Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
Phoenix and Las Vegas definitely are conserving more water than they use to, even with more people. I'm optimistic they'll find a solution to the future water problem. There are plenty of places in the country that have more water than they want. They only have to find a way to get it to Lake Mead.
Sure, just snap your fingers, and problem solved. LOL Here's, but one article indicating the future problem...from an AZ source, no less. Take a look around the Internet, there are numerous more articles outlining this, as well. People keep hiding their heads in the sand. BTW, no water will be coming from the Great Lakes, so that's not an option.
Why do you feel the need to say it again? Don't act like you're the water conservation messenger. I'm 100% positive that the states don't need a lecture from you when it comes to water conservation and are already fully aware of any water issues in the West. Here, why don't you learn something:
I watched it, and it's interesting. There's such conflicting information. I don't want this for Phoenix, as I visit the city, and even considered retiring there. I just think Phoenix can't continue to grow like it has, without knowing how they're going to fix the problem. We decided against moving there, but we're visiting again in November.
People understimate the North-South expanse of Nevada. The Northern border of Nevada is at about the latitude of Rhode Island. It gets cold out there. The winters arent mild by any means, so that removes one of the main factors in Sun Belt development from the get-go.
Sure, just snap your fingers, and problem solved. LOL Here's, but one article indicating the future problem...from an AZ source, no less. Take a look around the Internet, there are numerous more articles outlining this, as well. People keep hiding their heads in the sand. BTW, no water will be coming from the Great Lakes, so that's not an option.
Only people who are willingly ignorant of this issue say this argument every time the Southwest and and more arid parts of the West is brought up and never bring any nuance or any true research about the water issues. I know it's easier said than done, but its actually a very simple solution to the water crisis out here. The reason that it doesn't get passed? It would be considered "socialist" and "excessive government intervention in the 'free' market" that would attack California's largest industry, one of Arizona's largest industries.
The Midwest is extremely dependent on the warm parts of this country, especially in the more arid parts even, for food production. Your weather is not good for most of the food you eat and on top of that you have much shorter growing seasons. You say you won't give any water to us but then you won't get any food as California goes through excessive droughts in the future. But extreme regulations of agriculture out here is the only way to fix the issue, as well as a couple other water intensive industries (mining). It's not the people causing the problem it's a couple of industries being prioritized over the well-being of residents and environment, in California in particular. And they are being protected by the entire nation as California grows most of the nation's food. Also given that we overproduce food, regulating the water usage of agriculture and shrinking the industry would not hurt us really.
Give up guacamole, lettuce (most of the country's lettuce is grown in Arizona and California), wine, strawberries, etc. almost entirely, or triple to quadruple your food costs. Ball is in your court. You depend on us more than you think. If you can get California's water usage under control, then you can get the rest of us along with it. But California is the elephant in the room (not Arizona or Nevada contrary to popular belief) since they have a much larger agriculture industry, and thus should be the primary target for water conservation.
Because so much of Nevada is extreme desert or lifeless badlands........
Arizona by comparison is plush, full of life everywhere.
You can thank summer monsoons, and winter storms that replenish the soils, desert flora, forests and wildlife throughout the state.
Nevada's vegetation doesn't come close to Arizona's plains & mountains, save for the lands near the Nevada/California state line.
Nevada's summer and winter climate's both suck.
Contrary to intuition, Arizona has a lot of relatively enjoyable weather much of the year, throughout the state.
Phoenix, once a western city, with a unique western flavor has changed in a dramatic way, demographically after a half century of migration from Mexico and Central America.
The same can be said of Nevada, but the population and built environment of Nevada is much lower.
Clark County, home to Las Vegas, is discussing the opening/freeing up of federal lands for additional development, should the LV Valley need additional room to grow. However there is still a lot of land to build upon in LV, particularly in the north and SW areas. https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/p...e-from-groups/
Also worth noting, Las Vegas is more racially diverse than Phoenix metro is. A fact I appreciate. There are over 50,000 Chinese Americans in LV. And a lot of Filipinos and Hawaiians call LV home as well. Probably doesn't directly relate to why AZ has a larger population but I find it interesting.
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.