BOARD00100

• Board Meeting Date: 5/11/1960
• Description: Minutes
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

amount of the sedimentation in John r~rtin at
the present time, as I understand it, came
from one particular flash flood down at Picket-
wire and that is something that would have
perhaps occurred whether or not the fish pool
was there. But 1'm not a farmer and I'm not
an engineer and I don't want to get into this
particular argument.

The people below the dam are very defin-
itely interested in getting muddy water out of
this dam. They claim it is better when they
irrigate with it. They claim that when the
dam is empty they -or excuse me, it's the
other way around - when the dam has any water
in it, they don't get muddy water, they get
clear water. Now regardless. of the merits
of muddy water versus clear water, it seems
to me that this experience shows that when
there's a slight amount of water in the dam
there is a deposition of sediment there which
does not occur when the dam is dry.

I

MR. NELSON:

I don't believe we are oPposinq this
permanent pool on any of these grounds I've
outlined. \vhat I'm saying is, 'Sure, this
system may be. fine today, and it may be fine
in 1965, but what is going to happen to the
irrigators in 1975 and in 1990? Those are
the operating principles we are interested in
and those are the things we are interested in
finding out from the Game and Fish Department
as to how much water they'll need in 1980.
And what kind of a reservoir profile can be
anticipated, what the depth of the water will
be and what they need for safe biological
preservation of fish'."

"Mr. Beise, do you have any remarks to
make?"

MR. BEISE:

"For the record, my name is Charles Beise
and I represent the Southeastern Colorado
Water Conservancy District.

Mr. Moses commented on, I think, the
basic point of which comes first. . It seems
to me that Frank's question could well be
considered now. I don't know any logical
reason why the investigation couldn't be
premised upon certain assumptions as to the

I