[lvoc]

Originally Posted by UTES

Yep, we're doing just that on the Wasatch Front. Even though we've been in drought status too, our local reservoirs are healthy. No rationing, cutbacks or price increases for us. We're holding back water from tributaries of the Colorado - and it's legal under the compact. Once the water hits a major contributory of the Colorado or the Colorado itself, it's protected by the agreement(s). We simply divert the water at or near the source and preempt the compact.

The upshot of the above? Let's say Utah got 50% average precipitation this Winter (which we did). Normally, you'd expect Powell and Mead to get 50% of Utah's input as a result. But, it's going to be significantly less - due to our holdbacks.

Heck, if the people in Las Vegas don't worry about water - why should we? It's good to be upstream.

Bill

If the holdbacks get to be large enough it can become an issue and taken to the Congress or the USSC. Only the Lord knows what the outcome would be.

Mulroy has always held that any action the reopened the Colorado Compact was too dangerous to even consider. I would think it could happen but only if the drought becomes bad enough that the pact becomes unsustainable. I would also note that there are plausible up river claims by tribes and others that could eventually come into play and turn over the whole deal.

Under any circumstances the placement of Las Vegas is superior to that of anyone down stream.

[BBMW]

For NV's sake, it should have happened when Reid controlled the Senate. To late for that now.

Originally Posted by lvoc

If the holdbacks get to be large enough it can become an issue and taken to the Congress or the USSC. Only the Lord knows what the outcome would be.

Mulroy has always held that any action the reopened the Colorado Compact was too dangerous to even consider. I would think it could happen but only if the drought becomes bad enough that the pact becomes unsustainable. I would also note that there are plausible up river claims by tribes and others that could eventually come into play and turn over the whole deal.

Under any circumstances the placement of Las Vegas is superior to that of anyone down stream.

[lvoc]

Originally Posted by BBMW

For NV's sake, it should have happened when Reid controlled the Senate. To late for that now.

If it is ever opened it will go on for decades. The last time it took 30 years to resolve.

Reid won't last that long.

[UTES]

Originally Posted by lvoc

Under any circumstances the placement of Las Vegas is superior to that of anyone down stream.

And Utah, Wyoming and Colorado are upstream of Las Vegas. The compact does not cover the minor contributories. If we need the water, we won't let it hit the Colorado.

Frankly, with all the locals here saying they don't care - it's fitting that the three major contributing states (listed above) are starting to take what they want.

Still don't care?

Bill

[lvoc]

Originally Posted by UTES

And Utah, Wyoming and Colorado are upstream of Las Vegas. The compact does not cover the minor contributories. If we need the water, we won't let it hit the Colorado.

Frankly, with all the locals here saying they don't care - it's fitting that the three major contributing states (listed above) are starting to take what they want.

Still don't care?

Bill

No. I do not see it as an issue. Might well be in 25 years but no not now. To be noticed the upstream states would have to start intercepting millions of acre feet and that would bring the system down on them...and what the hell would they do with it?

No the battle if ever drawn would be between the upstream states and CA. NV does fine.

[ND_Irish]

A wet May brings rare good news for Lake Mead water projections - Las Vegas Sun News

[LVAllen]

Originally Posted by UTES

Heck, if the people in Las Vegas don't worry about water - why should we? It's good to be upstream.

Not sure where you get the idea that folks in Las Vegas don't care about water. We reuse as much as possible. We clean it, use it, and clean it again. We build detention basins to catch floodwaters and send it down to Lake Mead. We've been encouraging xeriscape for years. We use far less then our allocation from the Colorado.

[bayview6]

Originally Posted by LVAllen

Not sure where you get the idea that folks in Las Vegas don't care about water. We use far less then our allocation from the Colorado.

How do you figure that?

[Raiderman]

Originally Posted by bayview6

How do you figure that?

If the numbers are correct, from what I have read, we are allocated 0.3 million acre feet of water. We actually get 0.44. However, we return 0.17, netting us a total consumption of 0.27 million acre feet, which is less than our allocation.

[UTES]

Originally Posted by LVAllen

Not sure where you get the idea that folks in Las Vegas don't care about water.

I referring to comments regularly posted here. Thank goodness Nevada's government is concerned (at the state, country and city levels). Maybe that's why many of my friends here say they aren't worried - because the government is worried for them.

Overall, I think you're all doing a very good job of water conservation. The lackadaisical attitudes displayed in these forums obviously do not represent the behavior of most Las Vegas residents.

Bill