[Vision2020] Water Concern?
Mark Solomon
msolomon at moscow.com
Thu Oct 18 23:21:37 PDT 2007
Jeff,
I know I've posted to this list the graph of static water levels in
city Wanapum wells from the the 1930's to the present before and will
gladly do so again when I'm at the computer with the files on it. No
citations, no interpretations. Just two clearly similar declining
curves, from the 30's to 1960 and from 1990 to the present with a
rise from 1960-1990, the period when the city stopped pumping the
Wanapum wells. You're welcome to ask Tom Scallorn at the City of
Moscow Water Department for the raw data and do your own analysis.
The graph I'll re-post sometime this weekend was drawn by Dr. Dale
Ralston.
m.
At 10:48 PM -0700 10/18/07, Jeff Harkins wrote:
>If the facts are so readily available, please enlighten us all.
>
>I've read all the material from the last several water forums,
>committees and so forth. There is certainly no consensus evident
>from the materials I read. Do you have a particular source or
>reference that would validate your statements?
>
>And frankly, I have not heard any of the statements you attribute to
>Wayne Krauss, Walter Steed or Dan Carscallen. And if they did make
>those remarks, please tell me where and when.
>
>You raise an interesting point about relations with Pullman and
>tangentially with Whitman officials. I have visited with a couple
>of elected officials from Pullman and from Whitman. It was made
>rather clear to me that Pullman would have been delighted to talk
>with Moscow officials about the various water issues and policies
>and other matters of concern between our two communities. But, in
>their mind, the contacts from our side have more or less poisoned
>that well - when you threaten to sue your neighbors, when you
>interfere in their activities, and attempt to coerce them to agree
>with you - it does make it difficult to have a dialogue.
>
>Wayne Krauss, Walter Steed and Dan Carscallen are probably our best
>choices for bringing reason and rationale to the political quagmire
>we find ourselves in now.
>
>On the bright side, a change in our management may offer another
>chance to revisit Pullman officials, to open some doors, to have
>some conversations, etc. I suspect Pullman would be very willing to
>work with us, but I am fairly certain they have no interest in
>working for us. They are charting their own course - as is their
>right and responsibility.
>
>Please let me know if you can provide me with citations about the
>statements you attribute to Walter, Wayne and Dan. Also, any new
>studies that affirm your claims about the aquifer status and its
>future would also be helpful.
>
>
>At 10:10 PM 10/18/2007, you wrote:
>>Jeff --
>>
>>You've confused opinions with facts.
>>
>>The GMA candidates have the right to whatever opinions they like. They
>>can believe that it will be fine if we reach the bottom of the
>>aquifer. They can believe that we can get water from elsewhere at
>>reasonable cost. They can believe that we can negotiate with Pullman
>>to keep them from depleting our shared aquifer at an unreasonable
>>rate. All of these things are reasonable opinions.
>>
>>Wrong, but reasonable.
>>
>>The issue of whether we are depleting our aquifer at a rate greater
>>than the rate of replenishment isn't a matter of opinion. It is a
>>matter of fact. Similar, for instance, to the fact that the Earth is
>>getting warmer. GMA can either provide its own peer-reviewed
>>projections or start talking about the facts as they exist.
>>
>>Wishful thinking is not a water policy.
>>
>>-- ACS
>>
>>
>>On 10/18/07, Jeff Harkins <jeffh at moscow.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Gary, good to see your clear and concise comments making a difference.
>>> Here are some of my observations.
>>>
>>> Ideologues are all around us in this region. They have no solution to
>>> resolve the water issue (or much of any other issue) but they follow the
>>> same tactic used since the creation of the MCA; fear, intimidation,
>>> heckling and smearing are their tools. If you support an organization like
>> > GMA, you are publicly chided for supporting candidates endorsed
>>by them. In
>>> other words, you don't know as much as the MCA people and therefore your
>>> voices and your opinions don't matter.
>>>
>>> Frankly, all the candidates for city council seem to be honest,
>>>sincere and
>>> interested in doing what they perceive to be the best things for the
>>> community. But when the actions of supporters and/or candidates sense a
>>> challenge to their "vision for Moscow", rather than debate the issue, they
>>> turn on the candidate and chide them for their opinions. Wayne Krauss,
>>> Walter Steed and Dan Carscallen are all honorable men. They have
>>>spent most
>>> of their adult lives in this community. They have a right to be
>>>respected -
>>> for their views, for their willingness to step up to the challenge of city
>>> council and for their willingness to engage in honorable debate with
>>> candidates that they don't agree with.
>>>
>>> In a similar vein, Linda Pall, Aaron Ament, Tom Lamar and Evin Holmes are
>>> honorable folks. Most have spent a good portion of their adult lives in
>>> Moscow and they should be respected for their willingness to serve our
>>> community.
>>>
>>> To indict any of them for their opinions and views on a topic simply
>>> validates that our citizens should not vote for the candidate the indictors
>>> are supporting but should vote for the candidate being scalloped. Issues
>>> and answers and policies such as the water question are founded first in
>>> science. Let the science do the talking - report studies, provide links to
>>> the scientific evidence, establish the proposition of your hypothesis and
>>> then talk about strategies for solutions. It is "very difficult"
>>>to resolve
>>> a problem with rhetoric and finger pointing (Joe and Bruce, you are
>>> encouraged to think about this very carefully).
>>>
>>> This coming election will say a lot about our community and about the
>>> future we chart for ourselves. It is time for the hand-wringers to move to
>>> the sidelines. We need decisive, thoughtful and forthright leadership to
>>> guide us through the challenges that lay ahead. Will we have a community
>>> that can support our children and the children of our children? Will we be
>>> able to welcome new residents with a bundle of opportunities that entices
>>> them to stay or will we winnow them out - because they don't fit into our
>>> lifestyle? Will we have the type of community that encourages
>>>entrepreneurs
>>> to come here and risk their investment capital here or will we worry
>>> ourselves to death over whether or not this business or that business is
>>> "acceptable"? What I have learned from listening to the forums this past
>>> couple of years is that even if Santa Claus wanted to move his operation
>>> here, there would be at least a handful of people who would object to that
>>> move.
>>>
>>> For my taste, it is time for a change in Moscow.
>>>
>>>
>>> At 07:02 PM 10/18/2007, you wrote:
>>>
>>> Conservation can never be a bad idea but using the water issue as a club to
>>> force other ideological visions on the community where they don't
>>>apply (big
>>> box ordinances for one example) is disingenuous. I don't believe that the
>>> GMA endorsed candidates are suggesting that we make a desperate attempt to
>>> suck the aquifer dry before their terms expire. To suggest otherwise is
>>> simply partisan politics at its worst.
>>>
>>> g
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Tom Hansen" <thansen at moscow.com>
>>> To: "'g. crabtree'" <jampot at roadrunner.com>; "'Joe Campbell'"
>>> <joekc at adelphia.net>; <vision2020 at moscow.com>; "'Mark Solomon'"
>>> <msolomon at moscow.com>
>>> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 4:29 PM
>>> Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Water Concern?
>>>
>>> >g -
>>> >
>>> > You suggested that perhaps none of the city council candidates have a
>>> firm
>>> > handle on the water situation.
>>> >
>>> > If this is true, wouldn't it be better advised to err on the side of
>>> > caution?
>>> >
>>> > Both Lamar and Ament cited PBAC as authorities on the figures they
>>> presented
>>> > yesterday at the CofC Forum. Krauss cited "something [he] read
>>> somewhere"
>>> > and Steed simply wants to remove limitations and controls.
>> > >
>>> > Your thoughts?
>>> >
>>> > Seeya round town, Moscow.
>>> >
>>> > Tom Hansen
>>> > Moscow, Idaho
>>> >
>>> > "We're a town of about 23,000 with 10,000 college students. The college
>>> > students are not very active in local elections (thank goodness!)."
>>> >
>>> > - Dale Courtney (March 28, 2007)
>>> >
>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>> >
>>> > From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [
>>> mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
>>> > On Behalf Of g. crabtree
>>> > Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 3:33 PM
>>> > To: Joe Campbell; vision2020 at moscow.com; Mark Solomon
>>> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Water Concern?
>>> >
>>> > I assume the statement that includes "...regarding
>>> > the upper aquifer which if continued to be pumped at current
>>>levels could
>>> be
>>> >
>>> > in crisis as soon as 15-20 years from now." is couched that way to leave
>>> > room for the obvious corollary?
>>> >
>>> > Could be 50-75 years, could be 115-120 years? Could be we really don't
>>> know
>>> > for sure? Could be that Krauss, Carscallen, and Steed have as firm a
>>> handle
>>> > on the water situation as any of the MCA candidates do.
>>> >
>>> > g
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> =======================================================
>>> 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
>>> =======================================================
>>> =======================================================
>>> 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
>>> =======================================================
>>>
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list