[Vision2020] water development

[Mark Solomon]

I don't know about Washington, but the Nez Perce Tribe might have 
something significant to say as those are waters covered under their 
settlement with the state. A more probable but still highly unlikely 
source would be the N. Fk of the Palouse above Laird Park. Unlikely 
because of the cost of a pipeline, diversion structure, pump station 
(to get around/over Moscow Mountain.

Conservation is still the cheapest source of "new water". As I've 
discussed here previously, new development could fund conservation 
implementation to offset a development's water demand. Simple 
balancing of the water checkbook.

m.

At 4:43 PM -0700 4/14/07, Sunil Ramalingam wrote:
>Thanks, Mark.
>
>I also wonder that if money were available for such a project, 
>setting aside any environmental concerns, Moscow would be able to 
>appropriate Clearwater River water.  Wouldn't Washington users 
>downstream have superior claims that would make such a project 
>difficult?
>
>Sunil
>
>>From: Mark Solomon <msolomon at moscow.com>
>>To: Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>,        Sunil 
>>Ramalingam <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>, vision2020 at moscow.com
>>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] water development
>>Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2007 16:01:11 -0700
>>
>>Sunil is referring to the study done by the Army Corps of Engineers 
>>sometime way back when that looked at the Palouse, Clearwater and 
>>Snake Rivers as possible water sources for Moscow. Even back then 
>>(1974 I think) the energy costs of pumping water uphill to Moscow 
>>were prohibitive. The only person I know who has an actual copy of 
>>the study is Joel Hamilton. There is likely one in the UI library.
>>
>>m.