Drought Contingency

[yankeefan98121]

Guys/Gals,
i try to avoid a lot of pollitically charged subjects here and other forums I belong to. With that I want to bring up a questionnaire I was personally sent from ASU (Arizona St University) Decision for a desert study.
I live in Arvada (I’m sure others have been sent this same questionnaire, please speak up on your thoughts for or against) and have been here for about 13 years, previously living in Utah for the previous time of my natural life (all you natives that want to give me the “get out of our state can shove it).
While in Utah we had a politician (from AZ) running their mouth about what Utahns can do to help Lake Meads low water level and I personally flushed the toilet 3x’s every time I went the the restroom and took long showers for that person.
In the beginning (heh, I know another place where this is at as well) the questionnaire starts off mild asking about how I feel about all residents having access to safe drinking water, water for living, and how I feel about clean water for the the rest of the world, etc etc. As the questionnaire goes along towards the end it brings up the “Drought Contingency Plan for Colorado River Water” that’s where I came unhinged. (For those who do not know please google and read). In the end why should residents upstream be responsible for those who chose to build a city on the desert.
That’s my open question to the forum...

[beast556]

Pisses me off too

[Great-Kazoo]

What's this Water you speak of ?

[BushMasterBoy]

Sometimes, in the summer, I piss in the backyard at night. We should encourage that.

[00tec]

Sometimes, in the summer, I piss in the backyard at night. We should encourage that.

I am in a rural area. Every time i drink, and coincidentally have to drain it often, I just go to the back (or front) yard. As long as there isn't snow on the porch.

[GilpinGuy]

Water rights is a complicated issue.

Not to hijack, but can we now legally collect rain water or did that get squashed? LOL....water falls from the sky onto your roof, but don't you dare water your garden with it.

Government....[LOL]

[Irving]

We can now collect rain water. I pee in my yard at least as often as I go inside, no matter the weather or time of day.

[00tec]

We are permitted, by our career gods, to have up to 110 gallons of rain capturing capability.

[OtterbatHellcat]

I got that survey too...and the two dollar bill inside it.

I filled it out and mailed it back.

[yankeefan98121]

I got that survey too...and the two dollar bill inside it.

I filled it out and mailed it back.

Yup, I mailed the 2 dollar bill back and that survey

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

On the Eastern slope, we’re not really part of that.

It is some muckraking, but Cadillac Desert is a pretty good read. Basically, the entire West is on water welfare (truth), and we’re really sticking it to Mexico in the water treaty by overuse, particularly in CA, Las Vegas, and Arizona. What your feelings are on Mexico aside, if you are a person of law and order or respect treaties, Mexico really has a higher claim than these desert states.

Arizona is particularly egregious. The CAP flows right through the hottest part of the desert (ridiculous), and they waste it. My parent’s development (on a well, but still) is a PGA-level course, and they have fountains that just blast water in the sky. So, yeah, you guys in GJ (or wherever) can’t water your lawns but they can do that. Unbelievable.

[Skip]

Guys/Gals,
i try to avoid a lot of pollitically charged subjects here and other forums I belong to.

[snip]

So do I.

[Coffee]


It is interesting to watch the Gaia worshipers realize the mega metropolis from which they derive their power (and wealth) are environmentally unsustainable* and look for solutions rather than do the morally correct thing and shut them down.

Kind of like DeBlasio suing the oil companies over climate change. Who consumed all that oil? Who continues? Turn off the lights already!


* This word doesn't mean what they think it means but in the case of water for Las Vegas applies

[Gman]

I would just keep the $2 as a junk mail waste handling fee. I didn't ask them to send it to me, I have to pay for my waste disposal, and they just made an unsolicited contribution to my trash volume.

Sent from my electronic leash using Tapatalk

[Mtneer]

Google "Cape Town Day Zero" to get an idea of how bad things can get.

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

Know how many CFM are diverted annually through tunnels west-east?

OK, educate us. You're citing a pretty massive Ag project (which is indeed water welfare), not Denver showers. But, it is also where you are getting your food, so there's that.


[/I]When you think about it, a lot of the eastern slope (esp. Denver) is far more unsustainable than even Phoenix.

You might have had me interested until here. [Coffee] . I would love to see some serious evidence backing this whopper. You cite one river, which many of the townships (mine included) aren't even on. Beyond how ridiculous that sounds, it is one more significant water source than Phoenix has, the artificial CAP excluded. Or, playing the ever popular "which bucket fills first" game - turn off all these water projects as you say, and decide which city dries up first. The smaller city staring at snowpack directly above it, or the larger city in the middle of the desert sucking its aquifer dry, and dirtbiking across the Salt in August?

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

Having said all that - I do believe we should not having lawns and raising cattle basically anywhere in the intermountain West. That's just me personally, though. $0.02 That's unsustainable.

[Chaffee2]

Here in Chaffee county we have lost a lot of our water to Pueblo West. I have a hard time wrapping my mind around the fact that a rancher or anyone with water rights for that matter can sell "his" water to someone else for forever even years after he is dead.

Case in point there is a section of land near me that will be forever useless for raising crops or cattle. He sold water that has not yet and will not have flowed out the mountains for decades but he sold it and it is gone. PW will continue to grow and produce nothing but houses while land that produced cattle and years past eatable crops is gone forever.

So in other words people who sell "their" water to people downstream just screwed the people upstream forever. Am I correct in that thought or do I just not understand.

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

OK, so no evidence but a massive axe to grind. That’s fine. To be truthful though, I’m unsure where your beef is as it seems to generically be E vs. W citing political boundaries. However, there are boundaries and there are higher claims outside these boundaries.



This isn't a case of water welfare. Water rights have been understood going back practically millennia with upstream and original having the biggest claim. Nobody on the other side of a mountain could have alleged water rights.

But, majority rules. This isn't water welfare, it's simple majority theft from minority; as the long standing "rules" precluded this kind of "welfare" in the first place.

The only present justification is our current political boundaries envelop both sides, so the theft of a resource from a minority population (who arguably has much greater need) for free is justified for the majority interest, ignoring all traditions and rules.

Trot, you’re a guy who loves to come on here with all sorts of legal ruminations. Here are your tradition and rules:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_River_Compact
(And if you prefer other than Wikipedia - details are readily available elsewhere).

So...
1) This treaty was signed as a concern much larger than the state of Colorado.
2) I can’t speak to “rules” going back “millennia” but this treaty certainly predates you and I.
3) It would seem that “upstream” doesn’t have the larger claim. Colorado has 1/2 of 1/2, but California has a larger claim. Seems you’d rather they get it than the Eastern slope (which by your own post isn’t even a calculable fraction of what CA is getting), and that’s fine too. There is something to be said about keeping water in the basin of origin and I do agree with you on that.
4) Theft by definition is illegal, but this is the law of the land. On the other hand, we have a conventional word where by law, we legally subsidize those with less in the interest of whatever. You can say this situation is not that word, but it sure fits the definition of welfare. To argue otherwise is somewhat disingenuous. You’re one of the first mods on here to clamp down on discussion advocating the illegal (which you aren’t doing here) - but this current movement of water is the law.

I get that you don’t like it. I don’t particularly like it either, [Beer] but am of the opinion your anger is somewhat misplaced.

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

Here in Chaffee county we have lost a lot of our water to Pueblo West. I have a hard time wrapping my mind around the fact that a rancher or anyone with water rights for that matter can sell "his" water to someone else for forever even years after he is dead.

Case in point there is a section of land near me that will be forever useless for raising crops or cattle. He sold water that has not yet and will not have flowed out the mountains for decades but he sold it and it is gone. PW will continue to grow and produce nothing but houses while land that produced cattle and years past eatable crops is gone forever.

So in other words people who sell "their" water to people downstream just screwed the people upstream forever. Am I correct in that thought or do I just not understand.

No, I think you have it: correct in thought. This is why these treaties are so serious.
Imagine if we were to shut off CAP or California. Massive populations have made arrangements based on expected flows. “Too bad for them” maybe, but the FedGov is definitely going to step in to protect the masses.

You can argue right or wrong, but in my mind, it is kind of like the Colorado liquor license thing in the sense that unwinding a bad law is going to hurt an awful lot of little guys.

[hatidua]

Water rights is a complicated issue.

Not to hijack, but can we now legally collect rain water or did that get squashed?

I'm not going to ask if you collect water, and you don't need to tell me if you collect water :)

-and if you happen to drive 56mph in a 55mph zone, I likely won't tell teacher on you for that either.

[BushMasterBoy]

We just don't have enough reservoirs. And building reservoirs is going to cost $$$. The biggest loss is to evaporation. Everybody is going to bitch, no matter what. I'm more worried about floods than drought.

http://www.kmitch.com/Pueblo/flood.html

[Gman]

We just don't have enough reservoirs. And building reservoirs is going to cost $$$. The biggest loss is to evaporation. Everybody is going to bitch, no matter what. I'm more worried about floods than drought.

http://www.kmitch.com/Pueblo/flood.htmlThere are groups more concerned about habitat for some wildlife, like some variety of field mouse, being put under water with the construction of a new reservoir. They'll use the mess that is the Endangered Species Act as an excuse.

Sent from my electronic leash using Tapatalk

[OtterbatHellcat]

We're an endangered species without water.

But you're right, in the long run the field mouse will win....legislated or not.

[Gman]

Yeah, I was actually using a real life example. My first wife had a boss that was part of a group shutting down human improvements because of Preble's jumping mouse.

PROTECTION FOR COLORADO-WYOMING MOUSE CHALLENGED AGAIN
http://www.9news.com/mobile/article/news/local/protection-for-colorado-wyoming-mouse-challenged-again/427051992

https://www.yourwatercolorado.org/component/content/article/91-headwaters-magazine/headwaters-spring-2005/250-the-endangered-species-act


The threatened Preble's meadow jumping mouse has been one of the state's more contested listings, pitting residential and commercial developers, cities and water providers against the USFWS. Thousands of dollars were spent studying the mouse's habitat in conjunction with proposed water projects such as the Reuter-Hess Reservoir near Parker and Milton Seaman Reservoir located on the lower North Fork of the Cache la Poudre River, among other projects.

[Irving]

If we can create several nice reservoirs, or even one big one, even half the size of Lake Mcconaughy, we could really step up our tourist game!

[GilpinGuy]

I kill every mouse I can.

[NeedMoreAmmo]

That survey was coded to your address, and asked a bunch of questions that were none of their business. I thought about it for a day and then mine went into the fireplace. My answers were along the same idea as others have mentioned in this thread: Not our problem you want to live in a desert, and we will be keeping our fair share of our rivers.

[def90]

On the Eastern slope, we’re not really part of that..

Our water in the metro area mostly comes from West of the divide.

[def90]

Having said all that - I do believe we should not having lawns and raising cattle basically anywhere in the intermountain West. That's just me personally, though. $0.02 That's unsustainable.

Shouldn't be growing corn in Colorado either.. the world isn't short on it and it's one of the most water intensive crops out there.

[def90]

Map of all the tunnels in Colorado moving water from west to east..

https://www.aspenjournalism.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Screen-Shot-2016-10-31-at-4.18.09-PM-771x552.jpg

Map of water produced:

https://partingthewaters.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/2011snakediagram_forweb.jpg

[Martinjmpr]

Map of all the tunnels in Colorado moving water from west to east..



Map of water produced:

https://partingthewaters.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/2011snakediagram_forweb.jpg

Interesting. So, according to this chart, historically, at least, the western slope gets more than 5x the water that the Eastern slope does.

[00tec]

Shouldn't be growing corn in Colorado either.. the world isn't short on it and it's one of the most water intensive crops out there.

Then where would we get our inefficient biofuels?

[Martinjmpr]

Map of all the tunnels in Colorado moving water from west to east..

https://www.aspenjournalism.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Screen-Shot-2016-10-31-at-4.18.09-PM-771x552.jpg


Did anybody else add all that up? Since I'm bored, I did. It came up to about 560,000 AF of water diverted from the Western slope. Compared to the 8.6 million AF that flows out of the Western slope that comes to about 6% of water diverted.

[Martinjmpr]

ETA2:
]When you think about it, a lot of the eastern slope (esp. Denver) is far more unsustainable than even Phoenix.


Phoenix also depends on massive amounts of electrical power (as does Las Vegas.) You think those cities would be as big as they are if air conditioning wasn't a thing? There's a reason that both Phoenix and LV were tiny before WWII - nobody in their right mind would live there in Summer.

[Eric P]

Interesting. So, according to this chart, historically, at least, the western slope gets more than 5x the water that the Eastern slope does.

Rain shadow effect. The moisture from the West is precipitated as it is elevated and cooled over the mountains. As the air drops from the mountains, it is warmed and sucks moisture from the environment.

[Martinjmpr]

Rain shadow effect. The moisture from the West is precipitated as it is elevated and cooled over the mountains. As the air drops from the mountains, it is warmed and sucks moisture from the environment.

Sure, I knew about that but I didn't realize until I saw that chart just how massive the discrepancy was.

[Martinjmpr]

ETA: Obviously, the Colorado government, Colorado Supreme Court, etc. - all based in Denver, mind you, justified these projects/reasoning and will always do so. That doesn't mean Denver is not stealing water from the driest basin in the country with an entirely doomed outlook.

Considering that most of the taxpayers in Colorado live on the Eastern slope, and that the tax revenues collected benefit the entire state - to include the Western slope - it's more accurate to say that Denver and the eastern slope BOUGHT the 6% of the Western slope's water that they are diverting.

Put another way, if you crunched the numbers I'll bet most Western Slope residents would be more than happy to trade the 6% of water (560,000 AF according to the chart posted above) that is diverted East in exchange for the tens or hundreds of millions of $$ they get in tax revenues from those of us on the Eastern slope. [Dunno]

ETA: In your imaginary situation where CO is divided into two states at the Continental Divide, what would happen? Well, the East would not be entitled to any water from the West but the West would not be entitled to any $$ from the East. So the East would be Water-poor and money-rich, and the West would be water-rich and money-poor. How long do you think that situation would last before the West decided to sell the one resource they have that the East needs? Either way you'd have a situation where money flows East to West and water flows West to East, which is the situation we have now.

ETA 2: And I haven't even touched on the impact of tourism from the Eastern slope to the Western. Millions - probably at least tens of millions if not hundreds - of $$ are earned by people on the Eastern slope and then spent on the Western slope. That's a direct benefit to the Western slope of people who live East of the divide.

[Gman]

Sure, I knew about that but I didn't realize until I saw that chart just how massive the discrepancy was.
The moist air from the west is being forced up a mountain which cools the air as it rises in elevation and squeezes the moisture from the air (colder air has less holding capacity for water vapor). Then the air falls down the eastern slope which increases in temperature as it falls and the relative humidity drops. If you really want to see an example of this, compare the western and eastern slopes of Oregon and Washington divided by the Cascades. Lush rain forest on the west side, dry brown grassland on the east side.

[spqrzilla]

I've learned a lot in this thread .... but mostly whose yard I'm not going to walk barefoot

[Irving]

I've learned a lot in this thread .... but mostly whose yard I'm not going to walk barefoot

I probably don't have to tell you not to climb the fence barefoot either.

[00tec]

I probably don't have to tell you not to climb the fence barefoot either.
[ROFL2]
Hahaha

[Ronin13]

Phoenix also depends on massive amounts of electrical power (as does Las Vegas.) You think those cities would be as big as they are if air conditioning wasn't a thing? There's a reason that both Phoenix and LV were tiny before WWII - nobody in their right mind would live there in Summer.

The same was said about many areas west of Denver in the winter before centralized heating (think old stoves that you had to chop ungodly amounts of wood to warm your home)... I'm thinking along the lines of Conifer, Evergreen, Deckers, Pine, etc.

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

x2


I have learned a lot from this thread as well, and been incorrect on a couple things. .

Indeed, good thread. I underestimated the tunnels.
I’ll still be one of those “Denver people” who places tremendous blame on LV and PHX, and I have friends / family in both. I don’t expect either to be long-term sustainable. We shall see, but probably not in my lifetime.

[Martinjmpr]

Thanks for the maps etc. I've never been able to source a comprehensive figure. So it is mostly S. Platte with some minor Arkansas diversions. I have learned a lot from this thread as well, and been incorrect on a couple things. (Namely CO water rights are largely oldest claim first). 560,000 AF may seem insignificant, but from what I understand that is more than what the major reservoirs (e.g. mead and powell) are short by year to year. So that measly 6% would otherwise stabilize what really is at this point doomed. There are several dems that would LOVE those to be drained, and are working hard to do it (e.g. releases/artificial floods during drought years)- which would affect a massive swath of conservative america, to say nothing of creating a wasteland of silt.

The only state that has the right to bitch about how much water the front range takes is Utah. Per the Colorado River Compact (CRC) the upper basin states (Colorado, Wyoming, Utah and New Mexico) are required to send a certain amount of water to the Lower Basin states (AZ, CA and NV) every year. The amount used to be 7.5 million AF but I seem to recall a few years ago they might have revised that (corrections welcomed - I'm not going to take the time to research the history of the CRC.)

What that means is that once we (the upper basin states) send the required amount of water South, we have fulfilled our end of the deal and AZ, CA and NV can piss and moan all they want but they are entitled to exactly what the CRC gives them and not one drop more.

As far as the dams go, there are a few problems with them, as well. First of all, having a large, flat expanse of water in a hot, dry desert is naturally going to lead to losing a lot of that water to evaporation. I don't know what the evaporation rates are of Lake Mead and Lake Powell but they're not insignificant.

Second, dams have a fixed life. they are already silting up their bottoms, eventually there's going to be so much silt that the dams will be useless.

A few years back I read (somewhere on the Intertoobz, can't remember where) that there was enough water to fill Lake Powell OR Lake Mead, but not both. One proposal was to drain Lake Powell so the water would fill up Lake Mead. I don't even want to think about what happens to the Grand Canyon if/when the Glen Canyon dam is removed but it's not going to be pretty, unless they have a way to mitigate the damage that is going to be caused by all that silt flowing downstream.

The problem with that proposal, of course, is the CRC: Lake Powell is the way that the upper basin states "save" extra water to send to the lower basin during times of drought. Without having Lake Powell as an emergency water source, the Upper Basin states would have to send almost all of their water South or else be in violation of the CRC. So any proposal to drain Lake Powell would have to come with a serious revision of the CRC that the Lower Basin states (already complaining about not enough water) are unlikely to agree to. And there's no way in hell that Las Vegas would ever agree to remove Lake Mead, it's too important to them as both a water and power source.

So the bottom line is that the situation is likely to remain in a stalemate for the time being. Unless someone comes up with some genius plan to take water from, say, the Columbia River basin (which has an abundance of it) and pipe it all the way to California, the water situation is going to be one of perpetual crisis in the Southwest.

[Irving]

There is a book called The Water Knife. I haven't read it, but eventually it'll be mentioned in this thread, so I thought I might as well be the one to do so. It's about this stuff.

[BushMasterBoy]

Some of the old mines drain water trapped in the rock. The acidic water can be treated electronically using carbon fiber high area cathodes and solar power. Technology can produce astounding results, but so far seems undeveloped. Until then, billions of gallons of water is wasted.

https://www.denverpost.com/2015/08/15/230-colorado-mines-are-leaking-heavy-metals-into-state-rivers/

[Martinjmpr]

Some of the old mines drain water trapped in the rock. The acidic water can be treated electronically using carbon fiber high area cathodes and solar power. Technology can produce astounding results, but so far seems undeveloped. Until then, billions of gallons of water is wasted.

https://www.denverpost.com/2015/08/15/230-colorado-mines-are-leaking-heavy-metals-into-state-rivers/

I think there are any number of potential solutions, whether it's big desalinization plants to produce fresh water from the ocean (some Middle Eastern countries are doing this now) or having a big pipeline project to bring water in from another basin. Right now these solutions aren't cost effective but when the population pressure gets high enough to warrant the expense, I figure an answer will be found.

[Gman]

Some of the flooded mines contain more than acidic water, like toxic heavy metals. It would probably be more cost effective to go the desalination of seawater path than to try and recover water in mines for human consumption.

[Martinjmpr]

If there's one thing I believe in it's that if there is money to be made, someone will figure out a way to make it.

Sooner or later the population pressure in the SW is going to force the region to come to terms with its water demands. I think the region has been "kicking the can" for years with stopgap measures like dams and reservoirs and canals but that only solves today's problem by creating a problem for tomorrow.

I don't see any likelihood that population growth in the SW is going to slow down, so there is going to have to be a way to figure out how to get more water into the region. It won't be easy and it won't be cheap but I don't see any alternative.

[BushMasterBoy]

Thought I would show a newly released video of the problem.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=22&v=ZBlR05tDCbI

[NeedMoreAmmo]

This is a great thread and extremely informative. Thanks to everyone.

[Irving]

Thought I would show a newly released video of the problem.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=22&v=ZBlR05tDCbI

Honestly, I don't expect better from people who take vertical videos.

[Aloha_Shooter]

While it's true that the Eastern slope is buying its water from the Western slope, it's somewhat inaccurate to say the tax revenues collected on the Eastern slope benefit the entire state. Denver politicians vote for state funds to benefit Denver and the outlying regions be damned (except where such expenditures benefit Denver residents such as improving the roads to Western slope ski resorts). This isn't anything new; the old mini-series Centennial even demonstrated how Colorado has brought Western slope water to the Eastern slope to benefit agriculture and residential development in the last 2 or 3 episodes.

In the vast scheme of things, diverting the water makes a lot of sense -- certainly more sense for Colorado as a state than letting that water go downstream for Nevada and California to steal. Shortages in Colorado River outflow are far more a product of California's overuse (anyone remember how they tried to retroactively "fix" the Colorado River Compact 25 years ago to reflect how much more they had been taking?) than anything Colorado is doing. It wouldn't even surprise me if the survey referred to in the OP had its roots in California interests trying to reduce Colorado use in order to set the stage for another attempt at rewriting the CRC.

[Martinjmpr]

it's somewhat inaccurate to say the tax revenues collected on the Eastern slope benefit the entire state. Denver politicians vote for state funds to benefit Denver and the outlying regions be damned (except where such expenditures benefit Denver residents such as improving the roads to Western slope ski resorts).

That is simply the situation that exists in every state where you have a highly populated urban area and low population rural areas. The people in the rural areas bitch about how they don't have any political power because they get outvoted by the people in the urban area. People in rural Nevada bitch about Las Vegas. People in rural Arizona bitch about Phoenix and Tucson. People in Eastern Washington bitch about Seattle. People in Eastern Oregon bitch about Portland and Salem.

In Colorado, at least, the big cities on the Front Range contribute a huge amount of money to the Western slope because so many people come from the front range to ski, hike, camp, fish, hunt, etc, west of the divide. How much business would Vail, Aspen, Glenwood, Steamboat, and Gunnison be doing if there weren't a couple of million people just on the East side of the continental divide who were willing to go over the mountains and spend money? A huge proportion of businesses on the West side of the divide depend on customers from the East side.

Western slopers may hate to admit it but much of their livelihood depends on people coming over from the Eastern slope. Without the economic engine of the Eastern slope, the mountains of Colorado would look a lot like the mountains of Wyoming - sparsely settled by businesses that are hanging by a thread, lots of deserted buildings, boarded up main streets, etc. I realize there are probably people here who think they would be OK with that but having lived in Wyoming for 5 years I thought it was kind of depressing. The lack of thriving businesses means a lack of jobs, stagnant wages, college grads who have to leave the state just to find employment, etc. It's not pretty.

[D_F]

Using that logic Phoenix and Las Vegas are buying our water wth their federal tax money and all of Colorado should be happy for the opportunity to sell our resource. I live here for a reason, it isn’t always easy but youre very welcome to keep your tax money, tourism, politicians, traffic, and opinions in the city. Thank you very much.