Came across this extremely disturbing article by Utah State Senator Margaret Dayton:
http://www.heraldextra.com/news/communi ... 90a74.html
Pertinent quotes -
"The document's summary makes a subtle reference to restoration of forest health, but it makes specific reference to compliance with Executive Order 13514, signed by President Obama in 2009. That order was to reduce potable (drinking water) intensity (use) by 26 percent and industrial, landscaping and agricultural water intensity by 20 percent, by the year 2020."
"In effect, this new directive will give the U.S. Forest Service full authority to direct, control and monitor all of the waters that originate, pass through, "or are adjacent to" any land that is federally controlled. In Utah, more than 60 percent of the land is owned or controlled by the federal government, so adding the "adjacent to" qualifier could encompass nearly the entire state."
My thoughts -
This, I fear, could lead to a shooting war in the West. Cliven Bundy and his BLM showdown has nothing on this.
If you try to tell ranchers and farmers they have to cut their agricultural water use by 20%, you will bring back the very real prospect of shooting water wars - only this time it will not be neighbor vs neighbor, but ranchers vs feds. The states will have to decide where they stand. The agricultural impact upon Utah's economy in 2011 is 2.1% or 3.1% depending upon whether you include supplies grown on a farm for in-house use (hay, etc) or not. http://www.ag.utah.gov/documents/EconomicContributionOfAgriculture2011.pdf
Residential use is required to be reduced 26%. Now, as residential citizens in the city, I think we all agree we can do more to preserve water, and reduce use. First of all, I think water is too cheap. The price should be at least tripled. The sticker shock would force citizens to rethink usage. We are the 2nd driest state in the nation, yet we have the 2nd highest usage per capita.
Some immediate steps that could be taken would be to legislate water into home building. No municipality, board or county can issue new home building permits until the developer secures permanent water rights for each home for a period of not less than 70 years.
New homes must be plumbed to recapture grey water for first, toilet use, and then landscape or garden (agricultural) use.
Capture of rainwater from roofs should be legalized and encouraged.
Should water should be so expensive that one seriously reconsiders whether to have a lawn or not? Removing lawns will help tremendously in the required cut of 20% to industrial, landscaping and agricultural uses. should water should be so expensive people automatically turn the water off when they aren't using it - like brushing their teeth? That's much on par with electricity. Many of us were conditioned from childhood to 'Turn the light off when you leave a room!' Should water should be so expensive it is not dumped down the sink, but poured off into another container for reuse such as on houseplants, or the garden?
Why shouldn't this be the norm? It was a century ago.
And let us not forget we have a federal facility using , per media reports, up to 1.7 million gallons of water per day. Only a third of that can be recycled according to the following article. http://www.ksl.com/?sid=25978926&nid=148
I still say whomever cuts off water supply to that facility is a patriot and a hero.
Last question:
With the federal government in control of water in Utah, who do you think wins when push comes to shove and both Salt Lake City citizens and the NSA center both need that 1.7 million gallons?
http://www.heraldextra.com/news/communi ... 90a74.html
Pertinent quotes -
"The document's summary makes a subtle reference to restoration of forest health, but it makes specific reference to compliance with Executive Order 13514, signed by President Obama in 2009. That order was to reduce potable (drinking water) intensity (use) by 26 percent and industrial, landscaping and agricultural water intensity by 20 percent, by the year 2020."
"In effect, this new directive will give the U.S. Forest Service full authority to direct, control and monitor all of the waters that originate, pass through, "or are adjacent to" any land that is federally controlled. In Utah, more than 60 percent of the land is owned or controlled by the federal government, so adding the "adjacent to" qualifier could encompass nearly the entire state."
My thoughts -
This, I fear, could lead to a shooting war in the West. Cliven Bundy and his BLM showdown has nothing on this.
If you try to tell ranchers and farmers they have to cut their agricultural water use by 20%, you will bring back the very real prospect of shooting water wars - only this time it will not be neighbor vs neighbor, but ranchers vs feds. The states will have to decide where they stand. The agricultural impact upon Utah's economy in 2011 is 2.1% or 3.1% depending upon whether you include supplies grown on a farm for in-house use (hay, etc) or not. http://www.ag.utah.gov/documents/EconomicContributionOfAgriculture2011.pdf
Residential use is required to be reduced 26%. Now, as residential citizens in the city, I think we all agree we can do more to preserve water, and reduce use. First of all, I think water is too cheap. The price should be at least tripled. The sticker shock would force citizens to rethink usage. We are the 2nd driest state in the nation, yet we have the 2nd highest usage per capita.
Some immediate steps that could be taken would be to legislate water into home building. No municipality, board or county can issue new home building permits until the developer secures permanent water rights for each home for a period of not less than 70 years.
New homes must be plumbed to recapture grey water for first, toilet use, and then landscape or garden (agricultural) use.
Capture of rainwater from roofs should be legalized and encouraged.
Should water should be so expensive that one seriously reconsiders whether to have a lawn or not? Removing lawns will help tremendously in the required cut of 20% to industrial, landscaping and agricultural uses. should water should be so expensive people automatically turn the water off when they aren't using it - like brushing their teeth? That's much on par with electricity. Many of us were conditioned from childhood to 'Turn the light off when you leave a room!' Should water should be so expensive it is not dumped down the sink, but poured off into another container for reuse such as on houseplants, or the garden?
Why shouldn't this be the norm? It was a century ago.
And let us not forget we have a federal facility using , per media reports, up to 1.7 million gallons of water per day. Only a third of that can be recycled according to the following article. http://www.ksl.com/?sid=25978926&nid=148
I still say whomever cuts off water supply to that facility is a patriot and a hero.
Last question:
With the federal government in control of water in Utah, who do you think wins when push comes to shove and both Salt Lake City citizens and the NSA center both need that 1.7 million gallons?