Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Jencsok <br /> <br />Jencsok <br /> <br />Meyring <br /> <br />pitts <br /> <br />pitts <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />would appear to me that we are in danger of it being <br />used under a lot of other circumstances and I'm <br />afraid the end result will be just as it was here <br />that was a nice high year I think we would like to <br />have that and our appropriations have been on a <br />method which has been refined over a period of years <br />and surly something is available that would be better <br />than this, I think somewhat flawed judgment basis, <br />it's a scientific guess and I'm not sure that's good <br />enough. So <br /> <br />I'll let John speak to that <br /> <br />I'd like <br /> <br />Maybe have John and Tom make their <br /> <br />Tom you have some initial input <br /> <br />Yes, we're concerned about the committee progress <br />issue, we-it came up in context of specific section <br />seven consultation we still have some issues about <br />how to handle that-- <br /> <br />Which one was that Tom? Which section seven was <br />that? <br /> <br />Muddy Creek. and we and five other members of the <br />recovery implementation committee felt the purpose of <br />that act was important to the agreement. That was in <br />the context of the specific consultation which is not <br />really the issue today. The issue today is how do we <br />abide by the recovery program. Water users <br />agrees-State agrees that if we're to have water to <br />fish water we don't <br /> <br />13 <br />