BOARD01598

• Board Meeting Date: 9/27/1946
• Description: Table of Contents and Minutes
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

22

It was moved' by !'Ir. Bailey and seconded by Mr. Pughe
that Jean S. Breitenstein. Attorney for the Colorado Water
Conservation Board, be instructed to appear on behalf of the
Board in the adjudication proceedings, Mesa County, Grand
Junction, Colorado, and advise the.Court respecting the under-.
groun& water studies which are being made and take the position
that. because of the lack of adequate information at this time.
an attempt to adjudicate rights in underground water supplies
would be premature, and that he request the Court to hold the
adjudication matter in abeyance until more data is made avail-
able to clarify the situation.

I

Upon vote being taken, the motion was unanimously passed
and declared adopted.

Alfred C. Stiefel, a member of the staff of the Colorado Water
Conservation Board, showed colored slides of water development in the State
of Colorado and covering some phases of the work of the Colorado Water
Conservation Board. The slides also included pictures of,test hole drilling
in the Big Sandy Creek area in connection with the field work conducted in
the underground water study of the State.

The Board adjourned at 10,00 PM, Friday, September 27, 1946 to
reconvene at 9,30 AM on Saturday, September 28, 1946.

Morning Session - September 28, 1946

Boar~ Members Absent

Ron. John C. Vivian
HOl!. H. Lawrence Hinkley
M. C. Rinderlider
L. Ward Bannister

The meeting was called to order by Vice-Chairman Chris Wallrich
at 9:40 AM, Saturday, September 28, 1946.

The forenoon meeting of the Board was devoted to a discussion by
C. L. Patterson, Chief Engineer, and Royce J. Tipton, Consulting Engineer
of the Board, concerning the report of the Department of the Interior,
Bureau of Reclamation, entitled, "The Colorado River, a Comprehensive
Report on the Development of the Water Resources of the Colorado River Basin
for Irrigation, Power Production and Other ~eneficial Uses in Arizona.
California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming," This
discussion was of a detailed nature involving factual information disclosed
by the report and conclusions and recommendations of the Bureau of I
Reclamation with respect to the development of the water resources of the
Colorado River Basin. Both Mr. Patterson and Mr. Tipton indicated phases
of the report which should receive adverse comment on the part of the State .
of Colorado and p"inted out the manner in which the report. if adopted by
the Congress, would adversely affect the water development program of the
State. The purpose of .this discussion was to lay a bas is' for further
study of the report and preparation of Colorado's comments in accordance
with the provisions of Seotion 1 of the Flood Control Act of 1944.