Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.. <br /> <br />) <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />David Harrison: <br /> <br />Eric Kuhn: <br /> <br />David Harrison: <br /> <br />Eric Kuhn: <br /> <br />David Harrison: <br /> <br />Patricia Wells: <br /> <br />David Harrison: <br /> <br />Wendy Weiss: <br /> <br />Eric Kuhn: <br /> <br />Wendy Weiss: <br /> <br />exceedence and the frequencies. <br /> <br />So you're saying...flow remaining available after full utilization of carveout <br />as subsequently modified, or..and the Board reserves the right to quantify <br />those or more specifically describe those provided that such quantification <br />or more specific description would not exceed the flows recommended by <br />the Service, and the reference is back to a set of number,s the top line of <br />which is the 25% exceedence number. So you're saying that we would <br />refme the description or the quantification to a point such that we would <br />not be calling for more water than the Service has described as having an <br />exceedence of 25%. <br /> <br />That's... well, yes. <br /> <br />So we might have a different number than 1630, if we had a different...if <br />it were associated with a different statistical occurrence frequency. <br /> <br />Right. We may have numbers that are less than that, but we wouldn't <br />exceed that, OK, because the Service is not recommending flows that are <br />in the river in this flow recommendation, they're recommending flows they <br />would like to see in the river, and if you read their report, they admit that <br />the flows that they are recommending are more than what has been <br />available in the recent history, meaning the last 30 years or so. <br /> <br />OK. <br /> <br />Then it would be hard to exceed more than whats in the river. <br /> <br />Yes. Now, we've interrupted your making of the motion to try to clarify <br />that. Wendy? <br /> <br />(inaudible)...I'm not sure I understand this. Try to phrase these questions <br />so that its easy to understand. I'm not sure about your qualifying <br />statement that we not exceed the recommendation of the Service. Is that <br />intended to apply only if the board quantifies the flow, or apply even if the <br />Board does not? <br /> <br />My intent was that if the Board had to further describe or quantify, in that <br />event, we would not exceed the flows that are recommended. OK? Its to <br />cover that option, OK. Now, we may want to talk about that...that was my <br />intent, that may not be best approach to take, but my intent was that it <br />would only be a qualifier on the quantification. <br /> <br />And not on the flow(?) <br /> <br />Minutes of December 13, 1995 Special eWeB Meeting <br />