Ever Shrinking Lake Mead

[mdj930]

Originally Posted by Sooner or later

Mead and Powell absolutely dwarf any other reservoir that are upstream. Both are below 30%.

Mead capacity at 29 million acre feet
Powell 26 million acre feet

All of the dams on the main stem (includes Powell and Mead) have a combined 58 million acre feet.

Upper basin 10 million acre feet
Lower basin 10 million acre feet.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dams_in_the_Colorado_River_system

Here is another list of all reservoirs upstream from LakePowell. They are at 65% capacity. 6 million acre feet.

Reservoirs Upstream of Lake Powell

They could basically empty Powell and every reservoir feeding Powell and the result would be Mead would still not being at capacity.

Tell me about that manipulation of lake levels.

Shouldn't a draught effect down stream also?
Lake Havasu has been over full all summer. After a very quick search the body's of water down stream are not experiencing anywhere near the same stress as Powell and mead.

[3rd_gear_Ted]

Originally Posted by mdj930

Shouldn't a draught effect down stream also?
Lake Havasu has been over full all summer. After a very quick search the body's of water down stream are not experiencing anywhere near the same stress as Powell and mead.

The design intent of the system is to not have Havasu & Mojave fluctuate more than a couple feet. This allows precise dam releases between the Davis, Parker, Moovalya & Palo Verde dams.

[Sooner or later]

Originally Posted by mdj930

Shouldn't a draught effect down stream also?
Lake Havasu has been over full all summer. After a very quick search the body's of water down stream are not experiencing anywhere near the same stress as Powell and mead.

Havasu is 619,000 acre feet. About 2% of Lake Powell.

Why is Lake Havasu so high?

https://lakehavasuhouseboating.com/lake-havasu-water-levels/

[Sooner or later]

Lakes Mead and Powell's levels are at critical levels. There is no government conspiracy.

If we emptied every stinking reservoir on the Colorado River we wouldn't be able to fill Lake Mead.

[island911]

PEOPLE control which lake levels go low first. ...they have meetings and/or talk to each other, no doubt.
Perhaps it a bit dramatic to say that they conspire - sounds malicious.

Did someone here claim the lake levels are a government conspiracy?

[Sooner or later]

Tobra said: "You do realize the lake level at Lake Mead is manipulated for political purposes, right?"

Levels are not manipulated for political purposes. We could empty every reservoir upstream from Mead and it would still be less than full. The only manipulation that is happening is an attempt to keep all reservoirs upstream with a decent amount of capacity. 63% capacity upstream of Powell. And that 63% would only add 20% to Mead or about 10% to each Mead and Powell.

Water use from the Colorado River system is in a critical situation. It is not due to political manipulation.

[mdj930]

Originally Posted by Sooner or later

Lakes Mead and Powell's levels are at critical levels. There is no government conspiracy.

If we emptied every stinking reservoir on the Colorado River we wouldn't be able to fill Lake Mead.

No but if you stopped the release of water you may be able to fill it.
The Colorado river has always been feast or famine untill dams were built. I think it's foolish to not expect situations like this to a cure.

[island911]

Originally Posted by Sooner or later

Tobra said: "You do realize the lake level at Lake Mead is manipulated for political purposes, right?"

Levels are not manipulated for political purposes. We could empty every reservoir upstream from Mead and it would still be less than full. The only manipulation that is happening is an attempt to keep all reservoirs upstream with a decent amount of capacity. 63% capacity upstream of Powell. And that 63% would only add 20% to Mead or about 10% to each Mead and Powell.

Water use from the Colorado River system is in a critical situation. It is not due to political manipulation.

Water rights and distribution is always political. In Seattle the policy (law) had to be changed so that home-owners could have rainwater capture tanks. - Again, Seattle, where rain happens plenty. Now imagine the crazy water policies that have been set up around water in the SW where rain is more rare.

[RNajarian]

8/22/22 Lake Mead water level. Hopefully the trend continues.

[RNajarian]

Here is an interesting article to explain the rising water level you see in the graph above . . .

https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/lake-mead-is-finally-rising-again-here-s-why/ar-AA10Y54X?cvid=f00851c74a0749fe9fdcc3e49b7ac817

“ WHY IS IT RISING?

One of the most common questions when talking about the water level at Lake Mead is speculating why the lake is rising. The prevailing thought is because of the recent monsoonal flow that has brought rain to the area for almost four weeks.

While this has added to the lake level it’s not the only reason according to the Bureau of Reclamation.

“Recent storm events and runoff into the tributaries that enter Lake Mead as well as reduced releases from Hoover – due to a decrease in downstream demand – are the leading cause for the recent increases in Lake Mead’s elevation,” Bureau of Reclamation Public Affairs Officer Michelle Helms told 8 News Now. Helms added that as of Aug. 19 there are no significant changes to operations at Glen Canyon Dam.”

[Daves911L]

Originally Posted by mdj930

No but if you stopped the release of water you may be able to fill it.
The Colorado river has always been feast or famine untill dams were built. I think it's foolish to not expect situations like this to a cure.

True. The dams/reservoirs were built to allow management/manipulation to reduce that feast or famine. Make the lows less low, and the highs less high (I know I'm stating the obvious) and in the process produce more reliable (predictable might be a better word) water supply with the added benefit of power generation.

The "manipulation" that occurs is political of course, water is and has always been intensely political in dry parts of the world. But its also pragmatic, balancing harm/benefit for the people dependent on that system. The current situation has developed mostly as a result of over 2 decades of generally below normal snowpack in the upper basin states. There have been wet years in there, but more dry than wet. That's in contrast to the previous 20 years that were generally more wet than dry. There is a "normal" and well-documented climate record (tree ring data) in the desert southwest going back 1000 years that shows pretty consistent 20-30 year wet/dry cycles.

Exacerbating this recent dry period is that the upper basin states have gradually been using more and more of their allocation. The lower basin states have always used their full allocations, and then some. This worked out OK in the past because unused upper basin water provided a little "slop" in what was probably an overallocated system.

Several here have noted that upper basin storage is very low. The poop was about to hit the fan 5 years ago, with Mead/Powell storage levels about to trigger reductions in deliveries. A "shortage sharing" agreement was reached that resulted in smaller reservoirs in the upper basin states being largely emptied to maintain Mead/Powell at sufficient elevation to avoid those restrictions. The thought was that a lucky snowpack or three could refill those upstream reservoirs quickly. There has been some luck, but not enough, and so now you have those triggers at Mead/Powell again being reached but with the upstream storage also depleted. That's the sort of "manipulation" that happens. It is political, but in the way it is supposed to be. Representatives from the 7 states get together, all looking out for their own best interest, but negotiating and compromising to find solutions.

[Daves911L]

Originally Posted by unclebilly

Drought resistant crops have been used for 30+ years. You don't change the plant variety.

The seed and plant variants aren't what they were even 10 years ago. Cultivation practices aren't either. Agriscience is big business.

I will say that my heavily planted land doesn't support much other than GMO barley, wheat, and canola. When I put some of it back into hay, it took 3-4 years to get an average hay crop off that land. I am actually thinking about putting another 120 acres into hay next year.

Also, alfalfa isn't all that water intensive. It is also really good because it puts Nitrogen back into the soil. I think my alfalfa field did better last year in drought conditions than it did this year in wet conditions. If you flood an alfalfa field with water, it kills it.

At last, someone who gets it! Water is an input cost to the farmer (either directly, or as fuel/equipment/labor to manage/apply it) The farmer has an incentive to use it efficiently. Water application efficiency on many (most) modern farms is amazing. In some cases it is probably too efficient. The saying goes "we conserved ourselves right out an aquifer". The recharge/re-supply benefits of reduced irrigation "waste" are showing up in aquifers, wetlands, wildlife refuges, and downstream river reaches all over the west right now.

Alfalfa is an amazing plant. Give it the right amount of water and abundant sunshine and the tonnage that can be produced is staggering. Overwater it and your yield falls significantly. Not that some of it isn't. Plenty of weedy yellow alfalfa fields to be found. Those are the guys that make a small fortune in farming by starting out with large fortune. They go out of business and get replaced by guys who know it is a serious business and understand the equation.

Farmers produce the food we all require. They are the single most important part of our economy and the only segment of society we couldn't live without.

[Daves911L]

Better than average article on the Colorado river issue.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2531944/in-arizona-worry-about-access-to-colorado-river-water.html?fbclid=IwAR2ePAR_F0vQ-cmTV2t5HZbcfuUSweBMEodLEyhLVe3KzwsEI611_Mt3WvY

[masraum]

Originally Posted by unclebilly

Drought resistant crops have been used for 30+ years. You don't change the plant variety.

The seed and plant variants aren't what they were even 10 years ago. Cultivation practices aren't either. Agriscience is big business.

I will say that my heavily planted land doesn't support much other than GMO barley, wheat, and canola. When I put some of it back into hay, it took 3-4 years to get an average hay crop off that land. I am actually thinking about putting another 120 acres into hay next year.

Also, alfalfa isn't all that water intensive. It is also really good because it puts Nitrogen back into the soil. I think my alfalfa field did better last year in drought conditions than it did this year in wet conditions. If you flood an alfalfa field with water, it kills it.

Interesting stuff. Thanks for sharing. You've clear got "a little" land. I can't even imagine the workload for that kind of thing.

[3rd_gear_Ted]

My 2nd home is on the lower Colorado River is near Blythe CA. Hay there is a big deal.
They grow the highest quality blue/green alfalfa for export mostly.

https://ucmanagedrought.ucdavis.edu/Agriculture/Crop_Irrigation_Strategies/Alfalfa/

When someone says Hey, the response is "that's the first step in B.S.".

[gordner]

Originally Posted by Daves911L

At last, someone who gets it! Water is an input cost to the farmer (either directly, or as fuel/equipment/labor to manage/apply it) The farmer has an incentive to use it efficiently. Water application efficiency on many (most) modern farms is amazing. In some cases it is probably too efficient. The saying goes "we conserved ourselves right out an aquifer". The recharge/re-supply benefits of reduced irrigation "waste" are showing up in aquifers, wetlands, wildlife refuges, and downstream river reaches all over the west right now.

Alfalfa is an amazing plant. Give it the right amount of water and abundant sunshine and the tonnage that can be produced is staggering. Overwater it and your yield falls significantly. Not that some of it isn't. Plenty of weedy yellow alfalfa fields to be found. Those are the guys that make a small fortune in farming by starting out with large fortune. They go out of business and get replaced by guys who know it is a serious business and understand the equation.

Farmers produce the food we all require. They are the single most important part of our economy and the only segment of society we couldn't live without.

All that glorious food would rot in fields if not moved by trucks. So not the only segment of society you can live without.

[KNS]

Eye opening related article about groundwater issues in Arizona.

"If Arizona doesn't stop now, "put some brakes on" and start to look at groundwater in a more sophisticated way, at some point in the coming years, "it will be very bad here".


https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona-environment/2021/05/13/arizona-is-depleting-groundwater-in-many-areas-researchers-warn/5059471001/

[flatbutt]

I wonder if the west coast has the infrastructure to take advantage of these rain storms that have been rolling in.

[GH85Carrera]

I was wondering as well if California has taken advantage of all the rain and filled every lake and tried to keep as much water as possible. I sure hop a lot of it makes it over the mountain and into the Colorado river basin to help with lakes.

[craigster59]

Originally Posted by flatbutt

I wonder if the west coast has the infrastructure to take advantage of these rain storms that have been rolling in.

With all the development done in the last 75 years I don't know if a reservoir has been added in that time.

The snowpack in the Sierras is so important and the only other way to hold the water for later use. Otherwise the majority just flows out to the Pacific. That's why there's always warnings to avoid the beaches and swimming in the ocean. Too much toxic crap floating around out there.