water, water, water

[RockyGlen]

Please excuse my rambling thoughts this morning....I went to bed rather depressed and woke up rather grumpy.

In our neck of the woods it is common for farmers and ranchers to spend a week or so before the busy season starts just visiting neighbors. You tell the neighbor to the west you need to fix your fence and he offers to help. The neighbor to the east says his wife is sick and he's not sure how he'll manage to get his hay in, so you offer to help. Just that neighborly kind of thing - finding out what each other is up to and how everybody can help each other out.

This year it wasn't as much fun as normal. The men are mad and the women are worried. There's a lot of talk about what's going on in Colorado and Oregon. There's alot of talk about ethanol and how bad it is for everyone but the corn farmers. There's a lot of talk about city folks making rules that take away our livelihood and about getting food from overseas and about our country becoming weak, sissy momma's boys who forget how to grow their own food or even change their own oil. There's talk about baling out stupid city mortgages for greedy people and coddling the druggies and illegals. There's talk about a coming depression or a coming war of epic proportions.

But mostly - there's talk water. Don't get me wrong - there's always a little general grumbling, but nothing like I am seeing this year. A few days ago someone on here told me that everything was downstream from us and growing crops where they weren't meant to be was stupid. The farmers here are complaining about the big cities and how stupid it is to live in stacked kennels like dogs. There seems to be a general feeling that the city people might riot if they lose their water....but the country people have guns and know how to use them and will fight to protect the water that they need to grow things. Most seem to think it is their duty to not lose the ability to grow food for Americans in America.

There seems to be a lot of talk about how people out here fought for the land and fought for open range and fought for water and fought and fought....and that just because most americans have lost the instinct to protect themselves, the farmers and ranchers out here have not.

I guess that's what's bothering me.... Is water going to be the cause of the next civil war? Is anyone else seeing or hearing this kind of thing? What about those in CO and OR? Does farming in this country have a future?????

[fishhead]

Water supply is definitely going to lead to conflicts. The supply is getting divided into smaller and smaller portions because we have failed to stabilize our population. Then add to the changing rainfall patterns from climate change and we face a lot of challenges that we could have avoided.

Meanwhile the "leaders" fiddle and the majority of the public stays glued to the tube watching Survivor.

[anniew]

Exactly, fishhead. And when the population situation was brought up on another thread about having large families, there was heck to pay. Like most things, water is water, and it takes a minimum amount for each person in this country, continent or planet, and the more people, the less to divide...same for food. And then there are wastes...biological, chemical, etc.
I don't care how simply and efficiently each person or family lives, it still takes resources which are finite.
And although the thought of being "stacked in cages" isn't appealing to me, just think if all of them wanted to get their acre or two. Where would farming land be than? I believe that each person has the right to pursue what they want, but I'm glad many are happy to stay in the cities.
Ann

[Terri]

Originally Posted by RockyGlen

I guess that's what's bothering me.... Is water going to be the cause of the next civil war? Is anyone else seeing or hearing this kind of thing? What about those in CO and OR? Does farming in this country have a future?????

Not a chance.

I grew up in California, and conflicts about water were common. California is an arid state, and the population is huge!

IF a city goes after your water, it will NOT lead to armed conflict because they government has an army and you do not. Will you start a shooting war with the government with your kids in the next room? Nope. If the city does not win the first few conflicts, they will call in the feds.

Cities who are short on water need to cut down on water use. At times in California it is ILLEGAL to water your lawn or wash your car. You are given a glass of water in a restaurant only if you ask, because people who order soda might not WANT the glass of water, so why give it????

People who don't like it will either move and/or yell at their governments to get them more water.

*IS* there another source of water that could be developed? Even if it is more expensive than taking YOUR water, they might agree. IT is not just the farmers who would suffer, it is the people that you do business with. You *WILL* have some backers, if you can figure out another reliable source of water!

Speaking from what I have seen, if a city needs more water they WILL get it, because there are a LOT of voters in a city! They CAN be put off a few years with no-lawn-watering laws, and if the drougth breaks that will help a LOT, but I think that they WILL succeed in bringing in more water.

The big question is, is there another source? Politicians LIKE to take the cheapest source, but if there is enough fuss they MIGHT go for a source that does not harm you.

After all, farmers ALSO vote, as to the equipment dealers and the local storekeepers you support and the people who buy at farmers markets and the people who enjoy the beauty of your farms.

[Jim S.]

I agree that water is going to be the chief source of conflict internally in the USA in coming years. Add in the fact that our population is growing most rapidly in the states least hydrologically able to handle that, and there is big trouble brewing. Some of the Western aquifers that have been tapped to run Phoenix, Albuquerque, etc., take 1,000 to 5,000 years to replenish. Essentially, what we are doing out West is mining water deposited a long time ago for a great deal of the current water supply, and it is not an immediately renewable resource. As far as surface water, global warming will reduce average snowpacks over coming years, leading to shortage.

Lest we in the East think we have it fine, droughts are already ruling this area, and water is becoming short enough in supply that TVA has curtailed a good sized chunk of its hydroelectric generating capacity in order to conserve lake levels. I am in extreme drought where I live now. Things are still green now due to just barely enough rain, but hay crops will be short this spring and who knows what it will look like after our regular dry summer period passes. An increasing number of farmers are going to irrigation, which is pumped from wells, which further degrades the amount of available groundwater.

Plus, we waste so much. US residents use the highest gallons per capita per day of any country in the world.

Eventually, access to water will become a haves and have-nots matter, and as usual, those with the money will get the commodity.

RockyGlen, I do applaud a lifestyle like you have, where your neighbors cooperate and work together. Not so prevalent in my part of the country, which is a "by your own bootstraps" kind of area. I'm not saying I could not get -- or would not give -- help in really dire circumstances, but day to day helping out just doesn't get done much. I have watched that neighborliness decline as my area has moved from rural to semi-rural, a situation where most all of us of working age are working full time off-farm and then doing the farm work when we get home. And most of the folks surrounding me are of working age; there are just a few retirees. Cherish your good neighbors!

[fordy]

....................This is a solution that I've wondered about for a while.....given the mississippi floods every so often , I don't see why the corps of engineers can't intercept the flow somewhere above St.Louis and Divert some of the excess , West too kansas , oklahoma and Texas . Along this route they could construct huge holding lakes that obviously would possibly get filled UP in a very short period of time . The biggest expense would occur IF they had too pump huge volumes of water UP hill , but since the elevations are relatively low I'm sure that a route can be found that will allow a gravity flow transfer albeit maybe a little cRooked , LOL .
......................Now , obviously , people are going to loose some rather large tracts of privately owned land for the "Common Good" of the whole country . Additionally , once these reservoirs are filled they will be sources of revenue for the locals due to recreation , fishing and the obvious growth all around their perimeter . , fordy...

[fishhead]

There are tens of millions of people living in cities who are completely dependent on glacier melt for their water source. Those glaciers are now disappearing at a fast rate. When the water stops those tens of millions of people will be displaced.

Water has to be available in order to get it from another source. The SW US with it's growing population is unsustainable and there doesn't seem to be any other source of that water when they hit the wall. If that area has a prolonged drought those people will be forced to move and the economy in that area will collapse. That will send a ripple through the nations economy.

Lake Superior is dropping because of our prolonged drought. Our area is in extreme drought and the lakes are dropping. So are our aquifers.

Overpopulation is the engine that is driving us into the wall. We have two choices; voluntarily stabilize our population or wait until resource scarcity forces us and if we are foolish enough to allow the latter I expect it to result in a population correction. When nature forces a correction is normally pretty harsh and results in a crash.

These next few decades are going to be challenging and the longer we wait the worse it will be and the harder our decisions will be.

[RockyGlen]

Originally Posted by Jim S.

Add in the fact that our population is growing most rapidly in the states least hydrologically able to handle that, and there is big trouble brewing.

Cherish your good neighbors!

I would be very curious to know how much of our population growth is due to immigration, rather than fertility.

And I do cherish my neighbors...very much so!

[Wolf mom]

Can't build in & around Phoenix anymore unless you can show you have a 100 year water supply. But the growth is still spreading like Anthem, N. of Phoenix. Yet there's sink holes all over Scottsdale & recently the Tempe Lake...
I mentioned in another thread, that some counties are metering peoples private(?) wells. I think states are aware of the issue, but big business still talks louder.
One of the farmers main issues, and that home developers have used for years, is that it takes a lot more water to grow farm products than people use...
I don't have an answer or an idea except limit population growth. And as usual, my mantra is keep in touch with your legislators. Tell them your concerns. I don't hear this topic addressed on the debates...

Maybe global warming will resolve the issue for us as the polar caps shrink.

[Jim S.]

fishead, I always say that humans are arrogant creatures. We THINK we have control and can technologically get our way out of stuff...but in reality, these are illusions of intellect, and we in actuality are bound by and follow the same natural laws as a deer herd, field mice, or a bunch of bacteria in a Petrie dish.

The bacteria, finding food in the gelatin, multiply until the natural resource is used up, then die off in proportion to the amount of food remaining. Not all die. But there is a population collapse.

OK, we're so smart, right? We won't do that? Name any macro cycle so far where we have not followed that exact framework of nature. You can't find one.

Next macro cycle to come: CO2. And we are still debating whether we even need to do anything about it in this country, which produces 2/3 of it.

I rest my case. LOL.

Wolf mom, your comment puzzle me, as I have a friend who is a Phoenix architect, and he tells me he has never been busier. Says he'd like to retire, but can't justify the monetary loss, due to the housing boom.

[Jim S.]

Originally Posted by RockyGlen

I would be very curious to know how much of our population growth is due to immigration, rather than fertility.

And I do cherish my neighbors...very much so!

OK, I will tell you. When Columbus landed, there were 60 million Indians in the part of North America now called the USA. Today, there are 2 million fullbloods left. The remaining 298 million folks are all immigrants.

[fishhead]

Speaking just locally (US) immigration accounts for a big percentage but what's an even larger impact is that many immigrants carry with them the culture of large families. That is where the bulk of our increase is going to come from.

Each year the world population increases by 75,000,000 people. That means that every four years we add people equivalent of the entire US population who will need goods and services from our environment for 50-60 years. Much if not most of that increase comes in nations that cannot provide for the people already living.

[Argent Farms]

Originally Posted by Jim S.

Next macro cycle to come: CO2. And we are still debating whether we even need to do anything about it in this country, which produces 2/3 of it.

I rest my case. LOL.

Do you have a citation for the "fact" that the United States produces 2/3 of CO2 emissions?

[LisaInN.Idaho]

Originally Posted by Wolf mom

Can't build in & around Phoenix anymore unless you can show you have a 100 year water supply. But the growth is still spreading like Anthem, N. of Phoenix. Yet there's sink holes all over Scottsdale & recently the Tempe Lake...
I mentioned in another thread, that some counties are metering peoples private(?) wells. I think states are aware of the issue, but big business still talks louder.
One of the farmers main issues, and that home developers have used for years, is that it takes a lot more water to grow farm products than people use...
I don't have an answer or an idea except limit population growth. And as usual, my mantra is keep in touch with your legislators. Tell them your concerns. I don't hear this topic addressed on the debates...

Maybe global warming will resolve the issue for us as the polar caps shrink.

The Phoenix water situation seems so crazy to me. We moved from there 5 years ago but I remember when they started Anthem that they were leasing water rights from the Ak-Chin tribe. The tribes in Arizona are going to be the movers and shakers in the state with their increased water rights.
The idea of all these lakes in the desert (Tempe, Anthem) just seems crazy to me. When I remember the evaporation rate of a swimming pool and how often we had to top it off...can you imagine how much water is lost from a huge lake into the air? And with all of the sprinkler systems for golf courses, lawns and waterfront homes in the desert...I'm glad I live on a river and not leasing water that may someday run out.

[chickenista]

Some rich fellers are having the forethought to start buying up water rights. I wish I could remember where I saw it, but they are buying up water rights on lands in the southwest area. Sorta like the mineral rights used to be. It is going to be interesting to see how how the next 20 years or so pan out. I am gonna collect all of my rainwater and greywater the garden below the washer. It is the least I can do.

[gccrook]

Originally Posted by Jim S.

OK, I will tell you. When Columbus landed, there were 60 million Indians in the part of North America now called the USA. Today, there are 2 million fullbloods left. The remaining 298 million folks are all immigrants.

I just want to know who counted all those native americans?

[fordy]

Originally Posted by chickenista

Some rich fellers are having the forethought to start buying up water rights. I wish I could remember where I saw it, but they are buying up water rights on lands in the southwest area. Sorta like the mineral rights used to be. It is going to be interesting to see how how the next 20 years or so pan out. I am gonna collect all of my rainwater and greywater the garden below the washer. It is the least I can do.

..............Yep , that would be T.Boone Pickens , as he is\has purchased the water rights too 70 to 100,000 acres in the texas panhandle or maybe more by now . The water zone in question is the Ogallala which runs all the way up into Nebraska or maybe even farther . His plan is to pipe it too Amarillo , Lubbock , Midland-Odessa , and east to the Dfw area if he can negotiate agreements with the cities in question . , fordy...

[Jan Doling]

The powers that be divert all our water to the south of the state so that we can experience drought conditions annually. Each year the drought starts earlier and lasts longer. Then they act so surprised when we have uncontrollable wildfires (which destroy the place the water should have been but never the place where the water was diverted).

[moopups]

One answer is to build 'air wells', its a technology that involves removing moisture from the air, first there is built a long underground tube, diameter as big as you can afford for the project. There is a 180 degree entrance way that turns and points toward the Earth, a rodent/bug screen is installed.

At the other end there is a vertical cylindrical area with stainless steel 'pie shaped' plates, all titled and pointing toward the center. A collection basin is installed under the drip way, condensation gathers on the SS and drips to it. This is capped with a black metal chimney that extents above the ground, the heat causes air flow out the top, drawing in new air.

The daily yield depends on the humidity of the area. There are no moving parts to the main device, only an out side mounted pump to draw the water out, which can be triggered by a float system switch.

[Jim S.]

Originally Posted by Argent Farms

Do you have a citation for the "fact" that the United States produces 2/3 of CO2 emissions?

Ohhhh, good catch! That's bad memory on my part, I should have looked it up again. Let me set the record straight.

By country, the U.S. actually emits 24%, according to 2002 data collected by the U.N. So 1/4 of the total. That's more than the combined output of more than 2/3 of the world's countries. In fact, every country below #8 Canada (which produces 2.1%) generates under 2% of the total.

So out of 185 ranked countries in 2002, 123 produced 0.1% or less; 38 were between 0.1% and 0.9%; 13 were between 1% and 1.8%; 6 were between 2.1% and 5.9%. China and the European Union produced 14.5% and 15.3%, respectively.

And at the top was the USA, at 24.3%.

According to an Associated Press story from May 3, 2007, the U.S. government projects that by 2020 the U.S. will emit "almost one-fifth more gases that lead to global warming than it did in 2000, increasing the risks of drought and scarce water supplies.

That projection comes from an internal draft report from the Bush administration that is more than a year overdue at the United Nations. The Associated Press obtained a copy Saturday."

Full story...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17441481/

Glad to set the record straight.