My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00647
CWCB
>
Chatfield Mitigation
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
BOARD00647
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:52:46 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:42:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
8/15/1973
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.
/
30
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. Stapleton: Now who does that benefit in terms of water rights <br />or plans, to the action we take? In other words, I want to focus <br />in on who we are helping ahd who we are hindering by ~hat. Obvi- <br />ously, we are hindering the Rocky Mountain Power Company and Colorado <br />River Water Conservation District. Who are we helping? <br /> <br />Mr. Sparks: We have never made any analysis of this problem based 1 <br />upon who was being helped or who was being hindered. It was imma~ <br />terial to us who was in there or what the status of filings were. <br />It has no bearing upon the study we made. . <br /> <br />Some years ago, Governor McNichols appointed an oil shale committee, <br />since continued by Governor Love, and now by Governor Vanderhoof, <br />directing that intensive studies be made of the potential oil shale <br />industry in Colorado. As the study progressed, it became obvious <br />that the most important oil shale reserves were in the White River <br />basin and also that that basin possessed tremendous coal reserves. <br />On an acre per acre basis, that is the greatest potential energy <br />producing area in the state of Colorado, and perhaps in the United <br />States. Based upon that, this board, in cooperation with the fed- <br />eral government, made some rather intensive studies of two projects. <br />These were the Flat Tops project, initiated originally by the Bureau <br />of Reclamation and the Yellow Jacket project, also initiated by the <br />Bureau of Reclamation. All these private filings are merely spin- <br />offs from work done by the federal government and by this board. <br /> <br />It became apparent that it would be unwise to divert water from the <br />White River into the Colorado River, or any other place, because of <br />the tremendous energy potential of the White River basin. So we <br />did not pursue the Flat Tops project. It was not included for <br />feasibility study in the Act of 19S6. We did, however, pursue the <br />Yellow Jacket project. Again, this had nothing to do with any <br />individuals or companies. What we were trying to do was to determine <br />whether or not we could supply Water to a major energy development <br />center in the White River basin. We settled upon the Yellow Jacket <br />project which included all of these reservoir sites that have been <br />talked about here today, including an enlargement of the Trappers <br />Lake. We foresaw that we would have difficulty, environmentally and <br />otherwise. <br /> <br />The White River is a small river. It produces only about a half a .1 <br />million acre-feet. The present filings made by the Rocky Mountain <br />Power Company, the Colorado River District, Carter Oil, and numerous <br />others qreatlv exceed the total production of the South Fork of the <br />White River. <br /> <br />In any event, as to whom we benefit? We have been trying to benefit <br /> <br />-l8- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.