My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD02093
CWCB
>
Chatfield Mitigation
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
BOARD02093
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:11:41 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:09:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
5/18/1979
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.
/
96
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 />methodology we use, the. .end result, is. the 15 year figure.. ' The 15 <br />year average is the best basis we can work from. <br /> <br />As Mr. Sparks mentioned, we <br />to that also in the report. <br />gave the 10ngevities in the <br />Rio Grande is correct. <br /> <br />do have about 30 years of data. We refer <br />Some are 30, and some are shorter. We <br />report. But the answer you got from the <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />MR. KROEGER: When you repor.t, fot' instance, in. the San Juan3,that.= , <br />at this particular time there is 180 or 200 or 220 percent of normal, <br />this is 220 percent of the normal 15 year average, though, on snowfall <br />or water content? Is that right? <br /> <br />MR. HALSTEAD: Right. The '63 to '78 period. It is based on that. <br /> <br />MR.. KROEGER: But: it would not necessarily be 200 percent of the <br />long: term average and could be fat' short of ~hat. And I think it is <br />just that this year. Am I ~ight? ' <br /> <br />MR. HALSTEAD: From.a press standpoint,. it- is interesting to use that <br />average, and that is one reason for it. -If you look at the report, <br />we~have the high year and the low year and the 15 year average, last <br />year's water content. vers.usthis year's water content.' So in the <br />report there is enough to make a co~parison. But it 'could be mis- <br />leading, I agree with you. <br /> <br />MR. KROEGER: Do you mean to tell me, though, that Wolf Creek, the <br />Upper San Juan" with 56 inches of water content is an all time. high? <br />It is: only. an all: t.:tme high fO,r the 1a.s!::~ 15 years, .following 14 years <br />of-dry weather. - <br /> <br />..~~. c- <br /> <br />MR. HALSTEAD: '63 to '78. But the,lo~ years are in the report.: If <br />you read the press releases, it is--how will I say this--sensationa1. <br />But if you read t~e complete report, from a water users, standpoint, all <br />the information is in there. <br /> <br />MR. KROEGER: ' Thank you. <br /> <br />MR. HALSTEAD: I also appreciate the resolution. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />MR. KROEGER: I think this is extremely important. Let's see. . We <br />have a resolution regarding the authorizing of our board staff to <br />conduct project. feasibility studies. . Does anyone want to comment on <br />that? <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: Mr. Chairman,: we have been doing this right along. <br />Whether we had been doing it legally is subject to question. But since <br /> <br />~10- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.