BOARD01764

• Board Meeting Date: 2/16/1960
• Description: Minutes
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

I

MR. BUNGER:

MR. SPARKS:

MR. BUNGER:

MR. SPARKS:

MRS. KEATING:
MR. SPARKS:

MR. EAKES:

MR. STAPLETON:

I

MR. EAKES:
MR. SPARKS:

aquatic life. So to simplify the matter, we have
proposed this addition here, 'the Secretary of
the Interior shall operate the project so that
for the preservation of fish and aquatic life
the flow of the Navajo River shall not be depleted
below 40 cubic feet and the flow of the Blanco
River below 20 cubic feet'. We consider that is
the minimum essential flow necessary for the
preservation of fish life, and that's during any
period of the year. We think that New Mexico
will agree to that."

"Does anyone know what the minimum flow of
those two streams are?"

"We have it. Of course this is based upon
the hydrology of the streams."

"Would this water then, for fish, be charged
to New Mexico or credited to New Mexico?"

"Oh, no. It goes on down to Navajo Reser-
voir, but we're not interested in it after it
leaves Colorado. As long as it keeps our fish
alive, we are satisfied."

"We made a mistake in (f), Mr. Sparks."

"Yes, that amendment is wrong.
read 'the flow of the Blanco River
cubic feet per second of time'.

It should
below twenty

"Mr. Chairman, I might also add that these
figures that are in this paragraph are based on
the hydrology studies of the Bureau report and
they aren't figures that were just picked out of
the air. They are actually based on the 'minimum
flows that were proposed by the Bureau of Sports
Fisheries and Wildlife to protect the fish and
aquatic life."

"I take it, Mr. Eakes, that you agree with
their accuracy."

"Yes, sir."

"vle maintain our own gaging station there.

After that you will notice that a new proviso -'
get back to (g) here, which was originally the
old (b) - we had originally scratched out that
whole paragraph. We agreed to put that back in