My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP01527
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
WSP01527
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:31:29 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 10:30:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8240.200.40.H
Description
Yampa
State
CO
Basin
Yampa/White
Water Division
6
Date
11/1/1995
Title
Instream Flow Filings for Endangered Fish in the Yampa - Special Meeting
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Board Memo
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
83
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 />Kuhn: <br /> <br />Harrison: <br /> <br />Lile: <br /> <br />Kuhn: <br /> <br />Gimble: <br /> <br />Kuhn: <br /> <br />Harrison: <br /> <br />Kuhn: <br /> <br />Wells: <br /> <br />questions about the general thrust of where Eric is going with this? Give it a shot. <br /> <br />I would move that we direct the staff to proceed with the [mal notice with a <br />recovery program right which is at least one day junior to our base flow, and that <br />the amount of flow be for all the remaining water except for the development <br />allowances, or in the alternative the 20% exceedence flows in the base months, <br />and the 10% exceedence flows in the runoff months, and that in our proposed <br />application, the Water Conservation Board will agree to appropriate terms and <br />conditions to limit exercising the right until at least an additional 52,000 acre feet <br />of consumptive use on an average annual basis and distributed monthly, upstream <br />of the MaybeU gage has occurred. That we would further agree to terms and <br />conditions to modify the right to allow at least an additional 72,000 acre feet or.... <br />up to an additional 72,000 acre feet or up to the amount that the state reaches full <br />compact development under the 1922 and 1948 compacts. I said that sort of <br />clumsy, but the idea is up to 72 or full compact development, whichever occurs <br />first. <br /> <br />So 72 would be a cap on it, but modification might stop before that if we run out <br />of compact water. All right? Clarification of the motion? <br /> <br />You keep saying up to, but that's in addition to.. <br /> <br />That's right. In addition to the 52, we would modify for up to an additional 72, <br />or up to the point where Colorado reaches full compact development under the <br />1922 and 48 compacts. <br /> <br />Eric, I'm not sure in your motion there;s enough distinction, at least as I heard it, <br />between the first 52 and the second 72. They sounded the same to me, and I'm <br />assuming our actions are different in regard.... <br /> <br />I meant them that they would be different. I meant that they would.... <br /> <br />What I understood was that the first 52 is automatic, and the second 72 requires <br />modification proceeding. <br /> <br />The first 52 is automatic, OK? We would agree to terms and conditions to not <br />exercise the right at aU, until at least 52,000 acre feet of additional development <br />has occurred on an average annual basis and distributed monthly, and that once <br />that 52,000 acre feet of additional development or the monthly limits has occurs, <br />we would further agree to modify the right up to an additional 72,000 acre feet <br />or up until the point at which Colorado reaches full development under the 1922 <br />and 48 compacts, whichever occurs first. <br /> <br />Its the words, we wiU agree to terms and conditions not to exercise our <br /> <br />Minutes of October 10,1995 Special CWCB Meeting <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.