[Vision2020] Water - Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus

[Art Deco]

Nils, et al,

We don't have all the facts about the water resource but in addition to the 
depletion rates, we have other useful facts about the water resource.

One very important one fact is the recently confirmed interconnectivity of 
the various so-called sub-basins/sub-sources.

A second set facts is about the wells drawing water from the granitic 
batholith underlying the Palouse Range (Moscow Mountain , in part).  In this 
area wells have been lost over the last few years and the flow rates of many 
wells, though fluctuating, have generally decreased.

Residents of this area are very concerned that increased water usage 
downslope and in general on the Palouse may further deplete the resource 
through the natural hydrostatic/hydrodynamic forces (water is sucked out of 
the granite by downstream usage).  This depletion is likely to leave some 
residents without water, especially those that have wells with 1 gpm flows 
or less now.

I wonder if the role that PBAC is now playing would be much better handled 
by PWCN.  I have stated reasons for this before:  PBAC's outrageous support 
of the Naylor Farms first proposal, the competence/viewpoint of their former 
director, etc.  This is a serious issue for all of us now and in the future. 
We need to make our best efforts now.  In my opinion the skills and 
knowledge of those involved with PWCN would give us a better leading edge in 
this matter.


Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)
deco at moscow.com

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nils Peterson" <nils_peterson at wsu.edu>
To: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 10:51 PM
Subject: [Vision2020] Water - Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus


> Since I feel Virginia Henderson's editorial (below) is at least slightly
> addressed at me, I'm going to respond.
>
> And Nathan, if you enabled ping and trackback on your site I could do it
> from my blog, AND, if your local news and commentary were not behind a
> password, I could do it without violating your copyright.
>
> It seems the editorial argues "good plans are built on facts and the
> aquifers are not giving theirs up" so we need to choose a course of action
> based on the information we have (rather than wasting money and time 
> trying
> to gather more). The information we have is that the area's water resource
> is finite -- we have reached the limits of the resource. We either need to
> start designing and building Lake Carscallen or concede that new uses must
> play in a zero sum game with current uses. So, I refer Virginia to the
> discussion in this forum of a month ago -- the bold political decision 
> that
> she and the paper should have spent the editorial supporting is a City
> ordinance creating a real water budget at the PBAC agreed maximum and the
> halting of building permits until the new developments can secure "water
> rights" by conservation measures taken by existing users. Then there would
> be a way to get a handle on the marginal cost of water and we'd be able to
> do the economic analysis on Lake Carscallen.
>
> Or maybe that bold political decision is too much of a "blunt instrument
> against development," in which case the editorial would have been better
> spent proposing an different alternative to our dilemma.
>
>
>
>
> OUR VIEW: It¹s time for new questions
>
> By Virginia Henderson, for the editorial board
> Published: 05-23-2006
>
> It¹s time to stop arguing about how to define the problem and start
> exploring feasible alternatives to dependence on the two aquifers that 
> meet
> the water needs of the Palouse Basin.
>
> Some say there¹s no need to stabilize the larger Grand Ronde aquifer,
> despite its consistent annual loss of 18 inches. Many of the naysayers
> insist there¹s no reason to let aquifer hysteria interfere with their
> property rights. Others want to know what options exist if the aquifers
> aren¹t available.
>
> Meanwhile, most people just hope their leaders are safeguarding resources,
> coming up with creative and proactive ideas to guide planning and
> development.
>
> But good plans are built on solid facts, and the aquifers aren¹t giving
> theirs up.
>
> The Palouse Basin Aquifer Committee, known as PBAC, continues to sift
> through research to figure out how the aquifers and water between Moscow,
> Pullman and surrounding areas are connected. PBAC researchers have learned
> that the smaller aquifer recharges from groundwater, but the deeper
> aquifer¹s method of replenishing itself remains a mystery.
>
> It¹s going to take a lot more money and time to learn the answer, and
> there¹s no guarantee what will emerge.
>
> People could argue indefinitely about when, how, where and whether to 
> spend
> money and energy in a quest for answers.
>
> That¹s convenient for those who would use water as a blunt instrument
> against development. Leadership of the highest sort is called for. There 
> are
> alternatives to endless political rock throwing or tossing millions of
> dollars at the same questions.
>
> It¹s time for a fresh approach. If PBAC is the group to lead the way, it
> must build consensus among its members and advisory group, meet deadlines
> and operate from a clear directive from the people it serves.
>
>
> _____________________________________________________
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>
>