My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00632
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
BOARD00632
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:52:37 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:41:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
8/16/1972
Description
Agenda or Table of Contents, Minutes, Memos
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.
/
70
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 />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Mr. Stapleton: If I understand your memorandum correctly, they have <br />to come up with another $87,000. Is that right? <br /> <br />Mr. Sparks: Yes, it would probably run more than that. We have here <br />a new cost estimate of $1,225,000. It is my understanding that this <br />proposition is agreeable to Mr. Woodward of the Division of Wildlife, <br />providing that the legislature will provide the additional funding. <br /> <br />11r. Stapleton: Let me understand, if the power companies are going to <br />get the sole benefit out of it, what benefit is the Division of Wild- <br />life going to get out of these expenditures? <br /> <br />Mr. Sparks: Actually, the power companies would use it a very small <br />percentage of the time. Most of the benefit, probably 90 percent of <br />the time, is for game, fish and recreational uses. The power companies <br />would use it only as an emergency supply in critical years. <br /> <br />Mr. Stapleton: What business is this of ours? <br /> <br />Mr. SParks: This is a project that has to do with the conservation of <br />water, for one thing. This is a valuable reservoir site which will <br />be destroyed if a 5,000 foot reservoir is constructed there. We also <br />have a project, the Great Northern project, which involves Elkhead <br />Creek. This may be some alternate plan for the Great Northern project, <br />plus the fact that is is our obligation to secure the greatest bene- <br />ficial use of water within the State of Colorado. lve do not feel that <br />a single purpose use of this small reservoir is the greatest benefi- <br />cial use of water. <br /> <br />.'.,': <br /> <br />~~. Stapleton: Tom, do you have any. <br /> <br />? <br />., <br /> <br />Mr. Ten Evck: I have one observation. I think Larry indicated that <br />there was a 20-foot difference in elevation. I think that about a <br />5-foot difference . . . <br /> <br />Mr. Sparks: That is correct. <br /> <br />Mr. <br />not <br />the <br /> <br />Ten Evck: That is only a correction. <br />sure that this memo speaks as to who <br />water to store in that reservoir. <br /> <br />The other point is, I am <br />owns, or who will provide <br /> <br />Mr. Sparks: This would be a decreed water right. The power companies <br />have made application, as I understand it, or will make application <br />for a water right for this purpose. <br /> <br />-32- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.