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/18/2014 1:47:37 PM
Creation date
11/18/2014 1:16:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Sixteenth Meeting of the Arkansas River Compact Commissions 11/08,09,10/1948 Denver, Co.
State
CO
Author
Commissioners
Title
Sixteenth Meeting of the Arkansas River Compact Commissions 11/08,09,10/1948 Denver, 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.
/
172
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
m <br /> v <br /> 0 <br /> 0 <br /> 0 <br /> 16 <br /> P-1 <br /> do you mean it? <br /> O <br /> MR. KNAPP: It is the accumulation of silt during that <br /> time. <br /> MR. IRELAND: Were those figures on siltation due to <br /> any error in figuring the initial report? <br /> MR. KNAPP: No, it is-- <br /> CHAIRMAN KRAMER: I think maybe you better clarify that. <br /> What this data stems from is a physical survey of the bottom <br /> of John Martin Reservoir made during the spring of 1948, In <br /> the nature of a topographical survey, if you please, and the <br /> evaluation of that results in these figures. There is no <br /> relation by which you can compare that with any previous <br /> survey. It represents the action of nature during the inter- <br /> vening period, and they plan to repeat those surveys from <br /> time to time in order that there may be up-to-date data on <br /> what the actual capacity and rate of siltation are in the <br /> oouree of the years. <br /> Mr. Knapp points out that the estimate of the engineering <br /> oommittee was substantially higher than the figures for those <br /> first seven years. It does not follow, however, that anybody <br /> is right or wrong, because the estimate of the engineering <br /> committee was based on a repetition of the inflow for the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.