• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

AZ and NV face mandatory water cuts for the first time

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Arizona and Nevada Face First-Ever Mandatory Water Cuts from the Colorado River | The Weather Channel

At a Glance
  • Lake Mead is expected to be below the level that triggers restrictions on the amount of water that can be taken from it.
  • This winter's snows have helped the Colorado River basin, but reservoirs are still far below normal levels.
  • Arizona and Nevada officials say the cuts are about the same amount they've been conserving already

Lake Mead has been slowly going dry.

he two states are among seven that have agreed to drought contingency plans for the river system that serves about 40 million people and 6,300 square miles of farmland from Wyoming to Southern California.

The cuts are triggered by water levels expected in Lake Mead, a giant reservoir on the river at the Arizona-Nevada border. On Jan. 1, Lake Mead's level is projected to be 1,089.4 feet, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation said late last week. That's just below the drought contingency plan threshold of 1,090 feet, and it means cuts for Arizona and Nevada.

The ongoing drought has been a problem, even though there were heavier snowfalls this past winter. It hasn't been enough to compensate for 20+ years of drought.

Instead of relying on water level triggers for cuts, the Upper Basin states — New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming and Utah — agreed to a demand management plan that includes reimbursing water users for voluntarily contributing water to Lake Powell, the other major reservoir on the Colorado River.

(MORE: Greenhouse Gases Reach Levels Not Seen in 800,000 Years, Study Finds)

Both Lake Mead and Lake Powell, have dropped dramatically because of a drought that has lingered for nearly 20 years.

The reservoirs have gotten a boost because of heavy snowfall across much of the Rocky Mountains this winter. The reservoirs are now at 55% of total capacity, up from 49% at the same time last year.

“While we appreciate this year’s above average snowpack, one good year doesn’t mean the drought is over. We must remain vigilant,” Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Brenda Burman said in a statement.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Shouldn't people who move to very arid places, then expect water to flow freely, also expect some serious problems resulting from that?
Tom
 

Altfish

Veteran Member
Shouldn't people who move to very arid places, then expect water to flow freely, also expect some serious problems resulting from that?
Tom
But, if I understand it correctly, the water used to flow freely and now doesn't. It is changing...
 

Stanyon

WWMRD?
Shouldn't people who move to very arid places, then expect water to flow freely, also expect some serious problems resulting from that?
Tom

Best water I ever drank was in an elevated area near Payson Az the communities water was tapped straight from a mountain spring.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
But, if I understand it correctly, the water used to flow freely and now doesn't. It is changing...
Both the amount of water available and also the population who expect the water to continue.
Despite the fact that the population has been overusing the available water for decades. If it weren't for sucking water out of ancient aquifers, far faster than it's replenished, there wouldn't be a Phoenix.
Tom
 

Stanyon

WWMRD?
Mountain water is great, I agree.
But could we build Phoenix on that spring?
Tom

No, nor would I want to. I'd rather be able to continue enjoying it unsullied by over development. Let the city folk drink their recycled toilet water.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
The more affluent will still water their lawns.
Around here, Northern California, people were offered an incentive, first $500 and then $1000 to remove their lawns and plant drought tolerant vegetation. We did and I noticed others doing the same. There were also financial penalties for using too much water so we saw many lawns go dry and dead.

Fortunately there was enough water saved to avoid even more drastic solutions. And we've just started seeing cities going bone dry when all the water was used up.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
No, nor would I want to. I'd rather be able to continue enjoying it unsullied by over development. Let the city folk drink their recycled toilet water.
How about real estate developers drink it, including the ones who made enough money to live in Payson and Tahoe and such?
Tom
 

Stanyon

WWMRD?
How about real estate developers drink it, including the ones who made enough money to live in Payson and Tahoe and such?
Tom

Where I was it was an area filled with older people and retirees in very small. modest houses, some used food stamps and some lived in trailers. Not a lot of money there but they were mostly friendly and happy people. but who wouldn't be? Sky so clear you could see most stars, clean water, low humidity, very few bugs and a national forest that stretched for miles right in the backyard.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Shouldn't people who move to very arid places, then expect water to flow freely, also expect some serious problems resulting from that?
Tom
I ask, in spirit, pretty much the same thing seeing lush green lawns in semi-arid California. It's scary how much water people waste.
 

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
But Global Warming is just a myth ....

Of course the globe is warming. We are coming out of a flippin' ICE AGE! The earth has been changing climates..adjusting the average temperature up and down for something like four billion years.

As in, hello? Do we really need to do this?

The question isn't about 'global warming.' It's warming. It would be warming if there were no people on the planet. Really. It's just the way the planet works.

The QUESTION is 'are human beings responsible for climate change?....and if we aren't, are human beings able to exacerbate it?"

No, and yes. We are NOT responsible for climate change, but we CAN exacerbate it and make it more...I guess 'extreme' is an almost good word. You know what else is happening, but that the politically correct chicken littles of the world are NOT getting all hyped over?

The magnetic poles are switching places. Soon (in geologic time, anyway) the North Pole will be the South Pole, and vice versa. This change is going to fowl up bird migration patterns and a whole lot of other things. (pun intended, for the spelling police). In fact, THAT is going to mess our technology up big time...but do you see any political candidate getting all hot and bothered over that?

Nope. Because nobody can figure out a way to make conservatives responsible for it, or a way for liberals to 'fix' it. It's just gonna happen, utterly beyond human control.

Seriously. I am so tired of people traveling all over everywhere in their expensive private jets yelling about how WE have to stop producing greenhouse gasses, and stop driving, ect.,

Have you seen anybody mention that the Ozone layer will be healed by 2050, because we figured out what caused the hole and stopped making the stuff that did it?

NO? Well of course not, because nobody can get any political power by pointing at a success. SHOULD we be more careful of the environment and use clean energy? Absolutely. We HAVE succeeded in many ways and places. I spent the last week in Los Angeles. No smog. None....in the 1960's I wouldn't have been able to breathe down there; the sky would have been utterly brown. Last week it was bright, bright blue in the middle of a month where smog was generally the worst.

Can people keep the world beautiful? Yes. Talk to India and China. STop claiming that Americans are the villains, because honey, we ain't. If everybody ELSE in the world followed our example, really...if they just did what we DO, the globe would still be warming, because that's what the planet is doing. But the earth would be cleaner, brighter, lovelier. ....and quite possibly, less extreme in the climate change.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
STop claiming that Americans are the villains, because honey, we ain't. If everybody ELSE in the world followed our example, really...i
Ah yeah, no.
The USA has a per capita carbon footprint of about 17 tons of co2.
China and India(and UK) are about a third of that.
If everyone on the planet did things the way we do, the ecological disaster would be upon us while Trump is still president.
Tom
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Ah yeah, no.
The USA has a per capita carbon footprint of about 17 tons of co2.
China and India(and UK) are about a third of that.
If everyone on the planet did things the way we do, the ecological disaster would be upon us while Trump is still president.
Tom

China's total is twice as high as the US. Per capita hide this factor as that are 3 to 4 times as many people in China as the US. It is a common stats trick.
 
Top