Ban Law Office PC - Utah Veterans Disability, Utah Environmental Law » Vegas Water Grab

SLC Leads SW in Water Consumption

Joel — Fri, 16 Apr 2010 04:31:44 +0000

Revealing information on the need of water conservation in certain locales out west. Lends credence to Vegas Water Czar Pat Mulroy’s criticism of SLC and its “pastoral” environment. SLC ought to wise up to the reality that its basically a desert here even though it may not be as dry as some of the other cities on the list.

A COMPARATIVE LOOK AT PER CAPITA WATER CONSUMPTION IN UTAH AND OTHER WESTERN CITIES
Figures below are expressed in gallons per capita per day (gpd):

1)Las Vegas (Southern Nevada Water Authority) 165 gpd
2)Los Angeles (Metropolitan Water of Southern California) 125 gpd
3)Tucson 114 gpd
4)Albuquerque 110 gpd
5)Salt Lake City 240 gpd
6)St. George (Washington County Water Conservancy District) 254 gpd
7)Denver 168 gpd
8)Phoenix 218 gpd

Sources:
1)“Hidden Oasis”, Pacific Institute, 2007
2)Ibid.
3)Ibid.
4)Ibid.
5)Salt Lake City Public Utilities, 2008.
6)WCWCD, 2007 for water consumption rates in 2005
7)Denver Water, 2009
8)City of Phoenix Water Services Dept., 2005
Salt Lake City also reports that its customers’ consumption rate was 320 gpd in 1998, and WCWD states that its customer usage was 387 gpd in 1996, indicating some progress in conservation efforts. The Utah Division of Water Resources reported statewide consumption at 293 gpd in its most recent report.
For another analysis, see: http://wwa.colorado.edu/front_range/docs/IMW_WaterUseandRates.pdf
Information compiled by Steve Erickson, Utah Coordinator, Great Basin Water Network, 4/14/2010

Take Action Water Grab

Joel — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:33:39 +0000

As explained below Gov. Herbert has been at the cusp of signing the deeply flawed agreement with Nevada but for whichever reason has been hesitant. He needs to be convinced through letters that this agreement should never be signed. Below are talking points from Brian Moench MD, from UPHE, and Terry Marasco. Also comments from this office were formally submitted below during the public comment period they are still relevant in terms of comments of protest to the governor. Herbert’s e-mail is: gherbert@utah.gov

The DAQ stonewalled a later and more convenient public hearing. So far the only public hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, Jan. 12, 2010. At the Magna Chamber of Commerce, 9145 W 2700 South, Magna, Ut. 7:00 pm.

Water Grab Opinion Piece

Poised to hold the coat of the Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) while they pushed Utah off a cliff, Gov. Herbert has now taken one step back from the brink. To suggest that Utah continue tinkering with the fine print of the Snake Valley Water Agreement is like arguing over what tunes should the band play while the Titanic sinks. We offer ten reality checks.

1. The purpose of any agreement is to drain enormous volumes of water from Snake Valley to support real estate speculators and casino operators in Sin City. Over 70 years the water Utah would surrender to Nevada would fill a skyscraper 1 acre square, 471 miles high.

2. “Possession is 90% of the law.” Once Nevada has spent billions to make hundreds of thousands of people dependent on that water, no judge or court will turn off the tap regardless of the fine print in the Agreement, regardless of whether Snake Valley has become a ghost town or how much dust covers Temple Square. The saga of the notorious William Mulholland stealing Owens Valley water for Los Angeles is exactly what Utah can expect to be repeated.

3. Why does Herbert want an agreement and why have our entire Congressional delegation deserted us? Investigative journalists from the Las Vegas Sun, Los Angeles Times and Bloomberg News reveal that Sen. Harry Reid, financial benefactor of the project, has mixed a stew of blackmail, quid pro quo and, old fashioned influence peddling, by threatening to prevent the equally ill-advised Lake Powell pipeline if Utah doesn’t surrender the water in Snake Valley. Why settle for just one disaster when you can have two?

4. The Utah team has promoted the Agreement stating it “prohibits groundwater mining.” Yet Snake Valley ranchers, expert geologists, former SNWA hydrologists and biologists know there is no excess renewable water in the West Desert. This project is the very definition of groundwater mining.

5. The Agreement’s environmental safeguards are anything but. For an area the size of Vermont, the aquifers now provide the only lifeline for plants like the greasewood, the primary reason why the West Desert is not another Sahara Desert. Air quality monitoring will reveal nothing about the impending death of the greasewood plants, until it is irreversible. The routine dust storms in Owens Valley, Australia, Uzbekistan and the Middle East are evidence that in a desert, compensatory vegetation cannot be counted on to fill the void.

6. There are urban and rural economic threats. Ask any urban Utahn whether air pollution already impairs our quality of life. Quality of life issues become economic issues affecting real estate values, hurting existing businesses and suppressing new ones. Rural agricultural, tourism, and hunting and fishing economies will be depreciated and possibly destroyed. Additionally, development of alternative energy projects such as solar thermal will be prohibited.

7. Dust storms threaten not just our quality of life but life itself. The science is unequivocal. The particles inhaled cause the same kind of disease as those from tail pipes, smoke stacks and cigarettes. Within minutes blood pressure rises, vascular inflammation and clot formation begins, followed by increased numbers of heart attacks, strokes and deep vein thrombosis. Even if dust storms are short lived, their impact can last long after they are gone. Community mortality rates increase from even short term elevations in particle pollution and stay elevated for up to 30 days after the air has cleared.

New dust storms will harm all of us a little bit, thousands of us much more, and will certainly cause premature deaths. The additional threat that this dust is contaminated with mercury, radioactivity, fungi, and asbestos-like minerals continues to be ignored.

8. Utah’s negotiating team misrepresented Utah’s legal options. Our deputy attorney general stated publicly that if Utah brought a dispute to the Supreme Court we would have to prove current damages, not potential future damages. Not true, according to at least two U.S. Supreme Court cases and our legal counsel. Enough science already exists, and more is being done, that would solidify Utah’s case. The best chance to prevent this disaster is to stop it before it starts.

9. The only winners in any agreement are a handful of real estate speculators in Nevada and Southern Utah. Everyone else loses. Utah gets no money for the water surrendered. When Snake Valley runs dry even Nevada home owners will be at risk as SNWA searches for more rural communities to exploit.

10. Utahns must stop this. Call and write the governor to tell Harry Reid and the SNWA that Utah intends to win the “War on Water Terrorists.”

Brian Moench
President, Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment

Terry Marasco
Snake Valley business owner

Water Grab Update

Joel — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 23:16:31 +0000

Although things looked real bad last fall when Governor Herbert and DNR Director Styler gave the public the impression that the agreement would be signed very quickly after public comment this didn’t end up happening. Then at the end of 2009 it looked like the Governor would sign it and now there is some indication that there could be another delay, albeit a short one. One gets the impression that the Governor wants to sign it but is attempting to appease some County officials. The SL Tribune is reporting that based on letters from Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon and the Millard County County Commission that there could be a short delay. The most interesting part of the report is that Las Vegas officials don’t even believe that Snake Valley water would be pumped until 2050. Concerns coming from the Counties include the same general concerns about Wasatch Front Air Quality and some proof that there wouldn’t be irreversible aquifer mining as a result of the diversion.

Currently the BLM is finalizing its draft EIS on the project and reportedly will include estimations about what the aquifer would look like 200 years after the diversion occurs. The models used to predict such estimations of drawdown don’t seem to have much promise in terms of accuracy. The sentiment from scientists is quite direct: “Any forecast 200 years into the future is bulls—,” said Tim Barnett, a physicist and researcher at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California, San Diego. “You just can’t do that.” The bottom line is that there is simply no point in being in such a hurry to sign an agreement that is not based on any facts, and that even once the EIS is released it still won’t be much more clear how the aquifer will react to the proposed project. There certainly shouldn’t be a hurry in lieu of the fact that there wouldn’t be any diversion for another 40 years.

Nevada District Court Ruling Could Put Kibosh on Water Grab

Joel — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 02:40:31 +0000

A judge in Nevada’s seventh Judicial District overturned Nevada State Water Engineer Tracy Taylor’s decision approving large water diversions from Cave, Delmar, and Dry Lake Valleys. These diversions to Las Vegas would have been parlayed with Spring and Snake Valley, which of course is located mostly in Utah, but is fed primarily by Nevada snowmelt. “The State Engineer’s decision was arbitrary, oppressive and a manifest abuse of discretion,” says the ruling, however the ruling will surely be appealed to the Nevada Supreme Court. The reason this ruling is so critical is because without this water the plan to divert snake and spring valley would become economically infeasible since predicted costs are well in the many billions of dollars. The Nevada Judge picked up on the fact that the science supporting the diversions at the levels proposed is suspect. This is certainly a positive development in the struggle to fight this ill conceived proposal, but since an appeal is likely we’ll have to stay tuned to see what ultimately happens.

Public Records Request Reveals Utah Capitulation on Water Grab

Joel — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 01:43:07 +0000

The Great Basin Water Network in a recent public records request reveals that Utah’s position on the Vegas water grab changed when Nevada threatened to derail attempts to construct a Lake Powell pipeline to Washington County, Utah. Although it seems Utah initially insisted that the Snake Valley aquifer be split 50-50 this position changed upon the threat from Nevada. Utah Department of Natural Resources Director, Mike Styler, clearly has been inconsistent in how he presents the agreement to the public vs. how he felt about the split in private. It would seem Nevada was successful in arm twisting to the extent that Styler would attempt to persuade Utahns that it was a good deal for them. At this point, Styler seems to have done a 180 and now concedes that its a bad deal for Utah, and that in fact he was happy to see all the comments from Utahns that criticized the deal.

A 2006 memo states that Nevada threatened to take the matter to Congress to change the 2004 law requiring an agreement between the two states since they were dissatisfied with the pace of negotiations. Letters from 2007 indicate that Utah was hesitant to rely on a 50-50 agreement based on the USGS estimate for available aquifer water, which the federal agency said was only 67 percent reliable, and included water used by the plants that now keep Snake Valley soil from blowing straight to the Wasatch Front. At this point it doesn’t seem the state could sell this agreement to Utahns with a straight face. If the agreement were signed by Herbert it would prove that this agreement is about nothing but money and quid pro quo.

Utah Medical Association Opposes Pipeline

Joel — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 20:20:57 +0000

The largest association of doctors in the state, the UMA, has formally expressed its opposition to the Vegas water grab and associated diversion of water from the Snake Valley. The UMA has expressed opposition since the pumping of water at the proposed levels would prevent west desert vegetation from growing and would thereby destabilize soils causing dust storms across the Wasatch Front and exposing over a million Utahns to carcinogens, radioactive components, and fungi that causes Valley fever. The SL Tribune story on the comments state “Should this agreement move forward in its current form, the residents, farmers and ranchers in West Desert farming communities and on the Goshute Reservation would see their health and livelihoods put at risk,” says the letter, signed by Michelle McOmber, the UMA’s executive vice president and CEO. “Indeed, adverse health and quality of life impacts may be spread throughout the state.” Dust storms could carry toxic substances such as mercury, an asbestos-like chemical called erionite, radioactive particles that remain in the soil from the 900 nuclear tests conducted in Nevada, and fungus spores that cause valley fever. The comments from the UMA criticize the agreement since none of these threats are addressed in the agreement though they constitute a substantial toxic threat to Utahns. The UMA is not a fringe or extremist organization and so this letter could tip the balance, but on the other hand there is no way of knowing if such an authoritative voice will have any positive effect.

My Snake Valley Comments

Joel — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 04:04:11 +0000

Here they are. Feel free to use them as you will. Due September 30th please express your opposition to the Agreement……its a real disaster especially if you live in Utah. Send to snakevalley@utah.gov.

Excellent Comments on Water Grab

Joel — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 04:09:43 +0000

Dr. Brian Moench, head of UPHE has written amazing comments on the water grab from a human health perspective. Check them out and more importantly integrate them into your own comments to snakevalley@utah.gov and others.

CITIZENS’ HEARING ON THE SNAKE VALLEY WATER DEAL

Joel — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 01:17:53 +0000

Utah proposes to sign an agreement to permit the Southern Nevada Water Authority to pump
36,000 acre feet of water per year from Utah’s Snake Valley to Las Vegas. This deal could
devastate area ranching, wildlife and recreation, and turn this West Desert valley into a dust
bowl affecting the air quality and snowpack of the Wasatch Front.

The State will accept written comments through September 30, but will not hold any hearings
to gather oral comments on this draft agreement, so we invite the public to join the Utah
Association of Counties and the Great Basin Water Network for a Citizens’ Hearing on the
future of the Snake Valley on:

Wednesday, September 9th from 6:30 to 9:30 P.M.
At the Salt Lake County Government Complex
2100 South State Street, Room #N-2003.

Please Speak Out! Help us put the brakes on this flawed and rushed deal!
It’s our water and your air!

Water Deal Uniformly Panned

Joel — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 17:15:42 +0000

Although Utah State DNR head continues to laud what he says is a fair water deal between Utah and Nevada most others are uniformly rejecting the agreement. Foremost among the opponents of the deal are the Utah Association of Counties not usually known to be on the forefront of environmental causes. The main complaint is that the idea that there is a 50-50 split in water is an illusion. The agreement pertains to approximately 132,000 acre feet of water that is proposed to be split evenly. Remember that an acre foot of water is approximately 326,000 gallons of water or enough water to fill an acre of land with a foot of water. In short, this is a tremendous quantity of water amounting to billions of gallons of water. Much of this water is already allocated to a federal wildlife reserve at Fish Springs, which although proximate to the Snake Valley is not in the Valley itself. This means that the allocation is roughly in favor of Nevada at 59-41 even though the majority of the water lies in Utah. Others have requested documents regarding the negotiations themselves which of course the public was not involved with. It will be interesting to see what exceptions under Public Records Laws they will use to deny the public access to these records.

The main problem here is that they attempt to bring in the public after the agreement has already been drafted meaning that although its technically a draft the substance of the agreement is already set in stone. Public uproar could shift some minor details of the agreement, but its unlikely to change the quantity of water allocated between the two states. Nevertheless, if you can attend the public meetings please do:

Aug. 17 » 1 p.m., Baker, Nev., Baker School auditorium

Aug. 17» 7 p.m., Delta, Utah, Millard County fair building, 81 Manzanita Ave.

Aug. 18 »10 a.m., Salt Lake City, Department of Environmental Quality Building 2, 168 N. 1950 West

Aug. 20 » 9 a.m., Las Vegas, Southern Nevada Water Authority Board meeting, Molasky Corporate Center Suite 700, 100 City Parkway.

To see the proposal: www.waterrights.utah.gov