Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Well, the fourth one from the bottom. So that was the.area that was. <br />considered at the meeting, as I have this in my public connnents. <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON.: Saguache is not involved, I take it? <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: <br /> <br />That was not covered. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />MR. FETCHER: <br />considered. <br /> <br />So from the North Fork of the White River, that was.not <br />And, of course, that started with Rio Blanco. <br /> <br />MR. JACKSON: Mr-. Chairman, I am not clear. John, was everything on <br />here labeled "Routt County" considered at your meeting? <br /> <br />MR. FETCHER: I have the record here of the public meeting. <br />have to compare the two documents and take 20,minutes to do <br />can't qyite:answer that question. <br /> <br />I would <br />that. So I <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: Just to move the meeting along, John will work this out <br />at the noon recess and see if there are any on this list from page 4 <br />through Willow Creek on page 11 that were not properly presented. If <br />so, we will drop them off for preliminary discussion. But on that,-basis, <br />will you review. for us any problems that came up at the meetings? <br /> <br />MR. HELTON: I didn't attend the meeting. Mr. Fetcher attended the <br />meeting himself, and we have received no adverse connnents on any of <br />these reconnnendations at this point. Maybe Mr. Fetcher could answer. <br />your .question better: than 1. <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: John, what kind of changes were there? <br /> <br />MR. FETCHER: There was the addition of Willow Creek, which was done at <br />my suggestion, and there were some minor changes in quantities that we <br />reviewed. There was a change in the name of a river, the upper area of <br />the Yampa is called, traditionally, "Bear River." But it was left <br />"Yampa River," and we put in parenthesis "Bear River." I see no other <br />major changes, unless, Eddie, you know of any. <br /> <br />MR. KOCHMAN: John, every change. on there was at the suggestion over <br />there. Everyone that was included in Routt County is exactly the way I <br />we left. In going through that list ,and culling it, .youlook at every <br />Routt_County one that should be identified to your older list; there <br />were no additions other than changes like Willow_Creek. <br /> <br />MR. FETCHER: I have no hangup on voting on this right now. But if <br />you would like to wai.t ~until after lunch. when I have had a chance. to <br />compare the two documents, that would be fine, also. <br /> <br />-24- <br />