<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE></TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Here's another approach to water
supply issues: <A
href="http://www.waterexchange.com/auction/">http://www.waterexchange.com/auction/</A>.
I'm curious as to how this will play-out. I'm also still trying to
understand how water works here in AZ. It seems to be more about paper
"rights" that actual liquid "water." I'm encouraged that Moscow is
continuing to address the issue. I expect it will take a long time to
resolve, but an extended discovery & discussion period will
help in the long-term.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Mark</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><IMG style="WIDTH: 111px; HEIGHT: 86px" alt=""
src="cid:156523720@12102006-0ef6"> <BR><FONT size=-2><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: agency fb">mark r. seman, architect</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=-2><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: agency fb">v=928.925.7617
f=928.776.9107</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=-2><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: agency fb"></SPAN></FONT><BR> </DIV><FONT
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR>From:
vision2020-bounces@moscow.com<BR>[</FONT><A
href="mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com"><FONT
size=2>mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT size=2>]On Behalf Of
Joe Campbell<BR>Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 10:59 AM<BR>To: vision
2020<BR>Subject: [Vision2020] Is Moscow Ready for Reservoir?<BR><BR><BR>Dear
Jeff,<BR><BR>Some thoughts about this comment of yours: "Further, we do NOT KNOW
that the water issue must be dealt with soon."<BR><BR>I said that the water
problem "needs to be dealt with soon." What I meant was that we need to begin
THINKING about the water problem and PLANNING for the future. I did not say, for
instance, that Moscow needed to build a reservoir SOON. I never even claimed
that Moscow needed to build a reservoir!<BR><BR>The water problem is, as you
note below, a management issue, since we already have available sources of water
that we can utilize. A reservoir is one way to solve the problem, though perhaps
it is not the best way. The panel at the general meeting last Monday agreed that
we need to do a feasibility study before this idea goes any further.<BR><BR>One
day we will run out of water unless we find a way to manage our current water
resources. This is especially true if, as you said earlier on the V, Moscow must
either grow or die and if, as you say below, Naylor Farms has a right to 10% of
our water.<BR><BR>I am not an expert about water; nor am I an expert about
economics! However, I am an expert about KNOWLEDGE. I studied the theory of
knowledge (aka epistemology) at the University of Arizona in the late 1980s. At
the time they had, arguably, the top epistemology program in the country. I am
not making this up!<BR><BR>Your remark above suggests that we have a lack of
KNOWLEDGE about how much water we have available in Moscow, and from this state
of ignorance you conclude that we should carry on with business as
usual.<BR><BR>First, that there is a lack of knowledge about our available water
sources is debatable. Mark, for instance, predicted that the Wanapum aquifer
would be unusable in 15-25 years unless the water problem is dealt with soon. He
noted that the Wanapum supplies 30% of our demand.<BR><BR>Second, Mark also
noted that we lack similar knowledge about the Grande Ronde. This does not mean
that we lack complete knowledge about the Grande Ronde. We know that it is not
endless, right? We know that if the Wanapum is declining, then likely so is the
Grande Ronde, right? What we don't know is the RATE of decline. How big would
the Grande Ronde have to be in order that none of what we do know
matters?<BR><BR>Let's suppose that we don't know the rate of decline for the
Grande Ronde but that we do know, or can make a lucky guess, that it is
declining. What conclusions should we draw?<BR><BR>You suggest that we continue
business as usual. This strikes me as irresponsible. Here is an
analogy.<BR><BR>Suppose that you are in your friend's car, driving home to
Moscow after a weekend in McCall. You pass a gas station in New Meadows and
remember that your friend told you that the gas gage of his car was broken. You
do not know how much gas is left in the car. Luckily, you can fill up here, now
in New Meadows. Do you fill up at the gas station or do you continue business as
usual and hope that you'll find a gas station further on down the road? What
would be the responsible thing to do, given your current state of
ignorance?<BR><BR>Think about this and get back to me. I'll try to respond to
some of your other points but my day job is keeping me busy.<BR><BR>Hope that
you are well!<BR><BR>All the best,
Joe<BR><BR>-----------------------<BR><BR>Thanks for the post. It opens
the door to<BR>correct some misconceptions that you have.<BR><BR>>2/ What I
especially liked about last night's<BR>>meeting is that we discussed an issue
that was<BR>>not "in our face." Yet it is an issue that needs<BR>>to be
dealt with soon. The fact is that we use<BR>>more water than is being
replaced. As long as<BR>>the water supply is not endless, it will eventually
end. What to do?<BR><BR>Well, it has been in our faces - especially if<BR>you
owned property in the previously designated<BR>Emergency Water Management
Overlay Zone. Private<BR>property rights were immediately co-opted
without<BR>adequate discussion or proposed compensation.<BR><BR>Further, we do
NOT KNOW that the water issue must<BR>be dealt with soon. No long-term
validated<BR>studies by hydrologists have been done. The<BR>conclusions
that have been thrown out for public<BR>consumption have been the result of
pure<BR>speculation. The fact is - we don't know if we have a water
problem or not!<BR><BR>>A reservoir is one possible solution.
Water<BR>>conservation is another one. But CAN we conserve<BR>>enough
water to solve the problem? Shouldn't we<BR>>also look at other solutions?
We're just<BR>>beginning this dialogue, I think. (We're just<BR>>beginning
it as a COMMUNITY. It was clear last<BR>>night that there are quite a few
folks who have<BR>>been thinking about these issues for a
while.)<BR>><BR>>3/ One thing that came across last night is
that<BR>>we are in a rather unique situation, water-wise.<BR>>It is
possible that there is a large -- though<BR>>limited -- body of water that is
currently<BR>>available to Moscow. We need to think about how<BR>>we are
going to use it and -- until we can<BR>>provide a way of increasing that
amount -- we should plan to use it wisely.<BR><BR>The most immediate volume of
water available to<BR>us is, of course, rainfall - but that
requires<BR>collection. Another available source is the<BR>Clearwater
system - we can address the question<BR>of access at some point, but the water
is there -<BR>and technology can be utilized to pump it up
here.<BR><BR>>Naylor farms has plans to use a great deal of<BR>>our
current supply. Forgetting about the other<BR>>costs of their enterprise, it
is questionable<BR>>whether -- short of some long term solution to<BR>>our
current water problem -- we should invest<BR>>our water capital to meet their
ends.<BR><BR>Well, don't use hyperbole to describe their<BR>use. Their
initial application was for approx.<BR>200 million gallons per year - about 10%
of<BR>Moscow-Pullman consumption. The IDWR advised<BR>them that their
right was for approximately 2<BR>billion gallons per year. They,
quite<BR>rationally, reapplied for their full right.<BR><BR>>4/ I wish Naylor
farms would hold a public forum<BR>>similar to the one held last night. Which
is<BR>>just to say, I wish that Naylor farms would give<BR>>me the feeling
that they gave a rat's -ss about<BR>>how I and others think about these
issues.<BR>><BR>>I challenge Naylor farms to approach this<BR>>problem
in a way that illustrates their concern<BR>>for the overall community. It is
our water and<BR>>the supply is limited. If Naylor farms wants to<BR>>use
some of that supply, then they need to tell<BR>>us how we might benefit from
their use. So far I<BR>>have not seen the benefit. Nor have I seen
any<BR>>recognition on their part that there is a<BR>>genuine problem
here. Currently, there is just a<BR>>limited supply of water. We might debate
on the<BR>>amount but that the supply is limited is not an issue for
debate.<BR><BR>One part of your comment above does warrant<BR>specific
acknowledgement - the water supply for<BR>the world is fixed - you can change
its form<BR>(liguid, gas or solid) but you can't change the<BR>supply. BUT
you can change its location - and<BR>that is the challenge we must address - if
our<BR>current water flows are not sufficient to meet<BR>our needs, how can we
enhance our<BR>allocation. That is an important issue for us to
address.<BR><BR>Sorry, it is not YOUR or OUR water supply. Idaho<BR>has a
first in time, first in right allocation<BR>system. Until that is changed,
it is not YOUR<BR>water or OUR water. As I understand it, Naylor<BR>has a
senior or ancestral water right - and that<BR>right is recognized by the
state. At the last<BR>water summit I was surprised to learn
that<BR>municipalities (Moscow) have no water rights -<BR>they have simply
drilled for water and started<BR>selling it. And as a result of use, have a
"claim" to water.<BR><BR>But again, from a science point of view, we DO<BR>NOT
KNOW what the limits are to our water<BR>flows. Estimates of 10-25 years
of water<BR>remaining are pure and simple speculation - not<BR>unlike tea leaf
reading. Want to know the water<BR>supply limits? Spend the money on
a study - who<BR>knows - we might find out that all our water<BR>comes from
Canada and Montana as a result of the<BR>prehistoric Columbia Lake system.
If that is the<BR>case, then we have NO water rights.<BR><BR>I appreciate your
point about wanting Naylor to<BR>"illustrate their concern for the
overall<BR>community". But what concern have the water<BR>zealots shown
for Naylor's rights? Think of the<BR>things that have been said about them
- and done<BR>to them. The fact that their position was<BR>vindicated in
court should be of some merit in<BR>having the Naylor's treated with
respect.<BR><BR>>Until we can figure out a way to increase our<BR>>current
supply of water -- through a reservoir,<BR>>conservation, or some other means
-- it seems<BR>>irresponsible to allow Naylor farms access to it for their
own personal needs.<BR><BR>I am encouraged by one outcome of all
of<BR>this. Just a few months ago, I was publicly<BR>harangued and scoffed
by the likes of Jim Mital,<BR>French and members of the Protect Our Water
group<BR>for my suggestion that we explore the possibility<BR>of a collection
system for the approximately 200<BR>billion gallons of water that fall on
Latah<BR>County each year. The simple premise was that we<BR>have an
adequate water supply, but our management<BR>of the supply is the question - not
a shortage of<BR>water. At least that concept is now in the<BR>public
discussion arena and for that, I am<BR>pleased. But a simple mantra will
suffice - it<BR>is difficult to solve a problem until you understand what the
problem is.<BR><BR>As an aside, while I have some questions and<BR>concerns
about Prop 2 - there is one element that<BR>is appealing. I recognize that
one of the<BR>redeeming qualities of Prop 2 is that it would<BR>provide property
owners with a clear legal<BR>recourse should another initiative similar to
the<BR>Emergency Water Management Zone be<BR>adopted. Property owners do
have rights and it<BR>would appear that Prop 2 would help to protect<BR>those
rights from the tyranny of the vocal minority as well as the
majority.<BR><BR>=======================================================<BR> List
services made available by First Step Internet,<BR> serving the communities
of the Palouse since
1994. <BR>
</FONT><A target=_blank href="http://www.fsr.net"><FONT
size=2>http://www.fsr.net</FONT></A><FONT
size=2> <BR>
</FONT><A href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT
size=2>mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><BR><FONT
size=2>=======================================================<BR><BR></FONT></BODY></HTML>