Posted: May 27, 2009 Author: Terry Marasco, Baker, Nevada
 Open Letter To The Citizens of Utah; Wait for Science on Snake Valley West Desert Water Open Letter To The Citizens of Utah; Wait for Science on Snake Valley West Desert Water
Governor Huntsman, and perhaps now Lt. Gov. Gary Herbert may sign an agreement with Nevada to extract groundwater in NV and UT that would Depreciate Utah’s Economic and Cultural Assets for the growth of Las Vegas
Dear Utah Citizens:
Utah and Nevada are negotiating within the context of the Lincoln County Lands Bill, House of Representatives, 2004 regarding the Las Vegas Water Pipeline Project. This pipeline would take water from Utah’s and Nevada’s Snake Valley/West Desert aquifer to Las Vegas thereby de-watering areas in Utah and Nevada the size of Vermont. The reach of this taking would be to the Great Salt Lake.
It is not best for Utah’s nor Nevada’s near- and long-term economic and social interests to enter into this agreement for the following reasons:
1. Lincoln County Land Act OF 2004 does NOT require Utah to sign an agreement, and Nevada could not pump water from Snake Valley if Utah did not sign
To sign an agreement before the science is in, or before the Nevada State Engineer makes a decision is not in the best interest of Utahns. The Las Vegas water authority has asked for a one year delay which brings the decision to September, 2010. This gives Utah more time to gain a thorough understanding of the impacts of the massive water mining Las Vegas intends.
By signing any agreement in advance, you would be contributing to Nevada’s case for the water and thereby enabling the project.
“(3) AGREEMENT.--Prior to any trans-basin diversion from ground-water basins located within both the State of Nevada and the State of Utah, the State of Nevada and the State of Utah shall reach an agreement regarding the division of water resources of those interstate ground-water flow system(s) from which water will be diverted and used by the project. The agreement shall allow for the maximum sustainable beneficial use of the water resources and protect existing water rights,” Section 301(e)(3) Lincoln County Land Act OF 2004,House of Representatives.
The wording in the statute places no limitations on the terms and conditions for such an agreement, and the statute allows unlimited freedom to negotiate any agreement, or no agreement at all.
Of course Utah could not transfer water from Snake Valley to other basins in Utah with a reasonable interpretation of the Lands Act. These fragile valleys should be locked, and Utah needs to find alternative solutions as well.
2. The science cannot support massive groundwater mining in this currently drought-stricken valley
The scientific consensus, based on a rich and diverse literature in groundwater hydrology developed over the past 50 years, demonstrates that thousands of acre feet of water cannot be removed without substantially lowering the groundwater table. You recently received a letter (penned by me and a collaborating scientist, Professor Emeritus Dr. James Deacon, UNLV) from 147 scientists, researchers, and physicians in 25 states and 3 countries stating this concern. Forty seven of the 147 signees are from Utah.
As the groundwater table drops, costs of pumping for present (rural) users will increase -- resulting in diminishing returns on investment. At the same time, the hydraulic head will be reduced, reducing natural discharge from the groundwater system to the meadows, wetlands, ponds, and springs the system supports. Native plants dependent on roots reaching the groundwater table (phreatophytes) will eventually be unable to grow long enough roots, and will die to be replaced by bare ground, or other more seasonal plants. The inevitable consequence is that each acre-foot pumped to Las Vegas from the groundwater system is an acre-foot of groundwater that will no longer be available to support the livelihood of rural Nevadans and Utahans, the meadows, wetlands, and springs of the area, or the biodiversity dependent on those features.
When John McPhee wrote about this project in the New Yorker (4/26/93) he stated: “Mountain sheep, antelope, deer, coyotes, eagles, badgers, bobcats will forever disappear as permanent springs go permanently dry.”, and “Las Vegas blandly claims that the resource is renewable, that Las Vegas will not be mining Nevada's Pleistocene water. All they have applied for is—annually—the equivalent of a one-acre pond eight hundred and sixty thousand feet deep.” That’s 165 miles deep…
Simply stated, you cannot have the same body of water in two places at the same time. It is either in rural Utah and Nevada or in Las Vegas swimming pools and lawns.
If there is thinking that an agreement will protect Utahns, the history of such agreements tells us otherwise. The Owens Valley/Mono Lake experiences are replete with broken signed agreements by the Los Angeles water authority which had significant financial resources to pay fines. Inyo County, California (Millard County, Utah being the counterpart) had to raise millions to fight the LA water authority. One case saw LA pumping for 21 years while a case was in court, and with LA willing and able to pay fines of $5,000/day. Inyo County spent millions in court battles; you will leave Millard, Juab, Tooele and possibly other counties and all Utahns with this financial burden.
3. Utah cannot rely upon the Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) to protect the environment and the human uses derived from it including ranching, farming, hunting, fishing, recreation, and scenic values.
Pat Mulroy, the SNWA General Manager at the Sept 11 Spring Valley, NV hearings which I attended: “We have a new ethic to protect environmental resources” and “We have an environmental record beyond reproach”. And Mulroy finds comparisons to Owens Valley ridiculous: “Owens Valley was a time and place when this country had no environmental ethic and no environmental laws. Those days are gone,” she insists.
Just before a newspaper ad campaign in Nevada suggesting the Water Authority is concerned about environmental issues associated with the pipeline project, this from the Nevada State Engineer’s Office: “State Engineer Tracy Taylor, in a 19-page decision, largely rejected an effort by lawyers for the Southern Nevada Water Authority to limit consideration of environmental issues in the hearings. Taylor also rejected a Water Authority motion to exclude consideration of the effects on recreation and "scenic values" the ground water pumping and exportation could have.”
And Las Vegas may not stop only at this point along Utah’s border. The original pipeline plans propose wells at two more points further north along the Utah border. Additionally, the pipeline proposed to take 225,000 acre feet from the Green River in Wyoming will decrease flows to the lower Green in Utah. Utah is surrounded by such schemes and needs to just say no to these. If you say yes to one you’ll unlikely be able to say no to the others. This is a misguided precedent to set for Utah.
4. Additional impacts from a desiccated West Desert will add significantly to Utah’s already degraded air quality on the Wasatch Front
Others such as Mayor Carroon and commission chairmen from Juab, Millard, Utah and Tooele counties have expressed this concern directly to you. This concern is magnified by the Owens Valley, California experience in the Great Basin with similar soils, vegetation, and aridity. And the same concern: groundwater mining that produced the worst air quality in the US according to the EPA in the Owens Valley.
Financially, this could be a huge burden to Utah’s citizens; LA Water and Power had to pay $551,000,000 to mitigate air quality and $61,000,000 to restore the Owens River.
On Thursday March 12, 2009, the Salt Lake Tribune reported the finding of “a groundbreaking ozone study, published…in the New England Journal of Medicine, and co-authored by C. Arden Pope of Brigham Young University”: Study ties smog to fatal heart and lung diseases.” The Wasatch front already suffers from degraded air quality in “non-attainment” areas. And more recently the Wasatch Front is noted as one of the more degraded areas for air quality in the nation.
5. Various sectors of Utah’s economy will be depreciated significantly
Scientific studies of the impact of dust storms on snowpack are of concern as it affects the ski tourist economy. “Future drying in desert regions … and projected expansion and intensification of use of arid and semi-arid lands could cause regional dust emission to increase in frequency and magnitude. Therefore, earlier snowmelt and its effects on mountain water resources and glacial extent is a likely scenario in many of the world’s mountain ranges under enhanced dust deposition.” From Impact of disturbed desert soils on duration of mountain snow cover, Thomas H. Painter, et al, GEOPYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 34, 2007.
Agriculture is an important segment of Utah’s economy, and provides cultural variety to our lifestyles. Utah’s own Utah Geological Survey (Investigation # 254) by Kirby and Hurlow, March, 2005, has found, among other impacts: “Discharge of agriculturally and ecologically important springs will decrease.”, and: “The proposed pumping may change or reverse ground-water flow patterns for much of the east-central Great Basin in Utah and Nevada.” This dewatering of a vast area of Utah is not in the best interests of its citizens, and certainly not to its agricultural economy. The aquifer that may be tapped provides thousands of acre feet of water to the Great Salt Lake (BARCASS, Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5261, Report to Congress, Welch, et al. The vast area that would be dewatered will affect agriculture beyond ranches; grazing areas afar from ranches would dry up.
This agreement, in no small way, would continue the assault on agriculture in this country. Home-based agriculture is a strategic resource that maintains a consistent and safe food supply, and a valued life style for Utah and the US.
And it’s about rural economies in general. Hunting and fishing will be affected, and the businesses that rely on sports folk will be depreciated. For example, one of the best mule deer hunting sections borders an area where Las Vegas will sink its wells. After surface vegetation dies off the deer and elk leave. Then the local economy dries up.
According to Utah documents, in 2006, wildlife-related recreation delivered a total economic effect of $2.3 Billion to Utah.
6. There are more responsible alternatives for gaining water resources in Nevada and Utah than dewatering vast areas affecting both state’s economic and cultural assets
The Southern Nevada Water Authority asserts that they have a very effective water conservation program which will eventually reduce the present high per capita water use to levels comparable with other major Southwestern US cities. Recent reports by the Pacific Institute, Western Resource Associates, and Rocky Mountain Institute document numerous ways in which conservation efforts could be substantially improved. New technologies being adopted by Orange County, California and other water short areas around the world have not been proposed or, to our knowledge seriously evaluated by SNWA. A SNWA projection that overall per capita daily water use will decline from 264 gallons in 2006 to 245 gallons in 2035 suggests that the agency is not seriously committed to reducing overall per capita consumption. The 264 gallons per day per capita water demand for single-family residential use in Las Vegas Valley is unimpressive compared to the 110-120 gallon per day level achieved by many other southwest desert American cities.
It is even more unimpressive by comparison to the 38 gallon per day use recently achieved in Brisbane, Australia. The Brisbane strategy is one Utah and Nevada could adopt. Leadership there stated the problem to users, developed a clear course for a solution, and set voluntary, YES VOLUNTARY, conservation measures which the users exceeded.
Southern Nevada cities (Henderson) that would use Utah water are still building artificial lakes. There is no excuse for this and Utah should not allow any water to support such projects.
These data strongly suggest that use of currently available water conservation technologies and methodologies in all Southern Nevada cities could push the current justification/need for the Southern Nevada Water Project into the distant future. If the population size stabilizes, it is entirely conceivable that the need would never develop.
I would further state that Utah itself needs to go the stretch on water conservation. Utah averages about 220 gallons per person (and more in some southern Utah cities) not far behind Nevada but well behind other western cities. The conditions we ask of Nevada need to be expected of Utah. Water use in Utah is exceptionally high for a water-scarce state.
7. Utah could be eyeing water in Snake Valley for its own use by removing groundwater from Snake Valley to be used outside of the basin
For the same reasons stated herein, dewatering Utah’s natural assets and rural economies for the growth of cities is misguided public policy. Both states need to lock vulnerable, dry basins.
8. The FEAR OF HARRY REID Factor - Utah is lost if it operates out of fear
There are those in Utah who have publicly stated a fear that Harry Reid, who favors the pipeline and with his family has large political and financial assets in Las Vegas, would threaten Utah in a number of ways. As I have personally stated to Utah legislators, Utah is lost if it operates out of fear.
9. West Desert as Sacrificial Lamb? – Rural Utah and Nevada are not Wastelands
Since Utah’s west desert and other remote rural areas of Utah and Nevada are not major economic engines, some may believe they can be sacrificed to grow urban areas, or serve as the nation’s dumps. This dump mentality suggests “wastelands” are places we can dump toxic wastes (nuclear), the idea that nuclear waste from foreign countries could be dumped in rural Utah, conceive of Divine Strake, build coal-fired power plants that poison the air and pollute soils and water without respect to the people, and plants and animals that live there. The agreement will enable the devastation of these places.
The West has a long history of those looking for the weakest links -- Native Americans, sheep herders, the natural environment, Spanish-speaking settlers, rural folks – taking advantage of low voting/no voting numbers, the poor and people of color get the dirtiest air, taking land or water in the name of “beneficial use” and “economic development”. A signature on an agreement will enable this continued history.
In fact these remote areas are valuable yet underdeveloped recreational, scenic, and cultural assets that both states need to cultivate to generate tourism for those seeking pristine environments where they can escape the raucousness of urban noise and pollution.
The path for Utah perhaps is to conduct a comprehensive REVIEW OF WATER RESOURCE CURRENT INVENTORY, USES, AND NEAR- AND LONG-TERM NEEDS by convening a forum representing all stakeholders with additional hydrology, legal, and technical expertise to develop a plan, then present to Utah’s citizens that plan which: 1) emphasizes successful technology and methodology such as voluntary conservation; 2) benefits all stakeholders including agriculture; and, 3) minimizes the need for large-scale infrastructure such as dams and pipelines.
We may find, as has Brisbane, Australia, and cities the world over have found that the water needed to grow is under our feet.
Respectfully,
Terry Marasco, Baker, Nevada
For questions and/or documentation of statements noted in this letter email: tmarasconrm@natural-resource-mgt.com
www.natural-resource-mgt.com
Paid for by donations from hundreds of Utahns, Nevadans and citizens from across the US and Europe
|  |
|
