[Vision2020] Re: more on upper (Wanapum) aquifer of yore

[Leo Ames]

Dianne and Dale et al,

A note from history - Regarding the upper (Wanapum) aquifer serving Moscow:
If that is the same upper aquifer from which Moscow and the UI drew water 50
years ago, we may not wish to go back to depending only or primarily on it.
Some of us who came to the university in those years (and before) remember
it being the worst water SEEN. It turned buildings golden from the ground to
about 3-5 feet where sprinklers reached; bathing in a bathtub was like a
bath in weak orange juice; kids who spent their first summers in Moscow's
public swimming pool didn't realize until older that it wasn't natural not
to be able to see the bottom of the SHALLOW end of the pool. All the white
clothing took on a warm, golden glow.
   The "word out there" was the water was loaded with iron, perhaps other
things. Hydrologists can explain better the reasons why we don't use the
upper (Wanapum) aquifer more today.

               Leo Ames, Moscow
 
> 1. RE: Palouse Water (Dale Courtney)
> From: "Dale Courtney" <dale@courtneys.us>
> To: <vision2020@moscow.com>
> Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Palouse Water
> Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2003 08:43:01 -0700
> 
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> 
> ------=_NextPart_000_0219_01C34E9A.EE1EC570
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="US-ASCII"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> 
> Dianne,
> 
> Thanks again for the link to the report.
> 
> For those who would like to find the 2000 annual report directly without
> reading thru the entire site, it's at
> http://www.webs.uidaho.edu/pbac/pubs/00report.pdf.
> 
> The page of interest is page 15. FWIW, the upper (Wanapum) aquifer (as per
> measurements from Well #2) is at the exact same level as it was in 1977. It
> has had some significant increases and decreases, but overall the level is
> what it was at 26 years ago. It would be interesting to see what the data
> for 2000-2003 would show for Well #2.
> 
>> From page 14 of the same report, there can be little doubt that the Grande
> Ronde aquifer has been falling 1-1.5 feet per year. No one disputes that.
> 
> My question remains, however -- if the overall amount of water available to
> us is relatively constant, then the draconian measures that the MCA is
> calling for are unnecessary.
> Best,
> Dale
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vision2020-admin@moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-admin@moscow.com] On
> Behalf Of French
> Sent: Saturday, 19 July, 2003 18:49
> To: vision2020@moscow.com
> Cc: dale@courtneys.us; london@moscow.com
> Subject: [Vision2020] Palouse Water