My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01412
CWCB
>
Chatfield Mitigation
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01412
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:01:30 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:54:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
2/16/1953
Description
Minutes and Resolution
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.
/
36
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 />101 <br /> <br />section of the State. He called attention to the fact that the 177,000 <br />acre-feet of water which would be used for the Denver water project are <br />considerably less than the 430,000 acre-feet of water .involved in the <br />Bureau of Reclamation project. Mr. Saunders expressed the hope that the <br />Board would look with favor' upon a resolution which would permit <br />jAr. Breitenstein to insist on the inclusion of the Denver project as a <br />concurrent part of the Colorado River Storage Project bill. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Vice-Chairman Bailey asked Mr. Sande"s to give the Board <br />information on the engineering features of the Rroject. <br /> <br />Mr. Saunders explained that Denver's plan is to take.water <br />from the Blue River, at its confluence with the ~nake and Ten Mile Rivers <br />near Dillon, which has an elevation of 8,860 feet, through a twenty- <br />three mile tunnel to be built under the Continental Divide, to Grant, which <br />has an elevation of 8,640 feet. The water would then be stored at <br />Two Forks Reservoir, southwest of Denver, he stated, and from there it <br />would be brought to Denver and used as it is needed, He added that the <br />twenty-three mile tunnel from Dillon to Grant would have to be built first <br />and would take about seven years to complete. <br /> <br />Considerable discussion on the matter followed. <br /> <br />Vice-Chairman Bailey referred to resolutions passed by the <br />Board in connection with the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project providing that no <br />further fede~ally financed transmountain diversion projects Je approved <br />until the Western Slope surveys are completed and called on E. O. Larson, <br />Region 4, Bureau of Reclamation, to report to the Board concerning the <br />status of the Western Slope surveys. <br /> <br />Mr. Larson reported as follows: <br /> <br />A comprehensive inventory of potential <br />projects was completed in 1946. In 1950, a detailed <br />report was submitted on the Colorado River Storage <br />Project and thirteen participating projects, two of <br />which have been dropped since that time. That <br />report was finally sent to the Commissioner and <br />approved. The report on the FruitgrOYfers Project is <br />just bein~ completed. The Definite Plan Report on <br />the Paonia Project has been completed. The Fire <br />Mountain Canal report is nearly complete. There is <br />also a report on the West Divide Project, and <br />rehabilitation reports for the Uncompahgre and <br />Grand Valley Projects. The La Plata report has been <br />completed. Reconnaissance report on the Gunnison <br />Basin Project has been completed. A revision of the <br />report on t he Dolores Project should be out in April. <br /> <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.