My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00261
CWCB
>
Chatfield Mitigation
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
BOARD00261
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:47:58 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:34:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
5/13/1964
Description
Table of Contents, Agenda, 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.
/
102
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 /> MR. MC CANDLESS: <br /> MR. PETERSON: <br />I MR. MC CANDLESS: <br />HR. PETERSON: <br /> <br />HR. Me CANDLESS: <br /> <br />MR. JOHNSON: <br /> <br />MR. PETERSON: <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />.j!:l!:l;) <br /> <br />"If they are in different districts:" <br /> <br />IIpardon?U <br /> <br />"If they are in different districts." <br /> <br />"Now, it seems to me that we are not talk- <br />ing about priorities by drainage but priorities <br />for the entire Colorado River Basin in Colo- <br />rado because this list involves projects on <br />several drainages. On the Yampa and the <br />vfuite, also on the Colorado. We talked before <br />about priorities by drainage. Now it seems we <br />are talking about priorities in the western <br />part of Colorado. Therefore it seems to me, <br />I have no particular interest in whether <br />Basalt is worked ahead of Juniper or not, <br />but it seems to me that Basalt is rather a <br />small project and a combination of the Great <br />Northern and the Juniper would be. quite a <br />large project. probably those two projects <br />would be worked simultaneously." <br /> <br />"I think you have something there." <br /> <br />"Hay I ask this, in thinking ofa motion <br />in the rough. I've been trying to write a <br />motion. I would say, 'Move that the previous <br />action of this Board with respect to the prior- <br />ity of considerations by the Reclamation <br />Bureau of the Juniper Project be retained, <br />provided also that the Juniper Project has <br />now been amended by adding the Great Northern <br />Project' ." <br /> <br />. "Senator, I'm afraid that might hurt the <br />Juniper Project because our previous action <br />was. taken on priori ties. in each. particular. <br />basin. In other words, we had three or_four <br />#l's, three or four#2's, and .so on. At this <br />time we are making out a priority for a com- <br />bined area. So I think a new resolution, da <br />new priority, should be established at this <br />time setting forth the projects in the order <br />in which they should be investigated for feasi- <br />bility on the western slope of ~olorado." <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.