My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP01884
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
WSP01884
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:33:14 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 10:41:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.100.25
Description
CRSP
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
10/1/1949
Author
CWCB
Title
Minutes of Series of State-Wide Meetings Sponsored by the Colorado Water Conservation Board - Discussion on Interim Report of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation on CRSP
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
48
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 /> <br />MR. LARSON: W!i probably should also include the Dolores in Colorado. <br /> <br />JUDGE STONE:. t assume there is no objection to including the Pine River <br />Extension (No objec~ion voiced). <br /> <br />MR. WELLER: (tntroduces himsdf; Member of the Meeker Chamber of Conunerce.) <br />I suggest that a re~olution be made that would cause the State Board to determine. <br />an equitable ~asis ~or allocation of participating projects possibly on total flow <br />contributed by eachjdrainage basin before any participating projects are selected. <br />My chief concern is .:the White River. We do not have any project reports ready <br />in that area now. ~he more densely populated areas have by political pressure <br />caused reports to b~ issued on those areas, In order to protect the.more sparsely <br />populated areas we ~ould have SOme means of setting aside some of the pool funds <br />so that develqpmentjin the less populated areall will be guaranteed before the money <br />is all used up by a~eas which already have reports is sued, <br /> <br />JUDGE STONE: ~here is nO politioal press\lre involved, This can be worked <br />out for the small plijojects also. The report leaves the way open to include new <br />projects as soon as lreports on them become available. <br /> <br />MR. MCDANIEL: ;jI'he people f.rom the White River area had their chance to pass <br />resolutions at the O;raig meeting. I don't think we ought to concern ourselves <br />further with this question at this meeting. <br /> <br />MR. BLISS': I mll.ght suggest that New Mexico will go along with the La Plata <br />in New Mexico and th'll Hammond. <br /> <br />MR. McDANIEL: lJow I know where the La Plata is, but how about the Hammond? <br />I am opposed to passllng on these at this meeting as we are only making <br />recommendations to ohr Board. . <br /> <br />JUDGE STONE: I,think it is well that we show that New Mexico is co~ <br />operating with' us on! these projects in the San Juan Basin which are of direct <br />concern to you:peopl, in this area. I think it is proper that we include these <br />projects. Then we ate recommending in Colorado the Pine River Extension, the <br />Florida and La:Plata+ It is,understood at this meeting that these three be <br />included in the initial proposal. Vi)lat about the Dolores? <br /> <br />MR. HUNTER: I~uggest that we waj.t until the report is complete. <br /> <br />JUDGE STONE: I# there any objection? (No objections voiced) <br /> <br />The meeting adjourned at 3:40 p.m.) <br /> <br />-ll- <br /> <br />; <br />J <br /> <br />~\,,_ ;-i <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.