My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01764
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01764
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:06:48 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:02:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
2/16/1960
Description
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.
/
78
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 />_V~I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />thereafter adding to it small amounts of water, <br />because our Board feels that there are years in <br />which, if this pool is a success, (in other words <br />if it's designed to prevent the drying-up of John <br />Martin Dam) it's that last 10,000 acre-feet they <br />want to save, and our experience in the valley <br />has indicated that it's going to take a very <br />large increment added. If the reservoir ever <br />gets down to just 10,000 acre-feet, there is <br />going to have to be a lot of water put into that <br />reservoir because of the evaporation and seepage <br />which naturally occurs there and it is a question <br />of whether it can be held at that figure. But it <br />is going to require the purchase of a substantial <br />block of water. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Now, I said at the last meeting of the Board <br />that I view this as encompassing three factors. <br />One, federal legislation; two, state legislation; <br />and three, a comprehensive report, as has been <br />mentioned, on how will this thing operate and how <br />will it work. When the Fryingpan was under in- <br />vestigation we had many, many conferences with <br />Fish and Wildlife and even in the last operating <br />principles we agreed to release certain minimum <br />fish flows on the Fryingpan purely for fish pur- <br />poses - fish water. In other words, operational <br />details. Now if the Fish and Game is interested <br />enough in the Fryingpan Project to get into <br />operational details, certainly the irrigator is <br />entitled to know'in advance and approve the oper- <br />ational details of the fish pool. The Board com- <br />mented a month ago, and still does not know, what <br />those operational details are. <br /> <br />Secondly, as to the state legislation, if you <br />can't purchase water by voluntary agreement, <br />then comes the question, can you condemn? And <br />that bill has been in one form or another, on <br />access roads and water rights, in the Legislature <br />for, I'd say, fifteen years approximately. Is it <br />constitutional to condemn? Is it a public pur- <br />pose to condemn water for fishing? Along with <br />that you have the same problem as, in a sense, <br />you have at Georgetown - not that John ~furtin is <br />going to wash out - but if somebody is damaged by <br />the creation of a fish pool, as you men know, <br />you can't sue the state unless the state consents <br />to be sued. So we have felt there would be state <br />legislation involved in case of damage. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.