Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />mail. We have not had an opportunity to refer it to our legal counsel <br />or members of the Board, and I plan to do SO with the hope that we can <br />enter into the same stipulations with the Water Board that we have in <br />the past--that those minimum flows will not adversely affect the opera- <br />tion of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project. We have been very successful <br />with that in the past. But I would like the record to show that between <br />now and final approval we will be researching it and will appear at the <br />final. <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: I might point out that under our procedure the Board does <br />not really approve anything on the preliminary review. In fact, many <br />times the staff makes changes in the recommendation between the pre- <br />liminary and the final recommendation. so whatever stipultations you <br />want, if they are acceptable to the Division of wildlife and to our <br />staff, we would very much want to consider them. We have approximately <br />two months to do that. <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: DO we have a motion on preliminary? <br /> <br />MR. HELTON: Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out for the record that <br />there are two omissions on the preliminary recommendations. On page 1 <br />on Pruden Creek, we failed to put the amount of the recommended flow, <br />which is 1 cfs, and also the length of the segment of the stream, which <br />is 3 miles. That is about the sixth stream down from the top. <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: Give us those figures again. <br /> <br />MR. HELTON: The recommended flow is 1 cfs. The segment length is 3.0 <br />miles. <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: All right, th?lnk you. <br /> <br />MR. KROEGER: Mr. Chairman, I will move the acceptance of the preliminary <br />recommendations for minimum streamflows, with the exception of page 3, <br />which inVOlves all of Grand County. <br /> <br />MR. FURNEAUX: Second. <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: Any discussion? <br /> <br />MR. GORMLEY: Mr. Chairman, would it be proper to incorporate your advice <br />concerning that final date? <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: NO problem at all--with my encouragement. <br /> <br />MR. GORMLEY: I'm not sure of the parlimentary approach. But could that <br />motion be amended to say that those which are 'being deferred for pre- <br />liminary, those in Grand County, would come to some resolution or be on <br />for final action by the May meeting? <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: <br />for preliminary <br />proposer here? <br /> <br />Well, let's put it this way--that they would be considered <br />approval on March 14. Would that be all right with the <br /> <br />-21- <br />