BOARD02386

• Board Meeting Date: 3/8/1972
• Description: Agenda or Table of Contents, Minutes, Memos
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

Mr. Droskin. Could the effects of channel-
ization be investigated as part of your
planning?"

MR. DROSKIN:

"Well, the effects of channelization were
evaluated prior to the submission of the
definite planning report and this was con-
sidered at the Congressional hearings for the
Narrows. Because of lack of support, almost
unanimous lack of support for the channelization,
and the probability at the time of the hearings
that the Corps was going go come up with a plan
for control of Bijou. the consideration of
diversion into the Narrows was left out. It
was not a part of the authorized plan for the
construction of the Narrows project."

MR. SPARKS:

"I think the point that Mr. Vandemoer is
making is whether or not there would have to be
any revision of the Narrows plan for the reser-
voir sizing if there were a later diversion of
Bijou Creek into Narrows. It was my under-
standing all along that the Narrows Reservoir
could adequately handle the Bijou diversion
under its present sizing if that became neces-
sary."

MR. DROSKIN:

"That's right. Larry. We did consider that
and assumed that there would not necessarily
have to be any resizement of the Narrows. It
would have to be a reallocation of the base in
Narrows. There would be different operating
criteria. The conservation space would be
less. We would have added about 150 percent to
the estimated volume of sediment that would go
into Narrows.

I

In other words. instead of about 60.000
acre-feet of silt in the Narrows at the end of I
a hundred years. we figured that there would be
about 150.000 acre-feet. So the life of the
reservoir, the life of the conservation space
in the reservoir. would be limited somewhat and c
the uses during that operating period would be
less. "

-12-