Laserfiche WebLink
<br />A 'U. ,~: (1 <br />.1 U_ <br /> <br />d <br />. ,J,'.. <br />whether or not it will beoome a part of the Gunnison-Arkansas Projeot p:La:n. <br />Disoussions.disolosed the faot that the oompany is not diverting all of <br />the water originally intended, by reasons of the following oonditions: <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />(1) Ths main tunnel has not been oomplstely lined. <br /> <br />(2) Same of the colleotion oanals have failed and need <br />rehabilitation. <br /> <br />(3) The extension of at least one of the colleotion canals to <br />interoept add! tional drainage area was not made. <br /> <br />(4) In some years, inadequate storage oapaoity in Twin Lakes <br />Reservoir preoludes the diversion of all water available at the <br />oolleotion o ana Is . <br /> <br />14. Disoussion of prospeotive uses in the vioini t;y of Aspen for irriga- <br />tion expansion under the Salvation ditoh and for industrial uses in oonneotion <br />with mining operations indioates the need for a restudy of Western Slope re- <br />quirements in the Aspen vioinity. The possible use of a reservoir site 10- <br />oated upstream from Aspen to help oontrol the streamflows was suggested. <br />This review will involve not only the Twin Lakes Canal and Reservoir Company, <br />but also the initial Gunnison-Arkansas plan of diverting from Hunter Creek <br />and the ultimate plan of diverting from Diffioult Creek. It was agreed that <br />Mr. Powell will send data previously oolleoted by him to Mr. Jex, Mr. Riter, <br />and the Colorado Water Conservation Board. Using the Powell data and suoh <br />other field data available to him, Mr. Jex will review the water requirements <br />in the vicinity of Aspen, Colorado, and prepare a report thereon for sub- <br />mission at the next meeting. <br /> <br />Replaoement Storage <br /> <br />i <br /> <br />15. Mr. Delaney informed the group that Western Colorado is vitally <br />interested in the amount, looation, and operation plan of replaoement storage <br />reservoirs. He assumes that vested Western Slope rights will be proteoted <br />and also assumes that future Western Slope developments will not be made <br />more oostly. A number of questions, raised by the Western Slope interests, <br />are disoussed in suooeeding paraGraphs. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />16. There are no gaGing stations ourrently being operated on the Frying <br />Pan River; in view thereof, how ViaS the residual stre9.LU'low at the Ruedi res- <br />ervoir site determined? Reoords are available on the Frying Pan River as <br />follows: <br /> <br />North Fork at Norrie (42 sq. miles) 1911 - 1916 <br />Frying Pan nenr Norrie (92 sq. miles) 1911 - 1916 <br />Frying Pan nenr Thomas,ille (175 and 190 sq. miles) 1911 - 1920 <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />5 <br />