- js reader version
- view hidden posts
- tags and related articles
View article without comments
by Cultural Survival Trumps Development
Sunday, Apr. 15, 2012 at 12:29 PM
The use of propaganda to coerce transfer of indigenous populations from their homeland and cultural base is a violation of the United Nations Declarations on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and could be defined as cultural genocide. Will this be the legacy of SNWA General Manager Patricia Mulroy's pipeline?
For several years the (SNWA) Southern Nevada Water Authority’s General Manager Patricia Mulroy has relentlessly pursued the pipeline proposal to remove billions of gallons of water each year from distant aquifers. The Snake, Spring and Delmar aquifer systems are 287 miles to the north of Las Vegas and are targeted by the SNWA’s pipeline for removal. Despite the objections of numerous scientists and public testimony by National Park Service hydrologist Dr. Paula Cutillo who said that the aquifer cannot support this type of withdrawal without a 200 foot drop, the SNWA forges ahead with their pipeline plan. Like a mad sea captain steering the ship straight into an oncoming storm, SNWA General Manager Mulroy ignores the warning signs of ecosystem collapse and cultural genocide following aquifer overdraft.
Within the United Nations Declaration of Indigenous Rights there are several criteria required for an action to be considered cultural genocide. One of those criteria is the forced removal or displacement of an indigenous people from their homeland. This occurred during the infamous Trail of Tears when the Cherokee were marched from the Carolinas into Oklahoma against their wishes. It was impossible for the Cherokee to continue practicing their culture as the climate and ecology of Oklahoma was far removed from their indigenous homeland in the Carolinas. The loss of cultural practices and forced assimilation into another culture not their own is the textbook example of cultural genocide, though there wasn’t any U.N. Declaration of Indigenous Rights to protect the Cherokee from the Trail of Tears.
Today we would like to consider ourselves somewhat more enlightened than to advocate forced relocation of sovereign indigenous nations residing in North America, yet the reality of the SNWA’s declared intent to construct their pipeline contradicts this theory of increased enlightenment. The aquifer water level will decrease drastically from the SNWA pipeline withdrawal and dry up the springs that the ecosystem requires for survival. The entire culture of the Goshute Nation depends upon these spring fed ecosystems to continue existing intact. The loss of the springs not only physically deprives the Goshute of their own water, it disconnects them from the spring fed ecosystem that provided fish, fowl and game for their people over many centuries. These springs would have continued to flow into the future without interruption, though the proposed SNWA pipeline would remove enough water from the aquifer to lower the water table until it could not flow out from the springs. The aquifers of the Snake and Spring Valley region that borders along and beneath the Goshute Nation’s ancestral homeland were filled during a much wetter climate than our current one, meaning that the springs cannot produce any additional water than what was stored beneath them remaining from the ancient climate that had significantly more rainfall than today. These aquifers cannot remain stable with any additional excessive withdrawals than the already precarious balance between the lower rates of rainfall inadequately refilling the aquifer to levels it cannot achieve as it had before. The springs maintain their flow as there is enough refill from yearly precipitation to maintain the current levels at their present locations. Even the locals who only extract small amounts for irrigation purposes and small scale ranching with runoff returns to the same aquifer can extract too much water and temporarily dry out springs. Since minor variables such as drought years and excessive extraction by locals are enough to reduce spring flows, it follows that the much larger extraction amounts proposed by the SNWA pipeline would permanently dry out springs throughout the region.
The Snake and Spring Valley aquifer system is interconnected from east to west beneath the Snake Range. The northeastern edge borders along the Goshute Nation’s homeland and the southeastern edge enters into southwestern Utah. Removal of excessive water from any part of the Snake or Spring Valley aquifer will drop water levels across the entire region as a result of the interconnected system. This level drop will dry out the springs that the Goshute depend upon and the loss of water will be a significant deterrent for them to stay there and remain culturally intact. The difference between the Goshute removal and the Cherokee Trail of Tears is that the modern day cultural genocide against the Goshute is more subtle and deceptive while the older cultural genocide against the Cherokee was overt and used direct force of guns.
However, removal of water from beneath one’s home is enough of a loaded gun to be considered use of indirect force to facilitate removal, despite the covert nature of the SNWA’s pipeline. Though several professional scientists have repeatedly warned that the SNWA pipeline withdrawals will result in aquifer level drop and loss of spring ecosystems, the SNWA refuses to consider other more reasonable options for securing water for the Las Vegas region. Instead the SNWA employs propaganda to discredit the scientists, calling them mentally ill extremists who are against progress and jobs, “Taking food from out of the mouths of construction worker’s families.” The verbal hostility and ad hominem attacks from SNWA officials like General Mulroy towards scientists is enough to drive even the most logical ecologist egghead into a state of pure rage. Instead of working with scientists to facilitate more reasonable solutions such as additional conservation, rainwater harvesting and floodplain widening, the SNWA employs propaganda to frighten the residents and ratepayers of Las Vegas into accepting the pipeline as the only other option besides drought. This type of fear inciting propaganda of impending drought was also used by the planners of the Owens Lake water heist nearly a century ago when Los Angeles ratepayers picked up the tab for an expensive aqueduct that financially benefitted the architects who secretly siphoned off some of the new aqueduct water for their development schemes in the San Fernando Valley. The owner and editor in chief of the L.A. Times during the early century General Otis also stifled dialogue that questioned the motives of the aqueduct planners and the results that the aqueduct would have on the water source location of Owens Lake. The opponents of the aqueduct were frequently labeled as “violent anarchists” by General Otis on the L.A. Times editorial page. The LADWP mirrored the SNWA as the regulatory bureaucrats that purchased land from ranchers and devalued their property, coercing land sales at low prices.
Ironically one of the early supporters and financial backers of the SNWA pipeline was one Mr. Harvey Whittemore, the developer of the Coyote Springs subdivision along U.S. 93 some 50 miles north of downtown Las Vegas. The location of Coyote Springs is along the pipeline route and depends upon water outside of the region, with another 100,000 homes being planned provided that the pipeline delivers. Other developers such as KB Homes are also proponents of the SNWA pipeline, it could be said that all proponents who spoke at the Nevada State Engineer’s public comment in October 2011 were employed in the housing and construction industries. As if there weren’t already enough existing homes in foreclosure throughout Las Vegas, the pro-pipeline developers are now wanting to build more suburban sprawl along the U.S. 93 pipeline corridor. The claims made by pipeline proponents were that the construction workers could not feed their families if the SNWA pipeline wasn’t constructed, though this neglects the fact that throughout Las Vegas many homes are in disrepair (not just the ones in foreclosure!) and could use some reconstruction labor. In addition retrofitting homes, casinos and other commercial and office rooftops with rainwater harvesting systems will provide long term technically skilled workers with lifelong green careers.
Technological innovations with large scale rainwater harvesting systems for casinos could utilize the surface area of their roof for harnessing energy in addition to saving extra rainwater and reducing runoff. Harvesting energy with a rainwater harvesting system uses a principle in physics called potential gravitational energy. This defines the potential to create energy through downwards momentum along with the speed and force of gravity per mass of raindrop. The formation of rainclouds results from evaporation of seawater traveling upwards and condensing at the height of the clouds usually 1,000 feet or more above sea level. Heat rising with convection transports large volumes of water from sea level up to heights and across the deserts towards the Las Vegas Valley every summer as extreme thundershowers.
Potential energy requires the lifting from convection along rising heat currents transporting evaporated seawater aloft and the storing of potential energy as mobile clouds. The potential energy of water stored in clouds is lost as momentum as water hits ground, enters the watershed as rivers and returns to sea level. When a raindrop travels along a river the potential energy is zero at return to sea level. At sea level the former raindrop will not be able to travel any lower, thus becoming a zero value for potential energy. Rainwater harvesting systems atop tall casinos have the potential to intervene and collect potential energy of rainwater by forcing the downwards traveling water to turn a turbine inside the drainage tube as it heads towards lower elevations with the force of gravity. The potential energy of the water traveling with gravitational force turns the turbine that is connected by wires to a storage battery. The surface area of the roof combined with the amount of precipitation will determine the total net energy collected by spinning turbines as the water travels down the tube towards the filtration system and storage system below the building. Some amount of the collected potential energy would be used to pump the water up from the cistern below the building to ground level for usage. In advanced rainwater systems the use of capillary tubing could assist in moving water to upper floors without requiring the same amount of energy gained through the turbines in the drainage tubes. Capillary tubing assists water traveling upwards based upon the trees moving water from their roots to their leaves the exact same way. Potential energy is equal to the volume of water at heights and the distance it will travel downwards with gravity in the form of raindrops or other frozen precipitation such as hail.
The large volume of rainwater in summer thundershowers is most significant when understanding the severe flood dangers that Las Vegas residents experience each summer. When summer thunderstorms drop water most enters the roads as runoff as the hardpan surfaces of asphalt, concrete and caliche soils all prevent absorption and cause nearly 100 percent of precipitation to become runoff. The high rate of precipitation over an hour or two is enough to overwhelm the roadways with runoff that cannot escape fast enough as it swells from rainwater. The total net runoff would be precipitation combined with the surface area of roads, parking lots, sidewalks and rooftops. Rainwater harvesting systems would subtract the surface area of rooftops from the total net runoff equation. How would this new equation with no net runoff contribution from rooftop surface area alter the flooding potential? Depending on the variables, it can be reasoned that an overall net reduction of runoff may decrease the severity of summer thundershower flooding by implementing rooftop rainwater harvesting systems.
Finally the storage potential of this large volume of harvested and filtered water can be subtracted from water rates as the rooftop surface area per year of precipitation is not coming from Lake Mead or elsewhere other than the sky above. Homeowners with rainwater harvesting barrels have options for using it for bathing or even drinking. The myths that rainwater harvesting systems are not safe for drinking can be dispelled by understanding the types of filtration systems using charcoal and gravel could be even more effective than municipal sources and their underground pipe networks or the unregulated wilderness of bottled water quality.
There are three incentives for installing rooftop rainwater harvest systems; store filtered rainwater in underground cisterns for later use, potential energy collection by turbines in drainage tubes and reduce total runoff from summer thundershowers to reduce flooding severity. The average yearly rainfall in Las Vegas isn’t very much, though the yearly regularity means that it is a long term solution and an addition to Lake Mead sources. The long term regularity of rainwater harvesting stands opposed to the short term “bonanza” of distant aquifer water coming from out of a pipeline. The problem with the aquifer pipeline is that it cannot last beyond twenty years at the proposed rate without permanently exhausting the supply.
The legacy that General Mulroy chooses to be remembered by could be one of technological and green innovation, helping Las Vegas to become trendsetters in development of advanced rainwater harvesting systems. This legacy would certainly elevate her status as an enlightened individual and remove any risks of cultural genocide when the pipeline collapses spring ecosystems and forces the Goshute Nation off of their land.
On September 13, 2007, the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was adopted by the General Assembly. This decision comes as a result of more than twenty years of work by indigenous peoples and the United Nations system; http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/5yr-HLE3.pdf http://social.un.org/index/IndigenousPeoples.aspx
"THE RIGHT TO EXIST; GENOCIDE, ETHNOCIDE AND CULTURAL GENOCIDE
The Declaration protects against a wide variety of threats to indigenous peoples' culture and integrity, including specific problems affecting indigenous peoples, such as removal of children. It calls for the prevention of ethnocide and cultural genocide, which include actions such as population transfers, imposed assimilation and integration, and any form of propaganda against indigenous peoples.
One striking provision completely prohibits the forcible removal of indigenous peoples from their lands or territories - a long-needed protection against the abuses in recent years in the Americas and in other parts of the world. Special protections are also declared for periods of armed conflict aimed at preventing the abuses that have often occurred to indigenous peoples may be threatened." The state would further be required to provide interpretation for indigenous individuals in political, legal and administrative proceedings." http://www.culturalsurvival.org/publications/cultural-survival-quarterly/united-states/commentary-un-draft-declaration-rights-indige
Article 7 of a 1994 draft of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples uses the phrase "cultural genocide" but does not define what it means. The complete article reads as follows:
Indigenous peoples have the collective and individual right not to be subjected to ethnocide and cultural genocide, including prevention of and redress for:
(a) Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities;
(b) Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources;
(c) Any form of population transfer which has the aim or effect of violating or undermining any of their rights;
(d) Any form of assimilation or integration by other cultures or ways of life imposed on them by legislative, administrative or other measures;
(e) Any form of propaganda directed against them.
This declaration only appeared in a draft. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly during its 62nd session at UN Headquarters in New York City on 13 September 2007, but only mentions "genocide", not "cultural genocide", although the article is otherwise unchanged. http://www.enotes.com/topic/Cultural_genocide
Female authoritarians like SNWA General Manager Patricia Mulroy are no different from their male counterparts in positions of power. They have the potential to drive people like myself crazy... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHYnS9Dm-g8
Report this post as:
by 65 billion gallons per year at $15 billion
Tuesday, Apr. 17, 2012 at 1:43 PM
Southern Nevada Water Authority Groundwater Pumping & Pipeline Proposal
The Southern Nevada Water Authority, the water agency for Las Vegas, Henderson, and N. Las Vegas has applied to pump up to 200,000 acre-feet annually from eastern Nevada and send it through 300 miles of 8 foot diameter pipe to support the area's uncontrolled growth. The cost is currently estimated at $15 billion dollars. Just how much water is 200,000 acre-feet annually? It is more than 65 billion gallons of water – every year.
Map: Proposed Clark, Lincoln and White Pine Counties Groundwater Development Project
Map: Shows areas of current cultural use and interest as identified by CTGR elders (colored areas), overlaid with the water table drawdown impact area (red line). Click the map for a closer look.
SNWA claims that it can pump and permanently remove the water from eastern Nevada's desert valleys without any harm to people or to wildlife. Independent hydrologists contend that mining and exporting so much water will cause major environmental degradation and destroy the livelihoods of rural residents and tribal communities in eastern Nevada and western Utah. The area affected by the massive pumping proposal is home to National Wildlife Refuges in Nevada and Utah, state wildlife management areas, Great Basin National Park, Native American communities and dozens of agricultural communities who have been living within the constraints of the regions’ limited water supplies for over a century.
The proposed pumping would bring two hundred or more wells with power lines, roads, and pipelines though several valleys which are isolated and ecologically intact. Communities like Baker, Nevada on the Utah border would have large production wells in their backyard sending local water to a city 300 miles away. The Goshute Tribe and ranchers throughout the Snake Valley believe that water they depend on for their agricultural as well as cultural livelihoods will "dry up" if the project is approved.
* Some information provided by Great Basin Water Network.
View SNWA's Conceptual Plan of Development
Nevada State Engineer Water Rights Hearing
The purpose of the water rights hearing was for the State of Nevada to determine if there is excess water available in Spring, Cave, Delamar, and Dry Lake valleys available for pumping. The Nevada State Engineer is in the process of assessing whether to grant a quantity of water (92,000 acre feet) for interbasin transfer of those rights to SNWA. Protestants presented their arguments on water availability and rights, cultural and ecological impacts, pipeline necessity, and more.
The Confederated Tribes of the Goshute assembled a legal team that presented evidence that the granting of water rights to SNWA will impede on federally recognized Goshute water rights. Not only will SNWA’s acquisition of water rights impede legal specifications on tribal water rights, but also the granting of rights to SNWA threatens the very livelihood and future of Goshute culture.
Since the hearing has concluded, The Nevada State Engineer, Jason King will have until March 2012 to make a decision on how much if any water rights to approve to SNWA.
On October 7th, several members of the Goshute tribe as well as Ely Shoshone representatives boarded the "Groundwater Express" en route to Carson City in order to attend the oral comment period in front of the Nevada State Engineer. Check out the Media and Publications tab for more info.
The Goshute legal team presented in front of the Nevada State Engineer on November 14th, ending the following day on the 15th.
HERE is a report on the "Groundwater Express"
Bureau of Land Management's Draft Environmental Impact Statement
The NEPA review process enables the United States Federal Government to assess a proposed development project’s effect on the environment. Any development project proposed on public or federal land is subject to the NEPA review process.
The U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) received an application from the Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) for a right-of-way (ROW) permit to provide access to public lands for the purpose of constructing and operating pipelines, power lines, and ancillary facilities for groundwater conveyance. These facilities are associated with groundwater rights currently in application status with the Nevada State Engineer. This groundwater (up to 176,655 acre-feet per year) would be withdrawn in central-eastern Nevada and transported via pipeline to the Las Vegas Valley. http://www.goshutewater.org/index.php/las-vegas-pipeline.html
Report this post as:
by monsoon rain in India harvested
Tuesday, Apr. 17, 2012 at 2:31 PM
"Urban rainwater harvesting
Urban centres in India are facing an ironical situation today. On one hand there is the acute water scarcity and on the other, the streets are often flooded during the monsoons. This has led to serious problems with quality and quantity of groundwater.
This is despite the fact that all these cities receive good rainfall. However, this rainfall occurs during short spells of high intensity. (Most of the rain falls in just 100 hours out of 8,760 hours in a year). Because of such short duration of heavy rain, most of the rain falling on the surface tends to flow away rapidly leaving very little for recharge of groundwater. Most of the traditional water harvesting systems in cities have been neglected and fallen into disuse, worsening the urban water scenario. One of the solutions to the urban water crisis is rainwater harvesting - capturing the runoff.
This is practiced on a large scale in cities like Chennai, Bangalore and Delhi where rainwater harvesting is a part of the state policy. Elsewhere, countries like Germany, Japan, United States, and Singapore are also adopting rainwater harvesting.
Why to harvest rain?
In areas where there is inadequate groundwater supply or surface resources are either lacking or insufficient, rainwater harvesting offers an ideal solution.
Helps in utilising the primary source of water and prevent the runoff from going into sewer or storm drains, thereby reducing the load on treatment plants.
Reduces urban flooding.
Recharging water into the aquifers help in improving the quality of existing groundwater through dilution. http://www.rainwaterharvesting.org/urban/urban.htm
Report this post as:
by rainwater harvesting works in Kenya
Tuesday, Apr. 17, 2012 at 2:50 PM
There are some in the SNWA who have dismissed me as a crazy fool when i mention that rainwater harvesting is a more sustainable and reliable long term source for water than pipelines from distant aquifers that will soon be overdrafted.
This idea of rainwater harvesting is only new and "crazy" from the perspective of a corporatist system that expects unlimited water supplies from a desert aquifer simply because they have money! This perspective of unlimited water from aquifers only shows ignorance of ecology and a lack of understanding of why the desert is so dry to begin with!
People in Kenya also get monsoon summer thundershowers as does Las Vegas region and they are wise enough to collect the monsoon waters as efficiently as possible;
Rainwater Harvesting Seen as Solution for Drought and Flood Control
In Kenyan cities like Nairobi, rainwater harvesting is seen as a solution to multiple problems.
April 6, 2009
NAIROBI - Bitter irony: in recent years Nairobi has experienced severe flooding and widespread water shortages, due to poor urban planning and collapsing infrastructure systems that are failing to support the Kenyan capital's expanding population.
Large parts of the city are not properly served by water and sanitation infrastructure, particularly crowded areas like the Eastlands estates of Umoja, Makongeni and Doholm but also wealthier enclaves such as Karen and Langata.
At the same time, the rapid expansion of the city has led to sealing off of large surface areas, increasing the speed and volume of storm water run-off. Furious flooding exposes and damages water pipelines and chokes drainage channels with debris, spilling raw sewage into the streets.
David Mburu, chair of the Kenya Rainwater Association, says because there is too much surface cover, rain water is prevented from percolating into the ground. Some city residents who have opted for boreholes as an alternative to the intermittent water supply are now experiencing inadequate yields.
Mburu says there is a need to encourage both the harvesting of rainwater from buildings and directing run-off water into system of drains that would recharge the groundwater levels.
"Not all this water should be harvested and stored since we also need to recharge our groundwater levels by encouraging use of construction material that allows for seeping of run-off water into the ground or leaving as much surface that allows infiltration of water as possible," he says.
Peris Otachi, a resident of Kayole Estate, lost a brother in the 2001 floods, the worst experienced in Nairobi in recent years. "Flooding in Nairobi has become an annual ritual which unfortunately is never addressed by the city council or the government despite causing deaths and massive destruction."
Eleven people were killed by floods in Nairobi in 2001; while police cannot confirm the exact numbers, at least 21 more people have been drowned in flood waters since then. Otachi, whose younger brother's body was only found on the banks of the Nairobi River four days later, is now among residents who strongly believe that the floods can be controlled and the rainwater made better use of.
"It all starts with demystifying the rainwater harvesting technology," says Mr Stephen Mutoro."Let the people know it is within their reach to do it and its for their benefit in that they would reduce their water bills and access adequate water for non-potable use." Mutoro is the Executive Secretary of the Kenya Water and Sanitation Network (KWSN), a water consumers’ lobby group based in Nairobi.
"We need to create methods to capture rainwater as surface water is inadequate to meet demand in congested, over-paved metropolitan cities," says Professor Shaukat Abdulrazak, executive secretary of the National Council of Science and Technology.
A government statutory institute, the Council supports simple but effective rainwater harvesting methods as a solution to the over-paved city verandahs and streets. These include the installation of gutters to capture the roof water and setting up of underground storage tanks, especially by those putting up new homes and buildings.
How to get the process under way is a matter of some debate. Officials from the newly-created Nairobi Metropolitan Development (NMD) ministry, a new management structure for the greater Nairobi area, say rain water harvesting is to be enhanced to address the twin issue of flooding and water scarcity in the city of three million people, 75 percent of whom live in water-scarce slum and low income areas.
"We want to enhance effective rain water harvesting under an investment framework for water and sewerage services in the proposed metropolitan area in addition to managing metropolis’s water resource management capacity," NMD minister Mutula Kilonzo promised during the launch of the draft on the proposed metropolis by President Kibaki in January 2008. http://www.alternet.org/water/135403/rainwater_harvesting_seen_as_solution_for_drought_and_flood_control/
Report this post as:
by Resident's Rates Up 30%
Tuesday, Apr. 24, 2012 at 1:57 PM
A Good Day for Golf Courses… the Rest of Us, Not So Much
Posted on February 29, 2012
by Launce Rake in Economy, Environment
The upshot from today’s unfortunate vote by the SNWA board on water-rate increases here in Clark County: Golf courses and casinos win big, residents and small businesses take it on the chin.
The board, backed by Labor, backed the casino “option,” although according to a number of speakers, SNWA never seriously considered continued charging for consumption, or what people and businesses use, over a flat-fee, which eliminated conservation rewards from the commodity charge for residents and small businesses who have invested, in some cases thousands, in water conservation measures. Residents will see rate increases from 15 to 30 percent, on average; minimal water users will see larger increases than high-volume water users.
The real losers were small businesses, which could see their water bills soar by 70 percent. The real winners are casinos and those bastians of blue-collar, progressive organizing, the golf courses. They will see their bills go up by less than 3 percent.
How many of the union members are high-volume users living in gated communities?
We could get into a larger discussion of mean v. median, but clearly the high-volume users, the casino execs and Pat Mulroys of the world, bend the “average” away from many hundreds of thousands of thrifty water users. Those using minimal amounts are losers, and if this is the model for future rate hikes, will become even bigger losers down the road. High-volume users, naturally, are much happier to pay the $5 flat-fee charge than a per-gallon charge on their water use.
The Nevada Resort Association boss, Virginia Valentine, was so sure of the vote that she didn’t even bother to sign in to speak, appearing only after a representative from the Sierra Club (me!) and numerous speakers from small businesses talked about the inherent inequity of the rate hikes.
The vote comes despite the fact that public comment was overwhelming supportive of a consumption-based charge. One does not need to be a sophisticated political scientist to see that this is a case in which money, and power, trump public desires.
It gets worse.
Labor argued that this was a good move because we no longer need conservation, and this echoes the consistent message that the SNWA and Pat Mulroy have peddled throughout this process: conserving water (and with it, energy) just doesn’t make sense any more. (This is apparently the source of SNWA’s absurd meme that conservation costs people more – never mind that conservation has so far saved ratepayers from a $15 billion pipeline, the most expensive infrastructure project in the country, and if you think your water-bill increase is a lot to swallow now…)
One piece of good news is that, at least for now, people still have some incentive to conserve water. This only affects the SNWA portion of your bill. The local provider – the Water District, or the cities of Henderson, North Las Vegas or Boulder City – still includes conservation incentives. Again, for now.
The good news is that Chris Giunchigliani of the Clark County Commission, a strong advocate for sensible public policy and smart conservation, has promised to revisit this issue on her board. The county commission is also the Las Vegas Valley Water District, which sends the bills to customers in Las Vegas and unincorporated Clark County. http://thenevadaview.com/3317/a-good-day-for-golf-courses-the-rest-of-us-not-so-much/
Funny enough, SNWA produced that ad years ago. And funny enough, SNWA looked poised last decade to lead the nation in forming innovative and progressive water conservation measures. But now that Nevada State Engineer Jason King has green-lighted the proposed Snake Valley "water grab" from rural Eastern Nevada and Western Utah, SNWA seems to be slacking off in the conservation department as it rewards the region's biggest "water hogs" over small users in Clark County who have been working to conserve water. And now that SNWA is feeling emboldened by recent news, it's raising rates disproportionately on small users in order to fund the Snake Valley Pipeline.
Remember that the Snake Valley Pipeline began as a scheme way to make feasible Harvey Whittemore's proposed Coyote Springs exurban development that he wanted to stretch all the way to Lincoln County. Yet despite all the political and legal fallout over Harvey Whittemore and the budding scandals surrounding him, SNWA still plans to proceed with this pipeline. Why? http://nvprogressive.blogspot.com/2012/04/what-waste-or-why-southern-nevadas.html
Report this post as: