Laserfiche WebLink
<br />465 <br /> <br />MR. CRAWFDRD: <br /> <br />MR. MOSES: <br />MR. KELLY: <br /> <br />MR. MOSES: <br /> <br />MR. KELLY: <br />MR. CRAWFORD: <br />MR. SWEET: . <br /> <br />MR. MOSES: <br /> <br />- lO - <br /> <br />"There remains some land classification work <br />to be done. It is one of five projects which <br />have been authorized for Colorado--Smith Fork, <br />Silt, Pine River Extension, Florida, and Paonia." <br /> <br />"I don't think we have any conflict then." <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />"The only thing, as I commented at a previous <br />meeting, it has been brought up at our Southwest <br />District meeting that the people on the Rio <br />Grande wanted to construct the project the~- <br />selves. Here this paragraph is that of <br />helping them.- <br /> <br />"Do you have any objections to its being <br />investigated?" <br /> <br />"No." <br /> <br />"And we approve the report," <br /> <br />"I would like to make a comment for the <br />benefit of the Board members who are not <br />familiar with the Compact. There is no <br />conflict between the Bureau and the State. The <br />subject has been opened down there this year. <br />In fact, the last meeting was the first time <br />the subject has been brought out regarding; <br />790,000 acre feet for Texas. Actually they <br />have tried to get that much release. Now <br />I understand Colorado and New Mexico have <br />gotten into quite a discussion. The <br />engineering advisors of the Compact members <br />were directed to study that. However, for the <br />purpose of this report, the Bureau looks <br />to the State Water Board for direction as to <br />the requirements of the .compact, and if a <br />change in that woraing would make it more <br />acceptable to Colorado there is no rule on us <br />to keep it as ,it is. A rather. different aspect <br />of that 790,000 acre feet has recently arisen <br />and at the time we wrote the report it was <br />full~ in compliance with Colorado's ideas." <br /> <br />"With regard to that 790,000 feet, Texas <br />has added to her credit the difference between <br />790,000 acre feet and the amount they actually <br />get. Last year for the first time the question <br />was raised that if there were less than 790,000 <br />feet in the entire basin, is Texas entitled to <br />make a claim for 790,000 feet?" <br /> <br />I <br />