Laserfiche WebLink
<br />what we want in these m~n~mum streamflows, regardless of whether or not <br />this board makes an. appropriation. <br /> <br />MR. KROEGER: And the 70 second-feet then meets the approval of the <br />Division of. Wildlife? <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />MR. SHERMAN:: I attended the meeting this morning, and.I have been in <br />on this discussion for almost two months now. Based on our meeting <br />this morning and the statements made by both the Division and Frank <br />Cooley representing Yellow Jacket, I would move that.we accept the <br />recommendation that Larry Sparks had made of a minimum flow of 70 cfs <br />from Ripple Creek to Marvine Creek, and. eliminate the second appro- <br />priation there. of 80. <br /> <br />MR. KROEGER: May I have a second on that? <br /> <br />MR. LEINSDQRF: I second. <br /> <br />MR. SHERMAN: Before we:move:on that, I would like to hear specifically <br />from. the Division of:Wildlife., Maybe:Y9u can amplify-upon this pro-: <br />posed ~ompromise and how you see that aff~cting the departmental:values <br />of the st~eam between these two points. <br /> <br />MR. BARROWS: As was:mentioned, we did discuss this this morning. As: <br />Mr. Cooley has. indicated, no one came ~way:satisfied.. <br /> <br />Mr. Burkhard conducted a professional study, as Larry has indicated, <br />under contract to determine by this method:that we needed 80 :second-. <br />feet in this stretch of the river. As has already been:alluded to,:we <br />thought it was prudent to work this out in-house. Make.no mistake <br />about it,.we will be heard from the wildlife resource:standpoint, and' <br />we didn't even discuss the degree of damage and I don't think that is <br />particularly relevant. But our particular determination at this time,' <br />based on evidence that we have, is that we could live with the 70 second- <br />foot flow in this stretch.: <br /> <br />MR. SHERMAN: Well, can. Y9U amplify the extent to which it would <br />adversely affect the fishery? <br /> <br />MR. . BARROWS: Well, Harris, .if I:had known that this was going to I <br />happen, perhaps I would have developed information and we could have <br />given.you a quick and dirty on what.the damage would be.: <br /> <br />Now, Walt, who did the study, perhaps can do a better job and come <br />closer to a general description.ofwhat the adverse effect would be. <br />than:I could right now, because w~ just didn't have time. We were <br />unaware that there would be a compromise--not.totally unaware. I mean <br /> <br />-20- <br />