Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Near the Hoover Dam, the difference in the color of the rocks shows how high the water level in Lake Mead has been. Drought on the Colorado River has reduced the region’s water reserves.
Sunday, Aug. 12, 2012 | 2:02 a.m.
In August, Brian Greenspun turns over his Where I Stand column to guest writers. Today’s columnist is Pat Mulroy, general manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority.
After last year’s strong snowpack in the Rocky Mountains brought much-needed relief to a rapidly declining Lake Mead, there was optimism that perhaps the devastating drought that has plagued the Colorado River for the past decade was drawing to a close. Unfortunately, this year’s record dry conditions — which have extended throughout much of the continental United States — have dashed those hopes. Just as we have seen through many periods of extended drought along the Colorado River, last year’s bounty appears to have been little more than an apparition, disappearing more quickly than snow on the majestic mountain peaks of Colorado and Wyoming.
If climate scientists are correct, the West has many more such periods ahead. This new reality will fundamentally change the way we manage this crucial resource. This challenge will require a more selfless and fully engaged level of collaboration among communities and states than ever before.
I have often thanked the residents and businesses of Southern Nevada for your phenomenal efforts in reducing water use. Every year for the past decade, our per-person water consumption has decreased. However, last year we achieved a new milestone, reducing our per-capita consumptive use of water to 75 gallons per day among residents and only 133 gallons when all other community water uses are included. By effectively reusing virtually every drop of water used indoors, retrofitting much of our community’s landscaping and adhering to sensible watering restrictions, Las Vegas and its surrounding cities have become a model of urban efficiency, demonstrating that water conservation does not have to come at the expense of our quality of life. Our neighbors in San Diego, Los Angeles, Phoenix, Denver and Albuquerque are on the same path, having recognized that managing their water wisely is fundamental to protecting their communities in the difficult times ahead.
Equally important is finding new strategies to manage the entire Colorado River. From its headwaters in Wyoming and Colorado, the river is diverted across the Continental Divide to users in Denver, Aurora and other cities of Colorado’s Front Range, as well as vast agricultural tracts. As it reaches New Mexico, more water is moved to provide essential resources to Albuquerque. In Arizona and California, the river travels across hundreds of miles of desert to agricultural districts and thirsty cities. Even in Utah, which asserts that it doesn’t believe in transferring water beyond its basin of origin, the Colorado River’s flows are diverted to reach the growing cities of the Wasatch front, home to Salt Lake City. Ironically, while Las Vegas is the city closest to the Colorado River, Nevada receives only 1.8 percent of its allocated flows.
Although most people know that nearly 30 million westerners depend upon the river’s flows, the Colorado plays an enormous role in agricultural production. One individual farming district in California accounts for more than 10 percent of the country’s winter fruit and vegetables. The reality is that farms and countless acres of ranchland consume approximately 80 percent of the Colorado River while the combined cities account for only 20 percent, and these agricultural uses are crucial to both our economy and the stability of our nation’s food supply.
As I write, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation is finalizing a long-term supply and demand report that accounts for changing climatic conditions and projects the Colorado River’s long-term balance. Based upon the interim reports, the news is not encouraging, and the consequences will fall to all water users — agricultural and urban. Everyone, from the tribal nations of the Upper Basin to environmental advocates in Mexico, has a stake in the outcome. As we work toward solutions, we must always consider the needs of every stakeholder and ensure that the burden is shared equitably.
There are countless opportunities to stretch the river’s supplies for the benefit of all. Unfortunately, those opportunities quickly fade when two of the partners are before the U.S. Supreme Court, as appears to be the destiny for Nevada and Utah because Utah simply has ignored a congressional directive for the two states to agree on the equitable division of water resources in Snake Valley. When negotiated agreements are rendered a farce because they are simply discarded, it affects everyone in the basin. What happens in Los Angeles, Phoenix and Las Vegas affects Denver, Albuquerque and Salt Lake City.
The shortage-sharing agreement among the Colorado River Basin states in 2007 was a great first step; however, worsening conditions will make the next round of shortage discussions unavoidable. Protecting the communities of Southern Nevada in the face of such catastrophic events is the purpose of the project to develop renewable groundwater supplies within Nevada. We at the authority hope that the day is not upon us in the near term, but preserving the option for this community is imperative.
I've been asking this question for years, and nobody has ever been able to give me a good answer.
Why don't we build a desalinization plant in California? There is plenty of water in the pacific, and plenty of places to bury the resulting salt. It may be more expensive, but it's the only way to restore the Colorado river. If we could wean California off of Colorado river water, then there wouldn't be the water shortage we have today, and no need to build a pipeline to take water from a (slightly wetter) desert.
In my view, this is the only way to secure our community's water. With California out of the equation, we could up our water ration, all the while allowing the Colorado to return to a more natural flow. It worked so well in Perth, Australia, that they are building a second desalinization plant to reduce their reliance on the Swan River further. If the Aussies can do it, why can't we?
Could anyone answer that? Mrs. Mulroy?
The language in the Lincoln County Land Act (108-424) reads:
"AGREEMENT.--Prior to any transbasin diversion from ground-water basins located within both the State of Nevada and the State of Utah, the State of Nevada and the State of Utah shall reach an agreement regarding the division of water resources of those interstate ground-water flow system(s) from which water will be diverted and used by the project. The agreement shall allow for the maximum sustainable beneficial use of the water resources and protect existing water rights."
To me that is not a directive to reach an agreement, but rather a reasonable limit on the exportation of water from Snake Valley.
The agreement needs to be renegotiated so a logical apportionment number is reached -- i.e., based on historical use.
The number currently in the agreement is just an arbitrary political number imposed by an obstinate Nevada negotiating team, getting their marching orders from SNWA.
Rural Nevada and Utah are just as much subject to the extended drought as Las Vegas, but without the deep-pocketed political clout. It is a vastly different view from the source end of the pipeline than from the taker's end. Ms. Mulroy either forgets or ignores the grave risks faced by rural Nevada and Utah under her scheme -- or perhaps they are simply risks she is willing to take from her taker's end of the pipeline.
First of all, there MUST be a building moratorium in Southern Nevada, because continued growth is UNsustainable. The middle ground for building would be to utilize already developed parcels and "recycle" them, building into them every kind and type of water and power conservation device to insure zero impact for water or power useage.
As a duo resident of both White Pine County and Clark County, I can attest that the water supply up north is limited, and the fact is, that even the City of Ely has been water rationing. Local ranchers have had to redrill their wells in the last decade because the water table has dropped. Simply put, the water SNWA seeks to take from northern Nevada is already limited and scarce.
It is shameful that the Clark County Planning Commission continues to be on a "build, baby, build" mentality to the highest, most elite bidder. The little guy citizen will be paying forever up the waaazoo for SNWA & the Planning Commission's self-serving decisions. This is very discouraging for future generations as well.
Blessings and Peace,
Star
I moved here from the East several years back.I came here with eyes open and knowing conservation would be a daily thing. Back East I lived several hours north of NYC in a area "overflowing' with a endless supply of water and yet WE ALL conserved,even collecting rain water to water house plants. Lights were off if not needed,air conditioners turned up and recycling was as normal as putting on your socks. Here...I'm shocked at peoples attitudes and simply refuse to look past their own nose. It would appear to me they never did have a handle on the water situation here,that's apparent with all the greenery in the valley.The water wasters pay a higher rate...big deal,it's not working and its not stopping them from continuing with what they're doing. When it's gone...the WELCOME TO LAS VEGAS sign will come down and a FOR SALE sign put in its place.A moratorium should have been put on all new housing.We can not sustain this waste much longer.
Babyboomer is correct on some very important points. There is an enormous amount of water waste. Not only do we, yes, continue to see water running down the street all over the valley, but the problem is that the biggest users still do not pay the highest costs. Golf courses and casinos pay less per gallon than residents. The recent round of rate increases meant 2 percent increases for those users, 50 percent for me, and 100, 200 percent or more for nonprofits and churches (which according to SNWA logic, are like wildlife and don't contribute to the community). My old frenemy Pat Mulroy, when she's not busy trying to get reporters fired, knows very well that her great ambition to cover the state with pumps and pipelines is at best a very temporary solution that will only worsen the economic and environmental destruction stemming from the drought and climate change. But she does not care, nor answer to anyone; like the millions she spent in the failed attempt to take over NV Energy a few years ago, it is all about expanding her empire. God forbid that would actually happen. I might be convinced that she cared about the future of our state and communities if she spent more than a tiny fraction of her budget on conserving the resource we have rather than expanding her political power, budget and geographic control.
there is huge amounts of waste---the fake lakes of lake las vegas, and southern highlands association, and desert shores come to mind---what a slap in the face to all of us---WHY are these projects given appoval to waste millions of gallons of water if it in short supply????????
second point---this is partially a manufactured shortage for mulroy to gain more power and grow her budget exponentially. lake powell is full, lake majove is full, lake havasu is full---why is water released from lake meade, but no water released TO Lake meade???? to make it appear worse than it is so they can push the 15.5 billion dollar pipeline thru and gain more money and more power and provide more jobs to the rural mormon communities that they serve first. This pipeline will pour tons of money into alamo, caliente and many mormon rural towns--don't kid yourself if this isn't a huge factor in this mess.
THERE IS NO WATER SHORTAGE--there is only overbuilding and waste. the whole issue is a mirage.
mrlucky nails it. Massive CONJOB is afoot.
This whole issue of reuse is bs. Shell game designed to supply golf courses with new water at a discount price, we pay for that.
Central USA crops have taken a true wipe out this summer. LOOK for some food products to rise in price.In my area corn crops are worst I've seen in 25 years.I was not living in central USA prior to that..
SNWA's conceptual construction cost estimate for the groundwater project is $15.46 Billion over 66 years(http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/nv/groundwater_development/snwa/newsletters0.Par.23340.File.dat/Newsletter%209.pdf). The cost of SNWA's the conceptual funding approach on ratepayers has yet to be determined, but will be tied to consumer water rates, assuming SNWA relies on commodity charges to repay the debt, and is not included in the recently approved surcharge. The groundwater development project is estimated to supply water to 300,000 households. If my math is correct, the cost is $808/yr per household for the 66 year duration, not including operation and maintenance, treatment, or overhead.