dbackjon wrote:Great, as of now:D1B wrote:
BTW hows the water situation in Arizona?
http://www.srpwater.com/dwr/report.asp?dt=5/11/2009
Salt River system lakes are at 99% of capacity. Verde River lakes are at 72% (Horseshoe is low on purpose for flood control).
Total capacity is at 95%.
For now, yes. Arizona had a very good snow pack.Cap'n Cat wrote:dbackjon wrote:
Great, as of now:
http://www.srpwater.com/dwr/report.asp?dt=5/11/2009
Salt River system lakes are at 99% of capacity. Verde River lakes are at 72% (Horseshoe is low on purpose for flood control).
Total capacity is at 95%.
And you expect that to maintain, Jon?
dbackjon wrote:For now, yes. Arizona had a very good snow pack.Cap'n Cat wrote:
And you expect that to maintain, Jon?
Led by former Democratic Govenor Bruce Babbit back in the 1980's, Arizona has been on the forefront of water conservation/supply management. All new development in urban areas (99% of the growth areas) have to demonstrate a minimum of a 100-year water supply before development can begin. Retiring areas from agriculture (where they were often growing crops that farmers elsewhere were being paid NOT to grow), innovative groundwater recharge systems (creating wetlands using treated waste water, ponds designed for wildlife and water recharge, and direct injection of excess water from the CAP in aquifers), and conservation measures
And not just western states, as the drought in the Southeast last year provedCap'n Cat wrote:dbackjon wrote:
For now, yes. Arizona had a very good snow pack.
Led by former Democratic Govenor Bruce Babbit back in the 1980's, Arizona has been on the forefront of water conservation/supply management. All new development in urban areas (99% of the growth areas) have to demonstrate a minimum of a 100-year water supply before development can begin. Retiring areas from agriculture (where they were often growing crops that farmers elsewhere were being paid NOT to grow), innovative groundwater recharge systems (creating wetlands using treated waste water, ponds designed for wildlife and water recharge, and direct injection of excess water from the CAP in aquifers), and conservation measures
Well, I stand corrected. Good to know there's some conservation measures going on there. The other western states suffered for a long stretch and I'd guess many, if not most, still do.
dbackjon wrote:And not just western states, as the drought in the Southeast last year provedCap'n Cat wrote:
Well, I stand corrected. Good to know there's some conservation measures going on there. The other western states suffered for a long stretch and I'd guess many, if not most, still do.
Cap'n Cat wrote:dbackjon wrote:
For now, yes. Arizona had a very good snow pack.
Led by former Democratic Govenor Bruce Babbit back in the 1980's, Arizona has been on the forefront of water conservation/supply management. All new development in urban areas (99% of the growth areas) have to demonstrate a minimum of a 100-year water supply before development can begin. Retiring areas from agriculture (where they were often growing crops that farmers elsewhere were being paid NOT to grow), innovative groundwater recharge systems (creating wetlands using treated waste water, ponds designed for wildlife and water recharge, and direct injection of excess water from the CAP in aquifers), and conservation measures
Well, I stand corrected. Good to know there's some conservation measures going on there. The other western states suffered for a long stretch and I'd guess many, if not most, still do.
And above average precipitation since then.D1B wrote:Cap'n Cat wrote:
Well, I stand corrected. Good to know there's some conservation measures going on there. The other western states suffered for a long stretch and I'd guess many, if not most, still do.
Arizona will be fvcked soon too. Here's the part Jon failed to mention...
March 1, 2008--The drought's not over yet (Arizona Central)
Runoff overflowing from the Verde River reservoirs continues to slosh down the front of the Tempe Town Lake dam, into the normally dry lower Salt River, but don't be fooled, state officials said Tuesday. This drought isn't over yet. Heavy rain and snow and the excess runoff has tempted a lot of folks to suggest Arizona has been rescued from its long dry spell, which would enter its 14th dust-choked year this spring. And it's easy to take a breath in anticipation of a relieved sigh, what with all the storms that have improbably soaked this year of La Niña.
http://www.waterinfo.org
Like the Army Corp draining Fort Peck in Montana to all time lows all because they wanted to run barges up the Mississippi.Cap'n Cat wrote:dbackjon wrote:
For now, yes. Arizona had a very good snow pack.
Led by former Democratic Govenor Bruce Babbit back in the 1980's, Arizona has been on the forefront of water conservation/supply management. All new development in urban areas (99% of the growth areas) have to demonstrate a minimum of a 100-year water supply before development can begin. Retiring areas from agriculture (where they were often growing crops that farmers elsewhere were being paid NOT to grow), innovative groundwater recharge systems (creating wetlands using treated waste water, ponds designed for wildlife and water recharge, and direct injection of excess water from the CAP in aquifers), and conservation measures
Well, I stand corrected. Good to know there's some conservation measures going on there. The other western states suffered for a long stretch and I'd guess many, if not most, still do.
When was that?grizzaholic wrote:Like the Army Corp draining Fort Peck in Montana to all time lows all because they wanted to run barges up the Mississippi.Cap'n Cat wrote:
Well, I stand corrected. Good to know there's some conservation measures going on there. The other western states suffered for a long stretch and I'd guess many, if not most, still do.
It got really bad the beginning of 1999, you could walk damn near 200 yards out from the face of the earthen dam before you hit water. Down 20+feet. Nobody cared about fishing or anything. Politicians, all of them should be hung from trees, street lights, light poles, none of them care about anything but getting/staying elected and making sure they get their money and kick backs. Bunch of crooksdbackjon wrote:When was that?grizzaholic wrote:
Like the Army Corp draining Fort Peck in Montana to all time lows all because they wanted to run barges up the Mississippi.
But you do know that water storage for downstream navigation was one of the primary reasons for building the dam in the first place?grizzaholic wrote:It got really bad the beginning of 1999, you could walk damn near 200 yards out from the face of the earthen dam before you hit water. Down 20+feet. Nobody cared about fishing or anything. Politicians, all of them should be hung from trees, street lights, light poles, none of them care about anything but getting/staying elected and making sure they get their money and kick backs. Bunch of crooksdbackjon wrote:
When was that?
And you know that the fishery is not the same as it used to be? There are many endangered species, you are all about protecting them right???, that were harmed very badly by the draw down. You do know that the peoples docks were damaged because the draw down was so great? You do know that many fishing/boating/recreational business went out of business, I know of 4, due to the conditions of the reservoir? Not meaning to be an asshole, but when your family farm is near the lake and you USED to be able to go out boating and fishing and then it is all taken away from you because some dickholes down stream wnat this or that with no regard to what you need is VERY DISTURBING. MY 2 cents.dbackjon wrote:But you do know that water storage for downstream navigation was one of the primary reasons for building the dam in the first place?grizzaholic wrote:
It got really bad the beginning of 1999, you could walk damn near 200 yards out from the face of the earthen dam before you hit water. Down 20+feet. Nobody cared about fishing or anything. Politicians, all of them should be hung from trees, street lights, light poles, none of them care about anything but getting/staying elected and making sure they get their money and kick backs. Bunch of crooks
So, how do reconcile all the non-agriculture employed morons who live in snow-belt states, like Wisconsin and Minnesota who are wasting our nation's energy heating homes 7 months of the year?D1B wrote:T, humans are fvcking up this planet. I could post hundreds of threads a day chronicaling this fact. But to me, like global warming, it's self evident. Just open your eyes and witness the death of Africa, the pandemic of the day each week, China and budding power consumers nations like India, Brazil, Russia and Argentina. Sure, ultimately the planet will adapt, but the planet don't give a fvck about humans.
We all must accept a lower standard of living and think of the planet first if we are going to survive.
As far as endangered species goes, I think the dam/lake was not good for them.grizzaholic wrote:And you know that the fishery is not the same as it used to be? There are many endangered species, you are all about protecting them right???, that were harmed very badly by the draw down. You do know that the peoples docks were damaged because the draw down was so great? You do know that many fishing/boating/recreational business went out of business, I know of 4, due to the conditions of the reservoir? Not meaning to be an asshole, but when your family farm is near the lake and you USED to be able to go out boating and fishing and then it is all taken away from you because some dickholes down stream wnat this or that with no regard to what you need is VERY DISTURBING. MY 2 cents.dbackjon wrote:
But you do know that water storage for downstream navigation was one of the primary reasons for building the dam in the first place?
Next time the Mississippi is flooding I say we open up the dams above the flooding area...That way they will have more than just one avenue to move them barges up the river. They won't have to just stick to the river channel, they could drop off their loads right at walmart or where ever.dbackjon wrote:As far as endangered species goes, I think the dam/lake was not good for them.grizzaholic wrote:
And you know that the fishery is not the same as it used to be? There are many endangered species, you are all about protecting them right???, that were harmed very badly by the draw down. You do know that the peoples docks were damaged because the draw down was so great? You do know that many fishing/boating/recreational business went out of business, I know of 4, due to the conditions of the reservoir? Not meaning to be an asshole, but when your family farm is near the lake and you USED to be able to go out boating and fishing and then it is all taken away from you because some dickholes down stream wnat this or that with no regard to what you need is VERY DISTURBING. MY 2 cents.
That is one problem with the multi-purpose dams - they promise everything, but that only works in optimum water conditions.
The water stored had a priority to it - navigation is a higher priority than recreation. I don't necessarily agree with that, but in the cost/benefit analysis used to build the dam, the benefits of Mississippi navigation far outweigh any other usage of the water.
Could be worse Griza....your family farm could be under the lake..those familiy's plight are no worse than the family forced to give up their land so people downstream can have goods...recreational uses can only be used as an added benefit, not the primary function, when assessing the cost-benefit analysis for water storage/navigational projects.grizzaholic wrote:And you know that the fishery is not the same as it used to be? There are many endangered species, you are all about protecting them right???, that were harmed very badly by the draw down. You do know that the peoples docks were damaged because the draw down was so great? You do know that many fishing/boating/recreational business went out of business, I know of 4, due to the conditions of the reservoir? Not meaning to be an *******, but when your family farm is near the lake and you USED to be able to go out boating and fishing and then it is all taken away from you because some dickholes down stream wnat this or that with no regard to what you need is VERY DISTURBING. MY 2 cents.dbackjon wrote:
But you do know that water storage for downstream navigation was one of the primary reasons for building the dam in the first place?
Uhhh, by using clean, green energy sources. Next....travelinman67 wrote:So, how do reconcile all the non-agriculture employed morons who live in snow-belt states, like Wisconsin and Minnesota who are wasting our nation's energy heating homes 7 months of the year?D1B wrote:T, humans are fvcking up this planet. I could post hundreds of threads a day chronicaling this fact. But to me, like global warming, it's self evident. Just open your eyes and witness the death of Africa, the pandemic of the day each week, China and budding power consumers nations like India, Brazil, Russia and Argentina. Sure, ultimately the planet will adapt, but the planet don't give a fvck about humans.
We all must accept a lower standard of living and think of the planet first if we are going to survive.
Fv(k those evolutionary rejects! Make 'em move to the South to save energy, or force 'em to report to Soylent Green processing centers.
Great idea, D1B!
BTW, you might look into Tucson...or better yet, Amarillo.
No one fucking knows Cap'n. The fed being just that, the fed.Cap'n Cat wrote:Q: What in the fuck, with the dominance of the highways by trucks and a still-efficient long distance rail system, are we doing using barges on the Mississippi and Missouri??? Nostalgia??
Coupled with politics, yes.Cap'n Cat wrote:Q: What in the fuck, with the dominance of the highways by trucks and a still-efficient long distance rail system, are we doing using barges on the Mississippi and Missouri??? Nostalgia??
"And as we wind on down the road, our shadows taller than our soul. There walks a lady we all know, who shines white light and wants to show, how everything still turns to gold."
Well, let's see. Lake Powell is at it's highest May 12th level since 2002, and rivers feeding Lake Powell are running at 107.67% of their normal May average, with the Colorado running at 114% of 5/12 normals. Reservoirs above Lake Powell are at 80.01% of capacity. Lake Powell is 85' below full pool, but has been brought up 5' since April 17th. All this despite the fact that during Water Year 2009, they have released over 1.2 million more acre-feet of water than they've had inflow into Powell. There are currently over 4.3 TRILLION gallons of water in Lake Powell.Cap'n Cat wrote:Z,
You do know that the precious Colorado River no longer reaches the Gulf of California, right? Wasn't that way 150 years ago.
Also, seen any pics of the water level at Lake Mead or any other reservoir out west?
You'll be showin' up at my door in that beat up old '88 Chevy Corsica Mama Z drives in a couple years, looking for a floor sweeping job and a place for you and the Z Kats to hang until an apartment opens up in Wisconsin Rapids.
D1B wrote:Cap'n Cat wrote:
Well, I stand corrected. Good to know there's some conservation measures going on there. The other western states suffered for a long stretch and I'd guess many, if not most, still do.
Arizona will be fvcked soon too. Here's the part Jon failed to mention...
March 1, 2008--The drought's not over yet (Arizona Central)
Runoff overflowing from the Verde River reservoirs continues to slosh down the front of the Tempe Town Lake dam, into the normally dry lower Salt River, but don't be fooled, state officials said Tuesday. This drought isn't over yet. Heavy rain and snow and the excess runoff has tempted a lot of folks to suggest Arizona has been rescued from its long dry spell, which would enter its 14th dust-choked year this spring. And it's easy to take a breath in anticipation of a relieved sigh, what with all the storms that have improbably soaked this year of La Niña.
http://www.waterinfo.org
sourcing from over a YEAR ago? Great idea, again, D1B!D1B wrote:Uhhh, by using clean, green energy sources. Next....travelinman67 wrote: So, how do reconcile all the non-agriculture employed morons who live in snow-belt states, like Wisconsin and Minnesota who are wasting our nation's energy heating homes 7 months of the year?
Fv(k those evolutionary rejects! Make 'em move to the South to save energy, or force 'em to report to Soylent Green processing centers.
Great idea, D1B!
BTW, you might look into Tucson...or better yet, Amarillo.
travelinman67 wrote:Great idea, again, D1B!D1B wrote:
Uhhh, by using clean, green energy sources. Next....
Though, it adds less than 1% to the total U.S. energy consumption...and with "obstructionism as policy" by the Progressives, it MIGHT be implemented before 2100...assuming America still exists. But in all fairness, it's worth a try.
Let's start with Biomass.
Care to contribute?
