My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01706
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01706
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:06:07 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:01:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
8/2/1961
Description
Table of Contents, Agenda and Minutes
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.
/
123
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 />.o::::lf.:>1 <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />And this will be Congress' concern and this is <br />a different concern than this Water Board has. <br />Now I realize that the primary concern of the <br />Water Board is this matter of irrigation assistance <br />but I simply want to say, before I go into that <br />point further, that we have other projects in this <br />area that are important projects. We've got the <br />Fryingpan-Arkansas Project; we've got the Navajo, <br />San Juan-Chama Projects and I simply caution this <br />Board that if western reclamation is going to be <br />converted to public power, you are going to lose <br />the support of the east and the south and the <br />middle west and you need those votes if you are <br />going to get these projects passed. So I feel <br />that what we are proposing here, since it is con- <br />sistent with the historical policy of Congress, is <br />a very vital question to this area and I think the <br />decision this area makes in respect to this may <br />very well determine the ability of this area to <br />get the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project passed, the <br />Navajo, San Juan-Chama and other necessary irri- <br />gation projects. <br /> <br />I'd like to say, coming to the specific <br />problem before this Water Board, I don't see any <br />particular purpose in reiterating the matters I <br />presented to the Water Board at our meeting in <br />La Junta. But just briefly let me state this, <br />that I think that we all agree - I don't think <br />there is any disagreement - that under the Con- <br />gressional criteria and under the criteria estab- <br />lished by the Bureau that the whole question in <br />this matter and the whole issue is exactly the <br />way Senator Johnson has stated, and that is, are <br />consumer power rates adversely affected or is <br />project repayment adversely affected? This is <br />the issue and this is really the issue that should <br />concern this Water Board. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Now for the purposes of analyzing the pro- <br />posals made by the companies, just to briefly <br />reiterate the history - the Bureau ennunciated <br />certain criteria and made public a 'yardstick' <br />system against which they would evaluate our <br />proposals. Then in October of 1960 and subse- <br />quently in January of 1961 the Bureau announced <br />its decision and that decision was rejecting our <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.