<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>Re: [Vision2020] Water
Concern?</title></head><body>
<div>Gary,</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>I'm glad we can agree that inquiring minds can look at simple
data and draw conclusions. What is your opinion of water levels in
Moscow wells from the data links I've provided? Forget the politics.
This issue will be with us forever.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>m.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>At 9:58 AM -0700 10/20/07, g. crabtree wrote:</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>?</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1">The point of
the post you refer to wasn't to present an "anti-science stance."
It was to remind folks that scientists are not gods and that a little
bit of thinking for yourself and questioning some of what is
force fed to you by the media (and partisans such as yourself) might
be a good thing. I don't remember anyone saying that "all science
was junk" or that "all peer reviewed articles are crap."
But then again being accurate has always been much harder
for you then being contentious and insulting.</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite> </blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial"
size="-1">g</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1">-----
Original Message -----</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1">From:
"Joe Campbell" <</font><a
href="mailto:joekc@adelphia.net"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">joekc@adelphia.net</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">></font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1">To: "g.
crabtree" <</font><a
href="mailto:jampot@roadrunner.com"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">jampot@roadrunner.com</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">></font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1">Cc:
<</font><a href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">vision2020@moscow.com</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">>; "Tom Hansen" <</font><a
href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">thansen@moscow.com</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">>; "'Mark Solomon'" <</font><a
href="mailto:msolomon@moscow.com"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">msolomon@moscow.com</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">></font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1">Sent:
Saturday, October 20, 2007 9:46 AM</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1">Subject: re:
[Vision2020] Water Concern?</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Arial"><br></font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1">Given the
anti-science stance of your last post, which cited the
non-existent<br>
Schwaller's anti-peer-review comments as support, there is no question
about<br>
whom you put your faith in.<br>
<br>
Mark replied to much of this. It is incredible to me how ignorant you
and the rest of the GMA are about the topic of water in Moscow.
Incredible but not surprising.<br>
<br>
Yet if science is a bunk of junk, what hope do you have of formulating
a<br>
cogent argument? If peer-reviewed articles are all crap, so much the
worse<br>
for your appeals to your peers: 'Schwaller' and Wilson. If half of
what you say<br>
is true, we've steped behind the looking glass and talk is useless.
The fact<br>
that you continue to argue only shows that you don't really believe
any of it.<br>
<br>
--<br>
Joe Campbell<br>
<br>
---- "g. crabtree" <</font><a
href="mailto:jampot@roadrunner.com"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">jampot@roadrunner.com</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">> wrote:<br>
<br>
=============<br>
>From the City of Moscow water dept. web site:<br>
<br>
" Wanapum well levels in Moscow area wells fluctuate some due to
pumping and recharge but appear to be quite stable."<br>
<br>
And<br>
<br>
" Since 1990 in the Moscow area, the water levels in the Grande
Ronde have been very stable."<br>
<br>
Who should I put my faith in, Water dept. professionals or the chicken
littles who would prefer to see Moscow as some sort of story book
fantasy?It really seems to me that water is the scare tactic du jour
and campaign issue of the moment for the MCA shills. Till they find a
different drum to beat.<br>
<br>
I repeat, 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.<br>
<br>
g<br>
<br>
<br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
From: "Joe Campbell" <</font><a
href="mailto:joekc@adelphia.net"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">joekc@adelphia.net</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">><br>
To: "g. crabtree" <</font><a
href="mailto:jampot@roadrunner.com"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">jampot@roadrunner.com</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">><br>
Cc: <</font><a href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><font
face="Arial" size="-1">vision2020@moscow.com</font></a><font
face="Arial" size="-1">>; "Tom Hansen" <</font><a
href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">thansen@moscow.com</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">>; "'Mark Solomon'" <</font><a
href="mailto:msolomon@moscow.com"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">msolomon@moscow.com</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">><br>
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 6:51 PM<br>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Water Concern?<br>
<br>
<br>
There were so many things wrong with the Super Walmart plan it is hard
to begin.<br>
Some people noted the water issue - which is as pervasive as water
itself - but I<br>
never did. For one thing, we have a problem with west-east traffic
flow that a Super<br>
Walmart located on Route 8 would only exacerbate. This 'plan' is
indicative of the<br>
GMA approach to grow first and ask questions later.<br>
<br>
In your original letter on this topic you wrote: "Could be 50-75
years, could be 115-120<br>
years? Could be we really don't know for sure?"<br>
<br>
But if we really don't know for sure, is it wiser to ACT like we have
water for the next</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1">200 years
(Krauss: "We could have, at the least, 200 years of water
left"), or to act like<br>
we MIGHT have water for only another 50-75 years? Which would be the
better course<br>
of action if we wanted to, conservatively speaking, plan for the
future?<br>
<br>
The MCA candidates do much better on this issue. Look at the
original<br>
Johnson article for starters.<br>
<br>
--<br>
Joe Campbell<br>
<br>
---- "g. crabtree" <</font><a
href="mailto:jampot@roadrunner.com"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">jampot@roadrunner.com</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">> wrote:<br>
<br>
=============<br>
I beg to differ, when a rational was needed for denying a change in
the<br>
comprehensive plan to accommodate a Wal-Mart in east Moscow water
was<br>
brought up as an issue. Water use is currently being used to meddle
in<br>
Whitman Counties Hawkins development. Water was cited as a reason to
oppose<br>
Naylor Farms.<br>
<br>
In reality the MCA candidates are not as knowledgeable on water issues
as<br>
they (and you) would like to have us believe. The science is not
settled and<br>
there most certainly is not a emergency currently. Pretty much like
Dan,<br>
Wayne, and Walt indicated.<br>
<br>
Water most certainly is an issue but it isn't a crisis and no quote
you can<br>
produce will change that fact.<br>
<br>
g<br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
From: "Joe Campbell" <</font><a
href="mailto:joekc@adelphia.net"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">joekc@adelphia.net</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">><br>
To: "g. crabtree" <</font><a
href="mailto:jampot@roadrunner.com"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">jampot@roadrunner.com</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">><br>
Cc: <</font><a href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><font
face="Arial" size="-1">vision2020@moscow.com</font></a><font
face="Arial" size="-1">>; "Tom Hansen" <</font><a
href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">thansen@moscow.com</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">>; "'Mark<br>
Solomon'" <</font><a href="mailto:msolomon@moscow.com"><font
face="Arial" size="-1">msolomon@moscow.com</font></a><font
face="Arial" size="-1">><br>
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 6:57 AM<br>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Water Concern?<br>
<br>
<br>
> No one is using the water issue "as a club to force other
ideological<br>
> visions."<br>
><br>
> The point is just that the GMA candidates are uninformed about
water<br>
> issues.<br>
><br>
> Voters need to know which candidates are and which are not
informed about<br>
> important local issues like WATER. Especially when this can be
easily<br>
> conveyed by merely QUOTING the candidates comments during a
DEBATE.<br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Joe Campbell<br>
><br>
> ---- "g. crabtree" <</font><a
href="mailto:jampot@roadrunner.com"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">jampot@roadrunner.com</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">> wrote:<br>
><br>
> =============<br>
> Conservation can never be a bad idea but using the water issue as
a club<br>
> to force other ideological visions on the community where they
don't apply<br>
> (big box ordinances for one example) is disingenuous. I don't
believe that<br>
> the GMA endorsed candidates are suggesting that we make a
desperate<br>
> attempt to suck the aquifer dry before their terms expire. To
suggest<br>
> otherwise is simply partisan politics at its worst.<br>
><br>
> g<br>
> ----- Original Message -----<br>
> From: "Tom Hansen" <</font><a
href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">thansen@moscow.com</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">><br>
> To: "'g. crabtree'" <</font><a
href="mailto:jampot@roadrunner.com"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">jampot@roadrunner.com</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">>; "'Joe Campbell'"<br>
> <</font><a href="mailto:joekc@adelphia.net"><font
face="Arial" size="-1">joekc@adelphia.net</font></a><font
face="Arial" size="-1">>; <</font><a
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">vision2020@moscow.com</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">>; "'Mark Solomon'"<br>
> <</font><a href="mailto:msolomon@moscow.com"><font
face="Arial" size="-1">msolomon@moscow.com</font></a><font
face="Arial" size="-1">><br>
> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 4:29 PM<br>
> Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Water Concern?<br>
><br>
><br>
>>g -<br>
>><br>
>> You suggested that perhaps none of the city council
candidates have a<br>
>> firm<br>
>> handle on the water situation.<br>
>><br>
>> If this is true, wouldn't it be better advised to err on the
side of<br>
>> caution?<br>
>><br>
>> Both Lamar and Ament cited PBAC as authorities on the figures
they<br>
>> presented<br>
>> yesterday at the CofC Forum. Krauss cited
"something [he] read<br>
>> somewhere"<br>
>> and Steed simply wants to remove limitations and
controls.<br>
>><br>
>> Your thoughts?<br>
>><br>
>> Seeya round town, Moscow.<br>
>><br>
>> Tom Hansen<br>
>> Moscow, Idaho<br>
>><br>
>> "We're a town of about 23,000 with 10,000 college
students. The college<br>
>> students are not very active in local elections (thank
goodness!)."<br>
>><br>
>> - Dale Courtney (March 28, 2007)<br>
>><br>
>> -----Original Message-----<br>
>><br>
>> From:</font> <a
href="mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">vision2020-bounces@moscow.com</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1"><br>
>> [mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com]<br>
>> On Behalf Of g. crabtree<br>
>> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 3:33 PM<br>
>> To: Joe Campbell;</font> <a
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><font face="Arial"
size="-1">vision2020@moscow.com</font></a><font face="Arial"
size="-1">; Mark Solomon<br>
>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Water Concern?<br>
>><br>
>> I assume the statement that includes
"...regarding</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1">>> the
upper aquifer which if continued to be pumped at current levels
could<br>
>> be<br>
>><br>
>> in crisis as soon as 15-20 years from now." is couched
that way to leave<br>
>> room for the obvious corollary?<br>
>><br>
>> Could be 50-75 years, could be 115-120 years? Could be we
really don't<br>
>> know<br>
>> for sure? Could be that Krauss, Carscallen, and Steed have as
firm a<br>
>> handle<br>
>> on the water situation as any of the MCA candidates do.<br>
>><br>
>> g<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
></font></blockquote>
<div><br></div>
</body>
</html>