My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00146
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
BOARD00146
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:45:39 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:32:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
12/30/1953
Description
Minutes and Resolution
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
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
<br />332 <br /> <br />The State of Colorado requests that, in <br />addition to its previous comments, there be <br />included in the initial authorization, the Cross <br />Mountain Reservoir on the Yampa and approximately <br />3,000,000 acre-feet of ~otal new storage on the <br />Colorado River and its tributaries above <br />Grand Junction, Colorado, a substantial,porti6n of <br />which shall be located on the upper reaches of <br />the Colorado, or a combination of the two. They <br />also approve constructing Denver's Blue River <br />Transmountain Diversion by Federal financing. <br /> <br />The known reservoir sites which might <br />accomplish this objective are Curecanti and . <br />Whitewater on the Gunnison and De Beque on the <br />Colorado River. Additional investigations may <br />disclose other sites. There is little doubt but <br />that the amount of storage requested will be <br />needed, Cross Mountain is a feasible development <br />as shown by the Supplement Report. Detail <br />invest igat ions may well show the others to be <br />feasible also. We would have no objection to a <br />conditional authorization and would undertake <br />the investigatiqns necessary to determine <br />feasibility as rapidly as the fund situation <br />would permit. It would be our intention, of <br />course, to recommend construction of those <br />units if they are found feasible. . <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Denver's Blue River Transmountain Diversion <br />proposal, insofar as we are aware, is basically <br />a~atter of seeking Federal financing of a plan <br />to be carried forward by the City. Litigation <br />affecting the use of - ~ _ Blue River water is now <br />pending. The feasibility of such a diversion <br />depends, among other things, on the outcome of <br />this litigation, or on some alternative thereto <br />which satisfactorily protects the Colorado- <br />Big Thompson Project. When a firm and detail <br />proposal is received, we will be glad to review <br />it and if satisfactory fro~ all aspects make <br />suitable recommendations. . It ~ay well be that <br />arrangements would result such that the proposal <br />could be rec~ended as a participating project. <br /> <br />Sincerely yours, <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />The President <br />The White House <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />Secretary of the Interior <br /> <br />NBBennettigmg 12-21 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.