Drought Contingency

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GilpinGuy

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.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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

---

There 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

We're an endangered species without water.

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

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/...gain/427051992

https://www.yourwatercolorado.org/co...ed-species-act

Quote:

---

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.

---

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!

I kill every mouse I can.

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.