U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-01-2007, 01:03 PM
 
Location: Frisco, Tx
384 posts, read 1,003,915 times
Reputation: 165

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve-o View Post
Great points and good write-up Jazzlover! Its a big issue, no doubt. I dont foresee the SW or west drying up in my lifetime, but sooner or later I imagine it will.
An article appeared in the Dallas Morning News about a weather study that says that a perma drought would begin to start in the 10 years in the southwest. Something akin to the dust bowl but would never abate due to global warming, take that how you will but I think it's a concern for every place in the desert southwest as well as Texas and Oklahoma.

Of course they say ten years, but how long has the present drought persisted in Utah, CO, and Arizona, maybe it's already here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-02-2007, 01:37 PM
 
Location: Somewhere along the path to where I'd like to be.
2,181 posts, read 3,809,352 times
Reputation: 789
I'm hearing a lot of complaints about the problem, but very little in the way of a solution. What do you want people to do - stay away and quit moving out there? How are you encouraging them to do that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2007, 06:26 PM
 
17,396 posts, read 24,728,398 times
Reputation: 12783
The more people that come here the quicker our leaders will be forced to deal with the issue.

When it becomes an "emergency" they will fix it, but only when the masses demand a fix will they find the courage to risk raising taxes and/or their re-election. Until then, they will keep approving the zoning and construction applications.

If our leaders aren't worried enough to fix it, my attitude is y'all come, and

- what, me worry?
s/Mike from back east

Last edited by Mike from back east; 03-22-2013 at 07:09 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2007, 07:13 PM
 
Location: Somewhere along the path to where I'd like to be.
2,181 posts, read 3,809,352 times
Reputation: 789
Well, I'd like to move out there. But I don't want to contribute to a problem. I wouldn't be buying a house anyway. I'd just be renting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2007, 09:49 AM
 
42 posts, read 147,232 times
Reputation: 36
Colorado has water but others want it and the dumb dumbs keep giving it away. There are metropolitan areas within the state that do not have water so take it away from someone else, the heck with them. I say, If you do not have the water don't grow. Grow where there is water. Why do we have to have big cities here anyway? Let the states that are drowning grow. Use their water, they have it. We can't turn back the clock but we can shut it off. Enough is enough. I know that will put lots of people out of work in the building etc industry but mostly politicians. But they too can follow the work. That is what most of us have done all our lives anyway. We lived where we found work. We have 3 larger cities. That's enough. They are drying up our states livelihood which has always been agriculture. It was set up many many yrs ago how much water should be sent out of the state. In some cases not real wisely as in so many ft of running water which should have been a % of water available or something of that sort. If in drought there is not that water to be had. Then they sue. There are only 2 states in the union that do not get water from anywhere else. Colorado and the other are islands. Colorado is not running out of water. We are wasting and over using it. Calif. wants it for swimming pools, Los Vegas for decoration etc etc.. Let them cut back on the fivilious. And people want Colorado to do away with only a tree and green lawns. Does not seem fair to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2007, 12:04 PM
 
17,396 posts, read 24,728,398 times
Reputation: 12783
Default Here's a guy who is TRYING to solve the problem...

....in today's Denver paper...The Denver Post - Water lifeline or dream?

Surf's Up! http://bestsmileys.com/water/6.gif (broken link)

s/Mike
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2007, 05:10 PM
 
8,177 posts, read 16,274,611 times
Reputation: 8265
So, not only does this latest "dream" water project envision diverting water in a scheme that would involve years of litigation over water rights that even the experts in the article call "questionable," it would have to burn natural gas (a non-renewable resource the last time I checked) to pump the water. When people are freezing in their houses because they can't afford natural gas, they can thank the promoters and land developers that just HAD to figure out how to make water flow uphill in order to move another million people into the traffic-choked, sprawl-engulfed Front Range. Can no one see what the hell is going on here?

canyontiger2 has it right--enough is enough.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2007, 07:56 PM
 
Location: Somewhere along the path to where I'd like to be.
2,181 posts, read 3,809,352 times
Reputation: 789
Jazzlover, I'll echo my previous statement - what solution do you propose?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2007, 10:11 AM
 
42 posts, read 147,232 times
Reputation: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by WCRob View Post
Jazzlover, I'll echo my previous statement - what solution do you propose?
Quit nitpicken with Jazzlover. He gave you an solution when he agreed with mine. STOP ALL NEW WATER TAPS. LET THOSE STATES THAT HAVE WATER TO SPARE, BUILD AND GROW! Stop this robbing Peter to pay Pal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2007, 10:17 AM
 
8,177 posts, read 16,274,611 times
Reputation: 8265
WCRob,

My "solution" is a relatively simple one, but it sure wouldn't be popular with the real estate developers--place a permanent moratorium on additional conversions of any water rights from agricultural to municipal use. I would also place a permanent moratorium on additonal interbasin diversions of water. Finally, I would place a similar moritorium on drilling of new wells in depleting acquifers. Now, the developers and promoters will scream that this will choke any further growth in Colorado. That's nonsense. What it would mean is that municipal use of water would have to become more efficient. People tend to forget that most water use INSIDE the house (culinary, bathing, sanitation, etc.) is non-consumptive if the home is on a municipal sewer system. Much of that water (I've seen estimates as high as 60%-70%+) returns to a stream or river. In contrast, the water use OUTSIDE the house (lawn irrigation) is nearly 100% consumptive. So, a moratorium on more municipal water would mean requiring much more limited and efficient outside irrigation. That would probably mean more xeriscaping, and more "cluster" type development and less urban sprawl--a pleasant side-benefit. Some places might even opt to place clustered development around open space--maybe even irrigated agriculture areas.

Will any of this ever be politically feasible? Probably not until the folly of our present policies becomes so painfully obvious to the average Coloradan that they no longer will tolerate it. Hopefully, that won't be too late to prevent an irreversible economic, social, and environmental disaster in the state, but the longer we wait, the more probable that outcome is.

If one stands back and looks at our present course with even a little logic, the question that begs an answer is obvious: Does it make ANY sense to live in a sprawled environment that takes huge inputs of energy and water to maintain--for no truly productive purpose--when that arrangement is obviously unsustainable over the long term, and is irreparably destroying the natural heritage of a place that virtually anyone would agree is one of the most unique and beautiful on the planet?

I can say it no more simply than this: To continue on our present course of ever-increasing sprawl, suburbanization, and totally petroleum and water-dependent growth in Colorado--or anywhere else--is ultimately SUICIDAL.

PS--I have lived in places with very limited domestic water supplies and was able to cope just fine. The waste of water that goes on in suburban Colorado is an absolute disgrace. (And is no less disgraceful in the lower basin states of Arizona, Nevada, and California.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $89,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top