Laserfiche WebLink
<br />00 <br />c.o <br />N <br />N <br />(~:) <br />o <br /> <br />4. The operation of the permanent pool would have to be <br /> <br />approved by the Corps of Engineers, Arkansas River Compact Admin- <br /> <br />istration, the Colorado State Engineer and the Colorado Water <br /> <br />Conservation Board. <br /> <br />Proposed Leqislation Meets Opposition <br /> <br />In 1960 Mr. Sparks recommended to the Board that they <br /> <br />approve a draft of legislation that would authorize invasion of <br /> <br />the flood control space to the amount of 10,000 acre-feet for a <br /> <br />permanent pool. Since it would be an invasion of the flood <br /> <br />control pool, it would not infringe upon the rights of their- <br /> <br />rigators in the conservation pool. Construction of various soil <br /> <br />conservation projects and two major projects - Trinidad and <br /> <br />Pueblo Reservoirs - would lessen the flood control requirements <br /> <br />and justify adminor invasion of the flood control pool. The <br /> <br />Board would not vote approval on the grounds that there was <br /> <br />considerable opposition from irrigators below the dam and also <br /> <br />they wanted more information on operating procedures. <br /> <br />In 1963, at the request of the Governor and the State <br /> <br />Game, Fish and Parks Department, the Board again considered the <br /> <br />draft of proposed legislation. During two meetings spokesmen for <br /> <br />all interested groups were allowed to present arguments. <br /> <br />The opposition made the following points: <br /> <br />1. Siltation would increase, because there would be <br /> <br />-8- <br />