>
>Californians ain't seen nothin' yet. So, far, this is a very minor
>drought compared to what has happened in long ago history.
><http://news.msn.com/in-depth/scientists-past-california-droughts-have-lasted-200-years>
>
> Some more serious water planning and storage is needed.
>
Yes, I'm aware of the historical record of precipitation here in the
southwest going back almost 2,000 years. Even though we have those records
available, we have not seen anything lke this in "modern" times. The Bureau of
Reclamation (aka Bureau of Wrecked Creation) has now stated openly that we are
very likely to see the Cantral Arizona Project (CAP) turned off this year if
and when (emphasis on WHEN) Lake Mead drops another 20 feet. California is
first for allocation, Las Vegas is second, and CAP is dead last. And then
there's the treaty with Mexico for delivering a specific amount of water with a
capped salinity down the Colorado for their agricultural usage.
The majority of people living in the arid southwest do not realise how
precarious their situation is. We've been managing water closely here in
Arizona for over a century now, but the population growth has all been
sustained up to now by way of a wetter than average century, and the Colorado
River allocations are based on a short period of abundant rainfall in the early
20th century before Hoover Dam was being built, and virtually nothing was known
about the historical record even for a century earlier.
Same is true for California's Central Valley, which was a desert prior to
reclamation and water management. No amount of management and storage is going
to make up for a lack of snowpack, which right now is only 12-15% of normal
while reservoirs are drying up. Some areas are now down to less than 100 days
of potable municipal water, even if agriculture was to be turned off. They at
least have the opportunity to construct desalinisation plants, but we here do
now have that opportunity.
Back in the 1950's we had a serious drought that deeply affected Arizona.
The response was to shut off all agricultural allotments and conserve what was
left for municipal purposes. Lake Roosevelt was all but empty, and we've had
one recent period where the level was insufficient for the turbine inlets.
Back in the 1950's drought there were fewer than 1 million people here, and now
we're pressing 6 million. I know from an analysis done by CAP that if the
canal was shut off and all other resources were NOT impacted the most we can
support is 4.3 million. But, if the CAP is shut off you can be certain that
all other water resources are similarly impacted. You can't shut off water to
subdivisions, and there is only just so much ground water available.
I don't like the scenarios that come to mind when you have 6 million
people all running around looking for a glass of water.
Chris
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro
- Hunter S. Thompson
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|