My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD02091
CWCB
>
Chatfield Mitigation
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
BOARD02091
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:11:37 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:09:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
3/16/1978
Description
Agenda, Minutes, 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.
/
58
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 />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />beneficial, not only to you but to us. <br />encourage any kind of understanding and <br />to do. <br /> <br />So anything we can do to <br />cooperation, we will be happy <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: Thank you. I am going to suggest to the Board that we <br />approve these preliminarily. That would mean that they would come up <br />for final discussion at our May 12th meeting. In the meantime, I am <br />sure that, if you will get together with Mr. Sparks and get a meeting <br />of as many as you possibly can who are interested and will participate <br />and will benefit from whatever meetings we can put on up there, we will <br />try to get you the most knowledgeable people we have. That will give, <br />you, I would think, ample opportunity to consider it before our final <br />consideration on May 12. Does that sound reasonable? <br /> <br />MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. <br />MR. STAPLETON: Does the Board agree with that possible solution? <br /> <br />(Whereupon, all members of the Board indicated affirmatively.) <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: If so, I will entertain a motion that the minimum <br />streamflow recommendations be approved and put on the agenda for the <br />May 12th meeting for final consideration. <br /> <br />MR. KOCHMAN: <br />I think most <br />the Board as <br /> <br />Mr. Chairman, I would like <br />of the discussion is over. <br />a body. <br /> <br />to make a statement now that <br />I would like to make it to <br /> <br />Two weeks ago, I attended a meeting in Fort Collins. It was attended <br />by somewhere over a hundred fisheries biologists from throughout the <br />western states--Wyoming, New Mexico, Utah, Idaho. And I saw something <br />for half a day at that meeting that I had never seen before over the <br />past ten years, and that was a half-day discussion on instream flows. <br />The state of Wyoming, essentially, boils down to where it really does <br />not have a good way to protect instream flows. <br /> <br />At least we have a basis in Colorado. Wyoming has nothing, neither <br />does Idaho. <br /> <br />All the biologists agree that if they had looked back seventy years ago <br />they are losing their fishery resource. There was a time when the old <br />timers talked about parts of the river in Wyoming just like we talk. <br />You could go out, and there was no limt on fish, and now there are <br />limits. The fish became smaller. The game and fish agencies were <br />forced to stock them. The deterioration. is occurring. <br /> <br />In this state, we have probably 8,000 miles of trout fishing. Since <br />the early 1900's, we have deteriorated probabl~ 30 to 50 percent in <br />varying degrees. <br /> <br />Now, it comes down to the point that in the future--and I predict that <br />this board is going to be called upon as time goes on, whether SB 97 <br />is the correct way or whether we eventually get an amendment--that this <br />board is going to be looked upon as, I guess, really the major board <br /> <br />-21- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.