water grab heats up

Things are heating up in the water grab. The Utah Legislature's Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment Committee sent a letter to the state's congressional delegation seeking support for a new $6 million study (BARCASS 2) of an aquifer that lies under Snake Valley in eastern Nevada and western Utah (http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_6514111).

That sparked an angry response by SNWA chief Pat Mulroy (http://www.lvrj.com/news/8869507.html) and a friendly editorial in the Salt Lake Tribune (http://www.sltrib.com/ci_6520486).

Mulroy imputes nefarious motives among the legislators, claiming they are stalling or want to hog Snake Valley's "excess water" for the Wasatch Front and Cedar City. She claims environmental laws prevent any repeat of Owens Valley, where dust storms are one of the biggest environmental plagues in the US. But SNWA's sibling, the Los Angeles Dept. of Water and Power, has used the courts and foot-dragging for decades to thwart and delay. SNWA has plenty of lawyers and deeeeeep pockets and could do the same thing to get around environmental laws. When negative impacts hit eastern Nevada and western Utah, I bet SNWA will want lots of long-range studies then -- while the water keeps flowing south.

Please contact the Utah congressional delegation and ask them to support BARCASS 2. A draft of BARCASS 1 was recently released but some hydrologists say it misrepresents the amount of water coming into and going out of Snake Valley. BARCASS 1 makes no attempt at evaluating the impacts of the massive SNWA scheme. BARCASS 2 would do that.

Lt. Gov. etc. to Snake Valley

Utah Department of Natural Resources chief and head negotiator for the UT-NV agreement Mike Styler will visit Snake Valley 3/23/07. He will bring UT water rights chief Boyd Clayton and, a bonus, UT Lt. Governor Gary Herbert.

While the exact schedule has not been finalized, they will be at Dean Baker's place in Baker at 9 am (all times UT time) to take Dean's water tour. Then they will have a meeting in the Garrison area late morning or early afternoon. They will travel to West Desert School for another meeting at 3:30 pm.

We need to (1) get an update on the agreement and (2) give them an update of our expectations and what is at stake here.

Also present will be the Juab County commissioners and the Millard County Commissioners. This is the first time the Juab commissioners will have been to West Desert as a group since the commission is almost brand new following the elections. They have offered to stick around after the meeting and talk to us about the water grab. The Millard County Commissioners will be at the Garrison meeting.

public meeting on Draft Snake valley (etc) groundwater report

 
What:  Public meeting

Who:   Kimball E. Goddard, 
           Director, USGS Nevada Water Science Center

When:  1:00 p.m., Monday, March 26, 2007

Where: Auditorium
          Utah Department of Natural Resources
          1594 West North Temple

Why:

A final review of the draft Basin and Range Carbonate Aquifer System Study (BARCASS), is nearing completion. The public draft report will be ready in July 2007. The six-million dollar project is being completed in an effort to improve the understanding of groundwater in Western Utah/Eastern Nevada (Snake Valley area).

Anyone interested in the latest scientific information about water resources in the remote part of Utah/Nevada, which is now embroiled in a controversy with Southern Nevada over the export of water to the Las Vegas area, is invited to attend.

public meeting on Draft Snake valley (etc) groundwater report

 
What:  Public meeting

Who:   Kimball E. Goddard, Director, USGS Nevada Water Science Center

When:  1:00 p.m., Monday, March 26, 2007

Where: Auditorium
       Utah Department of Natural Resources
       1594 West North Temple

Why:

A final review of the draft Basin and Range Carbonate Aquifer System Study (BARCASS), is nearing completion. The public draft report will be ready in July 2007. The six-million dollar project is being completed in an effort to improve the understanding of groundwater in Western Utah/Eastern Nevada (Snake Valley area).

Anyone interested in the latest scientific information about water resources in the remote part of Utah/Nevada, which is now embroiled in a controversy with Southern Nevada over the export of water to the Las Vegas area, is invited to attend.

Pot dissing the kettle

In a recent KCPW radio interview, SNWA's Pat Mulroy accused water grab opponents of being paranoid, fanatic, hysterics. You can hear her thoughts on that and on the Colorado River at KCPW - 1 March.

I watched one of the meetings of SNWA's integrated Water Planning Advisory Committee (IWPAC) in which Ms. Mulroy waxed hysterical about Utah stealing the recharge in Snake Valley because it originates mostly in the mountains of Nevada. (Ignoring the interstate sources of water coming into some other parts of Nevada, including the Colorado River.)

The main argument for the water grab from the southern end of the pipeline also has a hysterical quality: "We can't stop Nevada's economic engine (LV) or the state will dry up and blow away."

And when SNWA lawyers filed a motion with the NV State Engineer to disallow protests on SNWA's Spring Valley well applications because the protestants had done nothing in the 16 years of SNWA's inactivity -- that had a devious, desperate, almost hysterical ring to it.

See a transcript of the interview on Launce Rake's blog.

It's unanimous -- or at least unopposed

The Utah Legislature stepped to the plate and hit a home run. Both houses passed a joint resolution asking Governor Huntsman to wait for the best science possible before entering into an agreement with Nevada over Snake Valley water resources. The resolution also asked that a representative from Snake Valley be included on the negotiating team. Lt. Governor Herbert said the resolution helps Utah in the negotiations.

This is encouraging but much remains to be done.

Full reports can be found at Deseret News and Salt Lake Tribune.

Utah Senate passes joint resolution

The Utah Senate today passed a joint resolution (HJR001S01). You can see information about it at http://le.utah.gov/~2007/htmdoc/hbillhtm/hjr001.htm. The Utah House has already passed an almost identical resolution.

According to Steve Erickson, "This resolution expresses the unanimous will of the Utah Legislature that there should be no agreement between Utah and Nevada to allow Utah's water to be pumped to Las Vegas until all scientific studies regarding groundwater development are completed. This is a strong statement against the Las Vegas water grab and in support of protecting the lives and livelihoods of the residents of Utah's West Desert from the potentially disastrous impacts of groundwater mining."

Steve Erickson, director of the Citizens Education Project 801-554-9029

Arizona water, Nevada out-of-control growth

The feisty folks in the Beaver Dam, Arizona area are wondering why Mesquite, Nevada developers want Arizona water when the local Mesquite water authority, the Virgin Valley Water District (VVWD), already has enough water for 5 times the current Mesquite population.

They especially want to know why the VVWD would willingly make an annual donation of 5,000 acre feet of water to Las Vegas Valley's SNWA if there is such a crying need to import water from Arizona to Mesquite. According to SNWA's web site, it resulted from one of SNWA's agreements, the likes of which they want rural Nevadans and the state of Utah to enter into -- all in the name of "water sharing" and ensuring that "future municipal water supplies will exist for the VVWD."

In other words, if you don't "partner" with us, we'll steamroller you. Such an agreement with Nevada's Lincoln County led that county to roll over and play dead in SNWA's pipeline scheme. Four federal Department of Interior agencies recently signed a stipulation agreement which resulted in withdrawing well application protests in exchange for a toothless monitoring process of talk, talk, talk, talk as environmental impacts develop. They have the other Colorado River states agreeing to almost anything to avoid a legal showdown over the Colorado River Compact.

SNWA has had lots of practice fine-tuning their strategy of agreements. They seem to be the 1,000-pound gorilla in whatever room they enter. Even though the UT-NV agreement mandated in public law 108-424 specifies direct negotiations between the two states, SNWA presence hovers over the agreement.

BTW - Thanks No Nevada Water Grab Committee for the link to this blog .

NO NEVADA WATER GRAB WEBSITE

SNWA announcement

Snake Valley budget - enough?

While several news stories have covered Governor Huntsman's proposed budget, it took a little digging to find anything about Snake Valley. In a PDF file detailing the Natural Resources budget, was this on page 119:

Expand monitoring of water resources
• Continue Division of Water Rights groundwater studies, concentrating on Utah and Nevada border water issues with $355,000 supplemental General Fund

Previously officials in the DNR had proposed a series of 13 monitor / test wells costing about $1 million. DNR chief Mike Styler had urged the Interim Committee on Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment to authorize that much for the project.

While we are grateful for the governor's support in so many ways, as well as that of the Legislature, this does not seem like enough money to ensure we get adequate baseline data prior to pumping. It certainly seems insufficient to study aquifer characteristics if SNWA's massive water exportation proposal were ever to begin taking water from the basin.

Chalk one for David over Goliath

Chalk one for David over Goliath

In Justices find argument for raiding Sandy Valley Basin doesn't hold water (Las Vegas Review-Journal, Nov. 29, 2006) John L. Smith reported a Nevada Supreme Court decision overturning a Nevada State Engineer decision approving an interbasin transfer of water for development in Primm. Residents of Sandy Valley, from which the water was to have been exported, rejoiced after their seven-year, against-the-odds victory.

The developer, Primm South Real Estate Company, had hired Vidler Water Company to handle their water applications. State Engineer Hugh Ricci (since retired) granted Vidler 415 acre-feet of water (out of Vidler's original request for 1,400 AF) based on Primm South's assertions they needed the full amount of water even though they could not currently use it all. Some was for future development. (During the water rights hearing, a Primm South executive stated, "if we can't use it we'll sell it".)

The state Supreme Court rejected the idea of speculation. District Judge David Wall upheld the state Engineer's decision, forcing Sandy Valley residents to appeal to the state Supreme Court.

Along the way, the residents' original attorney died after a lengthy illness. Al Marquis, who owns the Kingston Ranch in the valley, stepped up and represented the community's successful appeal. The community raised $60,000 to fight the giant.

The justices found Ricci had, "failed to properly consider the evidence in determining the need for water in the import basin" and "failed to make the appropriate findings, his decision to grant Vidler Water's interbasin groundwater transfer application was not supported by substantial evidence."

__________
Perhaps the NV State Engineer will invest a little extra time and thought into the decisions before him, related to SNWA's proposal. SNWA has requested 90,000 AF from Spring Valley (adjacent to Snake Valley) and almost 200,000 AF from all the basins from which it wants to export water. Southern Nevada won't need that much water until mid-century, however, even at their current out-of-control growth rate and their excessively high per capita water usage.

The Supreme Court's opinion quoted above could just as easily apply to SNWA's scheme for mining water from eastern Nevada and Western Utah.

White Pine County land bill -- just add water

The Las Vegas Review-Journal published a news story today titled, "WHITE PINE COUNTY: County may pull support from lands bill." Why would the White Pine County Commission withhold support from the White Pine County bill? Water, and the study thereof. They want BARCASS 2, a follow up study to fill in the gaps BARCASS 1 was never intended to investigate.

BARCASS 2 would study the impacts of SNWA's proposed water withdrawal scheme. That would be nice to know. Some even think it is vital. Hence WPC Commission's lack of support for the WPC bill, which otherwise has many positive aspects the county wants. They think the water study is that important.

Ironically, it was water in Clark County, home of Las Vegas, that was the last straw. The WPC bill was loaded with Clark County water projects totaling almost $1 billion, including some that would encourage the out-of-control growth driving the pipeline. BARCASS 2 would cost no more than $20 million.

This is a good opportunity to write the Utah Congressional delegation asking them to support efforts to secure BARCASS 2 authorization and funding.

The Honorable Orrin G. Hatch
United States Senate
104 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510-4402
DC Phone: 202-224-5251
DC Fax: 202-224-6331
Email Address: http://hatch.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Offices.Contact

The Honorable Robert F. Bennett
United States Senate
431 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510-4403
DC Phone: 202-224-5444
DC Fax: 202-228-1168
Email Address: http://bennett.senate.gov/contact/email_opinion.cfm

The Honorable Rob Bishop
United States House of Representatives
124 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-4401
DC Phone: 202-225-0453
DC Fax: 202-225-5857
Email Address: http://www.house.gov/robbishop/contact/

The Honorable James D. Matheson
United States House of Representatives
1222 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-4402
DC Phone: 202-225-3011
DC Fax: 202-225-5638
Email Address: http://www.house.gov/matheson/contact.shtml

The Honorable Christopher Cannon
United States House of Representatives
2436 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-4403
DC Phone: 202-225-7751
DC Fax: 202-225-5629
Email Address: http://chriscannon.house.gov/email.htm

Another NV water grab

http://nonevadawatergrab.com/ = a web site dedicated to fighting the Mesquite water grab into Arizona. Different water grab from ours but the same kind of thirsty, arrogant developers seeking water for growth's sake --and the same kind of tough grass roots resistance.

Wind River Resources is affiliated with Nevada developers who want to drill on a small parcel of land they own near Beaver Dam, Arizona and pump approximately 4.5 billion gallons of water annually to Virgin Valley Water District in Mesquite, Nevada. This proposal is before the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR).

Wind River Resources claims the impact of pumping water to Nevada will be minimal. But their application quotes an expert report: “We believe the Muddy Creek Formation [at the Beaver Dam Wash] in the Virgin River Valley aquifer system is highly susceptible to subsidence.”

Besides the risk of desiccation and subsidence, the people near Beaver Dam risk arsenic contamination of their water. By pumping in clean Arizona water, Mesquite's arsenic-laden water will be diluted, without having to build a water treatment plant. But part of the plan is to flush contaminated water back into Arizona's aquifer.

This is a similar story and will only recur more often in the future. Thirsty desert cities demanding water from rural basins always whining about their critical urban needs while dismissing rural concerns as emotional babbling. BTW - Mesquite developers have previously made attempts on southern Utah's water.

You can subscribe for e-mail updates at http://nonevadawatergrab.com/join_the_committee.htm

BLM EIS update pending

I wrote to the BLM Environmental Impact Study project manager, Penny Woods, asking when she might have another update meeting in store for Snake Valley. Below is her reply. Her answer gives an outline of planned events and promises to keep the public posted.

__ reply from Penny Woods __

Hi Ken! I think early March might be a good time. We will have started working on some of the hydrology data and interpretation and we will have a couple of meetings with the cooperating agencies behind us that I can update you on. Would this work for you?

We intend on sending out a mailer within the next 60 days which may update folks in the interim.

Snake Valley & Owens Valley

In Rhetoric debunked (11-8-06) Bill Roberts paints a lavish picture of Owens Valley. It makes one want to move there.

He starts out, "Inflammatory rhetoric is all the rage in water wars." So he intended to introduce some boosterism to counteract it. He says he lived briefly in Owens Valley about 25 years ago and wanted to go back and see the damage everyone bemoans. He was shocked to see it pretty much as it was 25 years ago, with areas of lush green. He claims to have talked to residents who gave a glowing picture of idyllic life in Owens Valley.

Most of the people he depends on for quotes are connected to chambers of commerce. It may be in their best interests to debunk the message of devastation and desiccation. They are paid to put the best face on their communities. Roberts, too, seems full of the spirit of boosterism both for a depleted Owens Valley and for the water grab. I am surprised he didn't nominate the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) for an ecology award. He seems to be poised to put SNWA on a pedestal for their water exportation scheme.

Roberts describes Owens Valley as "lush." Maybe there are lush areas. But it obviously cannot be the same place it formerly was with so much of its water exported over so many years. That doesn't make sense. And even a few isolated verdant spots is a far cry from widespread agriculture that I assume is gone or greatly diminished.

It is not as if he had lived in Owens Valley prior to William Mulholland's rape of the valley. Roberts briefly lived there after both surface water and groundwater exportation. It may well have looked similar in the 25 years between when he lived there and when he returned. That indicates the stagnant nature of the economy there, the lack of a vibrant future.

Owens Lake is one of the worst environmental problems in US history. Doctors in Owens Valley have documented much higher rates of respiratory problems than the national average, at much earlier ages. By some accounts, it is impossible to dust proof homes.

Mr. Roberts' anecdotal evidence about Owens Valley does not make those of us who live in Snake Valley ashamed to make connections to Owens Valley and SNWA's water exportation scheme. Just as Mulholland was a shill for Los Angeles, Las Vegas has its shills. They are getting increasingly shrill.

Future posts will cover the Snake Valley - Owens Valley connection in more detail.

Owens Valley Committee

Critical Mass and the Depopulation of Spring Valley

by Cecil Garland (Callao, Utah)

[Note: Spring Valley, Nevada, is the next valley west of Snake Valley, also a target of the Las Vegas water grab. SNWA has begun buying ranches in Spring Valley.]

Critical mass in physics is the amount of material that must be present before a chain reaction can sustain itself. Critical mass has also come to mean the size or scale at which a community acquires self-sustaining viability.

Spring Valley, in eastern Nevada, has for over a hundred years been a community of ranchers living not close together, but close enough form friendships and, of course, some animosity but always a community willing to help each other in times of need. Ranching communities are like no other in that living two to 10 miles apart, they do come together often enough to maintain an ongoing critical mass so that they can continue their way of life. The recent purchasing of ranches in Spring Valley at highly inflated prices by Southern Nevada Water Authority is destroying that critical sense of viability. SNWA must know that what they do is destructive to the ranching community and are doing so deliberately. Ranchers need a relationship with their neighbors that is both lasting and mutually beneficial as has been the case in Spring Valley.

Ranchers work together in the spring to gather, brand, mark, vaccinate, and castrate their calves, and in the fall they work together to wean and ship the calves. Helping each other in these endeavors is a long established necessary tradition. Together they build and repair fences. They borrow, rent and exchange machinery, tools and help each other during haying. When going to town, one party may do a multitude of chores for a neighbor saving him a long, expensive trip to town. Older ranchers also depend on the younger people for help which is most often given freely and cheerfully. Phone calls, visits, trips together, social events, and church, the fabric that holds people together, is being torn apart. When ranches are sold to buyers that have no intentions of ranching or replacing the family, then the chain of sustainability and viability is weakened and finally broken. Uneasiness and apprehension will begin to take place in the minds of those who want to remain on the land. Questions will arise. Should I sell now while I can get a big price?

Is it inevitable that SNWA with all their power and wealth will take our water and then will our ranches be nearly worthless? Will our government really protect us, or in fact, can they?

When a valley is being settled by a pioneering, often reclusive individual, there is optimism. The first settlers knew well that others would follow, and that other ranches would come in time. When ranches begin to sell as they are doing today, the opposite psychological effects begin to happen. A foreboding gloom can become pervasive and constant with worry about what is next. Will there be any ranches or community left in a few years? Would any young folks want to come back to the valley? Will the roads, phone service, schools and school buses be maintained or possibly abandoned? It is understandable that young people would be reluctant to return to a valley stripped of its sense of community and the accepted amenities and necessities. These and many more questions of uncertainty are being raised.

Current events of endless hearings and deliberations, often by people who are alien to the ranching way of life, are lessons in how to destroy the critical mass of a valley. These circumstances will send ranching people into burgeoning cities where they are likely to be discontent and unhappy, longing deep in their hearts and souls for the space, the beauty, and the cohesiveness of their former community now gone like the cowboy riding into the sunset.

--

Cecil C.and Annette H.Garland
Rafter Lazy C Ranch
Callao 225 Pony Express Road
Callao, Utah via Wendover 84083

[Please comment on this post if you wish to contact Cecil by e-mail.]

--

Nevada trumps everyone

In an Arizona Republic story called Nevada builder wants Arizona town's water (10-24-06) *, Mark Shaffer reports that a Nevada corporation wants Arizona to grant them water rights to drill wells in Arizona and export as much as 14,000 acre-feet of water a year (afy) to Mesquite, NV.

Mesquite is primed to grow rapidly in the near future. The Arizona water is for drinking and diluting current Mesquite water which is high in arsenic. Mesquite currently has 12,000 afy but only uses about half. Their current water rights would serve about 45,000 people. Some treated water may then be exported back to Arizona. As an Arizona official said, "This falls very squarely into the category of a bad idea."

Arizona law allows water to be taken out of Arizona, although permits may be granted for no more than 50 years.

A public hearing will be held by the Arizona Water Resources Department in late November. But lawyers for Mesquite are complaining about delay, saying Mesquite has a "need of certainty of their future water supply."

Some locals are not convinced. They have a deep-rooted feeling that Arizona water should be available for Arizona growth and to keep the environment from deteriorating.

This would be an unprecedented scheme driven by insatiable appetite for water, much like that being experienced in Las Vegas. In Nevada, the gambling capital of the US, the wealthy and powerful want certainty. They don't want to gamble with water supplies and risk chocking the economic engines they've artificially created. They are, however, willing to gamble with other people's water and environment and livelihoods.

Some Nevada politicians and pundits have suggested a statewide water authority -- along the lines of SNWA -- to control the water resources of the state. Some have even gone beyond that to suggest regional water authorities covering multiple states. The SNWA model has worked well to keep out-of-control growth supplied with water. It certainly would clear the way for Mesquite developers to get their hot little hands on Arizona's water.

Something has to be done to keep water flowing throughout the West.

For some the answer is to do whatever it takes to get water where people are enticed to cluster in mega cities where congestion, pollution, crime, and other side effects of growth causing increasing numbers of residents to plead, "Make it stop!"

For others, the answer is conservation and then desalination as that technology rapidly improves in cost, energy efficiency, and environmental safety.

As Callao rancher Cecil Garland asks, "Is the future of the west a series of lush mega cities surrounded by desiccated basins?"

* (The news story requires a free registration to view.)

Snake Valley wells

In answer to a request, Utah water rights division chief Boyd Clayton wrote:

Our records indicate there are 257 wells or potential wells in Snake Valley. This includes water rights which are developed and those that are approved and may not be developed yet.

Reservoir Hogs

In Reservoir Hogs (Salt Lake City Weekly, 10-26-06) Ted McDonough summarizes the struggle between Snake Valley and Las Vegas. He waxes lyrical abaout Snake Valley and the Deep Creek Mountains and delves into the many obstacles faced by Utah ranches and puts the issue in context of other regional happenings.

Much of the article is a primer: excellent for those who don't have an extensive background. A couple of points, however, were put in fresh terms or were new to me (and I live and breath this issue).

For example, the Utah Geological Survey's Stefan Kirby says the water (possibly significant amounts) under the Snake Valley might not replace itself if taken out; it may have been put down in prehistoric times. He said the area’s complex rock structure possibly carries mountain runoff sideways miles away before going to ground.

Kirby also said Nevada’s wells will be placed precisely at the point where water from mountain creeks slips underground and makes its way into Utah. Previously the UGS warned of a drop in the water table near Garrison of more than 100 feet, possibly drying up springs 30 miles into Utah and certainly making it more difficult for farmers to economically continue to irrigate. Such drawdowns would certainly kill off much of the current ground cover, increasing the risk of massive dust storms, possibly carrying radioactive materials left over in the soils from the nuclear testing days. Such drawdowns could disrupt flow into the Great Salt Lake, possibly causing brackish water to reverse flow into Snake Valley -- forever ruining the aquifer.

There were some pretty strong words from Utah Department of Natural Resources chief Mike Styler, who heads the negotiation team in the UT-NV agreement negotiations. He reassured that stiff monitoring and safeguards will be included. He also said what Snake Valley residents have been saying from the beginning -- that there is no surplus water. He said, “The amount of water available is so limited I think it will be marginal for southern Nevada to put a pipeline in [to Snake Valley].”

According to Mr. Styler, Utah and Nevada water officials estimated how much of the valley’s water is already being used. The answer, Styler said, appears to be all of it.


This news story is recommended reading.

2 new reports

Two reports were released yesterday (10-24-06) that are of interest to opponents of the Las Vegas water grab.

Las Vegas & The Groundwater Development Project -- Where does it start? - Where will it end? is a report written by Christina Roessler and produced by the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada (PLAN).

Water in the Urban Southwest -- An updated Analysis of Water use in Albuquerque, Las Vegas Valley, and Tucson was written and edited by Taryn Hutchins-Cabibi, Bart Miller, and Anita Schwartz
Western Resources Advocates and sponsored in association with PLAN.

The first report examines the Las Vegas groundwater project in context of water issues throughout the West, where water for municipalities is getting increasingly hard to find and rural basins are being targeted for water supplies. The report highlights missing "key facts" and unknowns in SNWA's plan to raid water in rural Nevada and Utah.

The project's pricetag is one area the report focuses on. The report indicates that major costs, such as the electric power infrastructure, are not adequately included in SNWA's budget. SNWA repeatedly quotes a figure of $2 billion for the project. According to a Las Vegas Sun news story an SNWA spokesman now says cost estimates top $3.6 and include all power needs, construction contingencies, and inflation (assuming major construction begins in 2010). This is a somewhat different story to that told by SNWA in 2005 when it announced its capital expenditures. The party line then was that the basic cost would be $2 billion but that financing costs would raise the pricetag to $3.6 billion.

Without an accurate pricetag, the BLM will be severely handicapped in its legally mandated responsibility to identify reasonable alternatives in its Environmental Impact Study, currently underway.

The report also says that if Las Vegas were to diminish its per capita consumption of water to the levels attained by Tucson it could save more water than the 180,000 acre-feet SNWA has applied for in rural Nevada (which SNWA denies). The report says that while strides have been made in reducing the outdoor water waste in Las Vegas there is much that can still be done, and that indoor conservation has largely ignored.

The second report -- by researchers with Boulder, Colo.-based Western Resource Advocates -- compared conservation efforts in three desert cities: Tucson, Ariz., Albuquerque, N.M., and Las Vegas. Las Vegas falls well behind Tucson, which has an admirable per capita water consumption rate of 110 gallons per day. They achieve this by a realistic water rate structure that makes it very expensive to waste water. Water rates in the Las Vegas Valley are not structured to realistically foster conservation. Recent public opinion polls in southern Nevada indicate residents are much more worried about electricity bills than about water bills. Unlike Utah hotels and motels, those in Las Vegas typically do not offer visitors a choice of reusing sheets and towels between laundering. To do otherwise would diminish the carefully nourished perception of Fantasy Land.

The first report can be found at http://www.planevada.org/water1006.htm

The second report is at http://www.planevada.org/water1006-2.htm

The Las Vegas Sun reported the release in Report says southern Nevada water pipeline plan flawed

WATER TRIVIA

WATER TRIVIA from waterbank.com
( beware typos; cannot verify accuracy; please conserve. )
( * see note at bottom about waterbank.com )

• The only water we will ever have is what we have now.


• Showers use 9 gallons of water per minute.


• A bath requires 30 to 50 gallons.


• When ground water is contaminated it may remain that way for several thousand years.


• It takes 120 gallons of water to produce an egg.


• A hot water faucet that leaks 60 drops per minute can waste 192 gallons of water and 48 kwhrs of electricity per month.


• Human blood is 83% water. Human bones are 25% water.


• Running the tap waiting for water to get hot or cold can waste 5 gallons per minute.


• Saltwater is 97% of water on earth. Three percent is freshwater. Most of the freshwater stored on the earth is frozen in glaciers.


• Each day the sun evaporates 1,000,000,000,000 (one trillion) tons of water.


• The earth's surface is about 80% water. That is about 320,000,000,000,000 (363 trillion) gallons of water.


• Watermelons is 93% water.


• "Water" was the first word that Helen Keller learned. "Water was the last word spoken by President Ulysses S. Grant.


• In some deserts, rain is so uncommon that the natives to not have a word for it.


• Over 42,000 gallons of water are needed to grow and prepare the food for a typical Thanksgiving dinner for eight in the United States. This is enough to fill a 30 by 50 foot swimming pool.


• People in the United States use as much as 700,000,00,000 (700 billion) gallons of water each day.


• Heating water is the second largest energy user in the home.


• In some countries law requires solar heating of water for domestic uses.


• The koala bear and the desert rat do not drink water.


• In one glass of water, there are about 8,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (8 septillion water molecules.


• In a one hundred year period, a water molecule spends 98 years in the ocean, 20 months as ice, about 2 weeks in lakes and rivers, and less than a week in the atmosphere.


• Poor quality drinking water kills the equivalent of 20 jumbo jets filled with children every day.


• A corn plant needs 54 gallons per season.


• A milk cow needs 15 gallons per day or 5,475 gallons per year.


• A horse needs 10 gallons per day or 3,650 gallons per year.


• A hog needs 4 gallons per day or 1,500 gallons per year.


• An acre of sugar beets consumptively uses 651,702 gallons or 2 acre feet per season


• An acre of alfalfa needs 488,776 gallons per season in Colorado and 684,240 gallons in New Mexico.


• One bail of has requires 17,000 gallons.


• One truckload of 450 bails of has requires 7,650,000 gallons or 23.47 acre feet.
  

WATER MEASURES

• A Cubic Foot per Second or a Second Foot is also called a CFS. It equals 448.8 U.S. gallons per minute.


• One-Acre Ft. is the amount of water necessary to cover one acre of land to a depth of one foot deep. It is equal to 325,851.45 U.S. gallons.


• An irrigation is about six inches of water per acre unless the soils are saline when extra water is needed. An irrigation will usually penetrate 4-6" deep. If soils are saline additional water is needed to flush salts from the root zone.


• A Miners-Inch varies between 11.69 gpm in Colorado and 8.98 to 11.22 gpm in other western states of the United States.


• One U.S. gallon is 0.8327 Imperial gallons


• One cubic foot is 7.48062 U.S. gallons


• One cubic meter is 264.2 U.S. gallons


• One acre foot is 1,233.26 cubic meters
  

_________

* WaterBank^® and its personnel wear many hats in addition to brokering and dealing in water-related assets. In addition to the services that WaterBank^® offers, we are also a licensed real estate firm in New Mexico. WaterBank^® and its staff carry out a significant amount of investigative reporting that is uniquely reported on this Web Site. Because of the highly political character of water and potentially dangerous agendas of the actors, we consider ourselves as journalists and as such the sources of much of our material is strictly confidential and must remain confidential.