BOARD02488

• Board Meeting Date: 11/17/1977
• Description: Agenda, Minutes, Resolution
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

get clarifications as to the legal descriptions' on the applications.'
and so on.

But on behalf of our district, I did want the record to show that 'We
had not been consulted in this matter, and we have registered concern
over the matter. But on behalf of our board. if consultation has
been had with the Soil Conservation people and the county Commissioners
in Chaffee County, we will accept that.

I

MR. KROEGER: All right. Is there any other discussion?

MR. FETCHER: Fred. I have a couple of technical questions to Eddy.

The hydrographs that you enclosed with this" I notice that in three
of them. specifically, that the recommended flow is considerably above
the minimum flow; and I just picked ,those particular three out; One
of them is the Middle--Taylor Creek in Chaffee' county on the Arkansas,
and I notice ,that the hydrograph shows as recommended 3 cfs, and,
apparently, the minimum flows during the winter months are consider-
ably less than that. And perhaps it is okay. And then there were
two others--oneiLost Creek, ,near Buford, where the recommended flow
is 10 cfs, and the'minimum flow is around 2. ,And perhaps you have an
explanation for ,that. ,,'

The others seem to be pretty much in line with the minimum flows.

MR. KOCHMAN:' In looking 'at the ,hydrograph on Middle Taylor Creek, as
you stated, it is 3 cfs above the winter flow. From approximately
October, it looks like, through April. We have not looked at these
hydrographs in using our method;

As I explained to the Board before. computer modeling our data. we
developed recommendations., I would say that we recommend that 3 cfs'
as a'summer flow, primarily for April through september. and recog-
nizing that the winter flow is below that. But what we are telling
in our recommendations is that we are recommending that 3 cfs or the
natural flow. if less. And. truly. what we are saying is that the
entire winter flow is critical. and we are recommending maintenance
of that entire winter flow.

MR. SPARKS: Didn't we get 'some verbal communication about some of
these White River flows? Was there some objection to them?

MR. HELTON: Yes, sir. We received a copy of the minutes of the
Yellow Jacket Water conservancy District meeting, which included a I
resolution which their board passed, which asks you gentlemen to
reduce the recommendation of the Division of wildlife on the White
River Basin, the North Fork of the White River. The first thing was
the North Fork from Ripple Creek down to Lost Creek, the Division ,of
wildlife recommended 70, and the Yellow Jacket people asked for 60.
And on the North Fork from Lost Creek down to Marvene Creek. the
Division of Wildlife recommended 80, and they asked that that also
be 60. I have a copy of the resolution here.

MR. SPARKS: Those are in our final recommendations?

-34-