[Vision2020] Moscow and Water
Shawn Clabough
shawnc@outtrack.com
Fri, 27 Jun 2003 10:13:52 -0700
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C33CCF.7B847140
Content-Type: text/plain
Donovan,
This page gives an example and cross-section of aquifers.
http://www.ispe.arizona.edu/pubs/cap/aquifer.html
<http://www.ispe.arizona.edu/pubs/cap/aquifer.html>
You'll notice that there are multiple aquifers at different depths. The
aquifer that most people are referring to lately is the deep aquifer that
surface water cannot get back down to. It is my understanding that Moscow
does have shallower aquifers, but they are not as large as the deep aquifer
(i.e. Grand Ronde).
Shawn
-----Original Message-----
From: Donovan Arnold [mailto:donovanarnold@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 6:37 PM
To: london@moscow.com; griedner@ci.moscow.id.us
Cc: vision2020@moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Moscow and Water
Bill or anyone who can answer,
This may seem like a really stupid question, and probably is, but I must ask
it anyway to anyone that may know. Where is all the water going? I
understand people drink it, water plants, flush toilets, but why doesn't it
all end back up where it came from, the ground? If I water the lawn, doesn't
the water go back down into the ground or evaporate and go back into the
air, condense, and then rain back down again and go back into the ground
where we pump it back up again? I am not denying or implying that there is
not a water problem, I am just curious as to how 18 inches a year of water
can just disappear into thin air. It has to be somewhere, in some form,
matter cannot just disappear as we understand physics today. I guess this is
more of a geological or environmental question, but the only thing I think
is that perhaps we are not recycling the water or weather patterns have
changed contributing to the problem. Thanks!
Donovan J Arnold
>From: Bill London
>Reply-To: london@moscow.com
>To: gary riedner
>CC: Vision2020
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Moscow and Water
>Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 16:57:51 -0700
>
>I recently received a questionaire from the City of Moscow Water
>Department, regarding water use and water conservation.
>While I thought the questions and options about what our family was
>willing to do to save water were relevant, I was struck by the total
>lack of questions about the most obvious (to me) reason why water mining
>on the Palouse is both continuing and escalating: new home construction.
>
>Even if all of us stabilize our present water use, all those new homes
>around Moscow are increasing our total use. And new homes would use
>more than older homes, in landscaping anyway, because the new trees,
>lawns and shrubs take much more water than established plantings.
>So, here is my question to City Supervisor Gary Riedner: If the city is
>considering how to cut water usage in Moscow, is the city investigating
>the impact of new housing in Moscow, the option of a limitation on such
>housing, or even a housing moratorium?
>BL
>
>John Danahy wrote:
>
> > On Monday evening, the Moscow City Council decided that the way to
> > solve our water crisis was to have a voluntary ban on outdoor watering
> > between 9am and 6pm. Today, three days later, the MoscowSchool
> > District was watering the grass at RussellSchool at 10am, using a
> > leaky hose and standard air delivered sprinklers. At 11 am I noticed
> > someone watering plants at the 1912 Building by hand using a hose.
> > The action of the council was clearly designed to be feel good
> > propaganda and not a meaningful response.
> >
> > I examined my water bill payments for all of 2002. My payments did
> > not significantly change from month to month except for July and
> > August. However, I do not know if the change was due to increased use
> > or the surcharge the city puts on summer use. I suspect some increase
> > in usage but mostly the increase is the result of the surcharge..
> >
> > I realize that the city claim of doubled pumping of water is probably
> > true. But, when the city sends out a survey that infers private
> > homeowners are solely responsible for excessive water use, and
> > suggests these home owners should voluntarily cut back, it is making
> > an unsupported assumption. I do not believe that homeowners are
> > responsible for the doubling of water use in the summer. Certainly,
> > some use much more, but enough to double the pumping?? Hardly!
> >
> > What is the city's metered water use month by month?? How about the
> > county?? School district?? Other civic and governmental
> > organizations?? How much does the city pay for water?? How about our
> > malls? The fountain in downtown and at the entrance to UI?
> >
> > The council should take this situation seriously. Last years ban was
> > largely ignored by the individual home owner. The council claim that
> > the water department was "broke", followed by drastic increases in
> > fees, followed by the senior administrative staff getting pay
> > increases on par with Spokane and Twin Falls, speaks to a city council
> > with a severe lack of credibility.
> >
> > Let's start with a complete examination of all water use in Moscow and
> > what could be done differently. Let's examine recycling water where
> > we can, being efficient with water use, not just at home but in all
> > aspects of the community. Let's see the city step up to its
> > responsibilities. Yes, the aquifer is a gun pointed at the head of
> > this community, but it is the city council's finger on the trigger!
> >
> > At the rate it is falling, and considering water as a limiting factor,
> > can this community continue to support a 13,000 student university,
> > much less the projected increase to 15,000?
> >
> > John
> >
> > jdanahy@turbonet.com
> >
------_=_NextPart_001_01C33CCF.7B847140
Content-Type: text/html
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<TITLE>Message</TITLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1170" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=370400717-27062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Donovan,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=370400717-27062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=370400717-27062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>This
page gives an example and cross-section of aquifers. <A
href="http://www.ispe.arizona.edu/pubs/cap/aquifer.html">http://www.ispe.arizona.edu/pubs/cap/aquifer.html</A></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=370400717-27062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=370400717-27062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>You'll
notice that there are multiple aquifers at different depths. The aquifer
that most people are referring to lately is the deep aquifer that surface water
cannot get back down to. It is my understanding that Moscow does have
shallower aquifers, but they are not as large as the deep aquifer (i.e. Grand
Ronde).</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=370400717-27062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=370400717-27062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Shawn</FONT></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Donovan Arnold
[mailto:donovanarnold@hotmail.com] <BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, June 26, 2003
6:37 PM<BR><B>To:</B> london@moscow.com;
griedner@ci.moscow.id.us<BR><B>Cc:</B>
vision2020@moscow.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] Moscow and
Water<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P>Bill or anyone who can answer,</P>
<P>This may seem like a really stupid question, and probably is, but I must
ask it anyway to anyone that may know. Where is all the water going? I
understand people drink it, water plants, flush toilets, but why doesn't it
all end back up where it came from, the ground? If I water the lawn, doesn't
the water go back down into the ground or evaporate and go back into the air,
condense, and then rain back down again and go back into the ground where we
pump it back up again? I am not denying or implying that there is not a water
problem, I am just curious as to how 18 inches a year of water can just
disappear into thin air. It has to be somewhere, in some form, matter cannot
just disappear as we understand physics today. I guess this is more of a
geological or environmental question, but the only thing I think is that
perhaps we are not recycling the water or weather patterns have changed
contributing to the problem. Thanks!</P></DIV>
<P>Donovan J Arnold<BR><BR></P>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>From: Bill London <LONDON@MOSCOW.COM>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Reply-To: london@moscow.com
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>To: gary riedner <GRIEDNER@CI.MOSCOW.ID.US>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>CC: Vision2020 <VISION2020@MOSCOW.COM>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Moscow and Water
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 16:57:51 -0700
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>I recently received a questionaire from the City of Moscow
Water
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Department, regarding water use and water conservation.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>While I thought the questions and options about what our family
was
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>willing to do to save water were relevant, I was struck by the
total
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>lack of questions about the most obvious (to me) reason why
water mining
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>on the Palouse is both continuing and escalating: new home
construction.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Even if all of us stabilize our present water use, all those
new homes
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>around Moscow are increasing our total use. And new homes would
use
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>more than older homes, in landscaping anyway, because the new
trees,
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>lawns and shrubs take much more water than established
plantings.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>So, here is my question to City Supervisor Gary Riedner: If the
city is
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>considering how to cut water usage in Moscow, is the city
investigating
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>the impact of new housing in Moscow, the option of a limitation
on such
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>housing, or even a housing moratorium?
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>BL
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>John Danahy wrote:
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > On Monday evening, the Moscow City Council decided that
the way to
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > solve our water crisis was to have a voluntary ban on
outdoor watering
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > between 9am and 6pm. Today, three days later, the
MoscowSchool
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > District was watering the grass at RussellSchool at 10am,
using a
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > leaky hose and standard air delivered sprinklers. At 11
am I noticed
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > someone watering plants at the 1912 Building by hand
using a hose.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > The action of the council was clearly designed to be feel
good
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > propaganda and not a meaningful response.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > I examined my water bill payments for all of 2002. My
payments did
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > not significantly change from month to month except for
July and
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > August. However, I do not know if the change was due to
increased use
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > or the surcharge the city puts on summer use. I suspect
some increase
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > in usage but mostly the increase is the result of the
surcharge..
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > I realize that the city claim of doubled pumping of water
is probably
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > true. But, when the city sends out a survey that infers
private
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > homeowners are solely responsible for excessive water
use, and
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > suggests these home owners should voluntarily cut back,
it is making
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > an unsupported assumption. I do not believe that
homeowners are
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > responsible for the doubling of water use in the summer.
Certainly,
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > some use much more, but enough to double the pumping??
Hardly!
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > What is the city's metered water use month by month?? How
about the
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > county?? School district?? Other civic and governmental
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > organizations?? How much does the city pay for water??
How about our
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > malls? The fountain in downtown and at the entrance to
UI?
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > The council should take this situation seriously. Last
years ban was
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > largely ignored by the individual home owner. The council
claim that
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > the water department was "broke", followed by drastic
increases in
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > fees, followed by the senior administrative staff getting
pay
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > increases on par with Spokane and Twin Falls, speaks to a
city council
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > with a severe lack of credibility.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > Let's start with a complete examination of all water use
in Moscow and
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > what could be done differently. Let's examine recycling
water where
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > we can, being efficient with water use, not just at home
but in all
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > aspects of the community. Let's see the city step up to
its
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > responsibilities. Yes, the aquifer is a gun pointed at
the head of
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > this community, but it is the city council's finger on
the trigger!
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > At the rate it is falling, and considering water as a
limiting factor,
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > can this community continue to support a 13,000 student
university,
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > much less the projected increase to 15,000?
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > John
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > jdanahy@turbonet.com
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV></DIV><BR clear=all></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C33CCF.7B847140--