Dougfirtree
Well-known member
The writing is on the wall (maybe the wall of the canyon). Unless something changes in a big way, a whole lot of people in the southwest are going to become my neighbors before too long.
Glen Canyon
- Thread starter Hayduke
- Start date
marksjeep
Well-known member
An older article about the sedimentation issue and a little closer to home.
https://www.hcn.org/articles/water-...do-dam-faces-its-comeuppance-paonia-reservoir
https://www.hcn.org/articles/water-...do-dam-faces-its-comeuppance-paonia-reservoir
OriginalOscar
Active member
What I find most troubling is the record low Great Salt Lake. Large areas of exposed lake bed create rain and snow filled with sediment and salts. We get dust storms which blow those toxins into the Wasatch Front. The low lake level affects the lake effect snow which creates diminishing cycle of less precipitation.
Biologists’ fears confirmed on the lower Colorado River
Smallmouth bass feast on humpback chub, an ancient, threatened fish that’s native to the river, and biologists have been working hard to recover the chub. The predators wreaked havoc in the upper river, but were held at bay in Lake Powell where Glen Canyon Dam has served as a barrier for years —...
www.kunc.org
Biologists’ fears confirmed on the lower Colorado River
Smallmouth bass feast on humpback chub, an ancient, threatened fish that’s native to the river, and biologists have been working hard to recover the chub. The predators wreaked havoc in the upper river, but were held at bay in Lake Powell where Glen Canyon Dam has served as a barrier for years —...
"Last month, the Department of the Interior notified the seven western states that depend on Colorado River water that they must devise a way to conserve up to 4 million acre-feet of water in 2023 — more than Arizona and Nevada’s share combined -- or face federal intervention."
this is starting chap my ass so much.
the upper basin has always sent a surplus, beyond it's compact requirements through lees ferry. the upper basin is within it's compact rights to use even more. meanwhile the lower basin is consistently using more than it's actually allotted. simple mass balance says then that mead and powell will drop because of that. and yet federal intervention might mean that upper basin states could face orders to curtail.
there are some big court battles looming on the horizon.
Bambistew
Well-known member
Sad to see what is happening. Lake Powell is one of my favorite places in the US, hands down. I just looked at some of the spots we used to camp, most are miles from the nearest lake shore now. The article that @Oak posted made me look at the Escalante river delta, its come way, way down the canyon from the last time I was there in 2002. in the mid-90s you could go way up that river, The bass fishing was incredible, as was all the other fishing. We saw sheep many times at the upper reaches of the river. Such a cool place in an land that isn't conducive to such a wonder. I recall the lake dropping nearly 2 feet during the 2 weeks we spent there each summer in August. It was nuts how much evaporated, or was discharged from such a seemingly huge lake.
It appears that Powell has reached it's high for the water year in the last week and has begun to drop. It didn't quite make it to 3,540' elevation, which is 15' above the target level of 3,525' when mitigation measures kick in.
On July 9 last year the elevation was 3,558.43'.
The low this year was 3,522.24', a drop of 36.19'.
If the elevation drops the same amount this year it would reach 3,503', only 13' above the level at which the dam can no longer produce electricity. (I'm not sure about the effect of the "bathtub" shape of the reservoir and reduced AF/ft at lower elevation.)
Note that they withheld 350,000 AF of releases this spring to keep the elevation from dropping too far below 3,525'.
On July 9 last year the elevation was 3,558.43'.
The low this year was 3,522.24', a drop of 36.19'.
If the elevation drops the same amount this year it would reach 3,503', only 13' above the level at which the dam can no longer produce electricity. (I'm not sure about the effect of the "bathtub" shape of the reservoir and reduced AF/ft at lower elevation.)
Note that they withheld 350,000 AF of releases this spring to keep the elevation from dropping too far below 3,525'.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
JGDC, I just liked a post from when I was in college.
It seems like there will be a reckoning at some point about how water is used in the increasingly parched lower Colorado River Basin. For example, is growing alfalfa on State Trust Land for Saudi Arabian livestock the best use of our water?
At the risk of being (further) labeled a Commie, should we be drying up the Dolores River every summer so that we can grow alfalfa and load it on diesel trucks and boats to send it to California, Florida, and Peru?
Schwindt has put his hay on trucks bound for California, Florida and everywhere in between. He’s even heard of his crop showing up at a market in Peru because someone wanted it to feed to their prize horses.
Schwindt has put his hay on trucks bound for California, Florida and everywhere in between. He’s even heard of his crop showing up at a market in Peru because someone wanted it to feed to their prize horses.
DouglasR
Well-known member
Bruh idk much about this kinda stuff but that’s so insane that they built that big massive sob and it’s shitting out after like 60 years.
How tf did that happen?
How tf did that happen?
Irrelevant
Well-known member
While many, if not all, would question that use, water rights are a form of property right. You simply can't "take" that right away, either through outright takings or changing the definition of a beneficial use (some ability exists here). The answer is that governments simply need to buy out other users, not to scrape the entire western law framework. Every municipality tapping the Colorado should have an annual budget to buy ag water rights.
Who has the water rights in that story? And I didn't say anything about taking water rights. You're suggesting the stick approach. Perhaps there's a carrot approach for those with water rights.
seeth07
Well-known member
Idk what yall are worried about. Lots of water here, it's everywhere! Maybe it's exactly what the west needs to get people to move back east 
Irrelevant
Well-known member
Bad data, both in terms lack of sufficient data, and just that the data that was used was viewed as representing the wrong portion of the bell curve than it actually did. Meaning they used X number of years made assumptions that was an average (or not even that, but assumed they knew where those years plotted on the curve of possibility), modeled out all the potential precipitation scenarios and designed the dam. Turns out, drought is way more prevalent in that basin, flows are more variable than they thought. But @TOGIE would know WAY more than me.
OK, fair enough, if that reporting is accurate, step one is AZ drafting GW regs so that they align with western water law. I thought that was pretty common and that CA was the last to hop on the bandwagon.
I would say I'm not advocating for a stick. In my mind a stick would be to pass a law saying irrigation isn't an authorized beneficial use. I'm advocating for a market approach. It's successfully used all over the west, though I'm most familiar was WA. Muni's just need to purchase more existing water rights from existing irrigators. We have all kinds of approaches, from outright buying farms, to buying the water right off of a farm but allowing them to keep grazing or growing dry land crops, paying for irrigation improvements to reduce wastage (evap), then getting a portion of that "savings", etc.
Yep, we said the same thing in different ways.
yeah, the colorado river issue is a perfect storm. starting with bad data.
doug,
the compact was written using the averages of some of the wettest years on record. the compact broke up allowed colorado river depletions by upper and lower basin and then divided amongst the states in the upper and lower respectively. edit: need to rephrase - upper basin was allotted 7.5 mil acre feet/year and more importantly, has to send more than 75 mil acre feet past lees ferry in any ten consecutive years.
the upper basin has never used all of their apportionment, and sent that unused water downstream to mead/powell where the lower basin states can "order" their water out for delivery by USBR. the lower basin states populations exploded, irrigated agriculture exploded. they got accustomed to that excess, cause it was there. so now they basically depend on that excess.
okay so now the reality that the numbers are unrealistic and based on abnormal wet years is catching up to us. inflows to powell are dropping due to decades of below average moisture in the headwaters upper basin states, and yes, while upper basin use is increasing a bit (but we are still below are max allowed apportionment).
back to simple mass balance, lower basin is using more than is coming into mead and powell mean mead and powell go down.
kinda their own damn fault though, see graph:
i can't find the graph with more up to date numbers, but the story doesn't really change.
Last edited:
Irrelevant
Well-known member
The progression in my mind is
1. Manage surface water allocations
2. Establish where groundwater is connected to surface water, incorporate those rights into the same system.
3. Establish minimum flows for recreation, aesthetics, and fish/wildlife
4. Manage non-surface water connected groundwater rights for "sustainable use"
5. Ensure ALL water use is managed (includes single family wells, stockwatering, etc).
6. STOP issuing new water rights! At this point it's all been spoken for, even in the wettest locations.
7. All forms of governments that either purvey water or control use (i.e. building permits) needs to setup a water bank, and fund it, annually, every year.
8. States need to fund adjudications. ID is so far ahead of WA in this regard it's shocking.
If all of those boxes are checked, we don't have difficult water problems. Expensive, maybe, but not difficult.
Similar threads
