Comments about ‘Don't even think about pulling plug on Lake Powell’

lake powell is an amazing one-of-a-kind place. i'm hoping it is a around for a long while.

Right on...this Lake helped us raise eleven great children. We have see it both ways...we rafted it when it was a river...so do not tell us about it. We just wish the noisy crowds on houseboats would be more respectful when quiet time comes.

The "drain Lake Powell crowd" will always be with us.. we must hold our ground. This is an elite crowd of a few people who want it for themselves.

So much for objective reporting, presenting both sides of an issue. It's all about pleasure with our society now--pleasure, regardless of the consequences, trumps everything else.

Re: jp3 Why is it that people don't understand the difference between reporting the news and a column that is a writer's opinion. This is a column where a writer can do a commentary about how he/she feels.

Think about conservative's contention that federal projects create no wealth. Glen Canyon was a $193,000,000 federal project. If conservatives are correct that spending these tax dollars like, the federal money doing thirty road projects in Utah, only depress our economy why not drink it and save tax dollars?

As of Tues the water data said that Lake Powell was at 57.46% full.

Only the environmentally insane would consider draining Lake Powell. But then environmentalism has never made sense, and it was never about the environment anyway--environmentalism is all about power.

Drain Lake Powell and I'm never coming back to Utah.

y4lyfe

You will be missed like a canker sore.

Hilarious. Do some research and try again.
The reservoir is 60 feet below 300, aka 240 feet. If the reservoir was half full, then it would be 150 feet below 300, right? Clever math trick Mr. Grass. Maybe that claim would work if the reservoir were a perfect square. 100 foot high slot canyons make the numbers run different.
Lake Powell is only rising because it’s May. Had the snow decided to melt in February or August, then the lake would be rising then instead. Wait a couple months and watch it fall. The writer claimed people who have said the lake would never “rise” again would be wrong. Of course. What an unfortunate misquote! What is said is that the lake will never “fill” again. Show me evidence to the contrary and then we can talk.
Lake Powell is draining itself. Nature is having her way and until we can figure out how to create trillions of gallons of water in a laboratory, there’s nothing we can do about it. We might as well figure out now how to manage what we have.
Last but not least…sediment? There was sediment?! Welcome to the Colorado River.

Save tax dollars? Drink it and save money? What about the $90,000,000 in lost revenues from the "clean" power produced? Or the $400,000,000 pumped in to the local economy. (no taxes made there!)
I could go on and on with the benifits to having this wonderful lake in in our great state. The fact is that most of those who are advocates of draining Lake Powell have never even been and will never go. You know what I say to that? Do a little research of your own. You have no idea what you're talking about.
Take a few hours and drive down. Spend a cool Autumn night sitting on a red rock ledge watching the sun set, view the painted sky thru the waters reflection, then as your weeping at the beauty ask your self again what good it would do to drain Lake Powell.
Leave our lake alone!

No credible source has claimed that Lake Powell would “never rise again.” The question is how much. Skyrocketing water demand, record drought, and global climate change have drastically reduced the flow of the Colorado River from that of the past. Scientific studies project that this will continue indefinitely, and that there will probably never again be enough water to fill both Lake Powell and Lake Mead.

The only reason Lake Powell is not far lower is that water is being held back from Lake Mead downstream. As a result, Lake Mead has been low for years and is now only 43 percent full. Unless precipitation levels increase significantly next winter, water managers say Las Vegas could face rationing by early 2012.

Trying to maintain business as usual and hoping that things will go back to the way they were in the past is not a viable option. Colorado River management needs to change to address new realities. Action is needed now to look at other options – including making Lake Mead the primary water storage facility with Lake Powell as a backup – before today’s crisis becomes tomorrow’s emergency.

Raise our taxes,hurt the economy,water down the drain,and then use an excuse that this is an enviromental issue. Sound like politicians! This is why I refuse to be Democrat or Republican. Both sides are the same and will do anything for money and power even if it means to destroy our freedom that people fought and died for. I think the only thing that should be drained down lake power is big government.

Interesting logic. First, "the lake is a long way up from half-full mark". Reality: the lake is 57.6% full by content. Then, "there were no provisions made to ever drain the lake". Reality: what provisions were ever made to dam the river to begin with? And yet we managed. Next, "huge pockets of water that would remain and become stagnant pools over time with no inlet or outlet". Reality: if there is no inlet, would the pockets not go dry? The business about the writers unable to find the Cathedral until they rented a boat. Well, they won't find it now, it's under water, fortunately only temporarily. Yet the Cathedral was easily reachable by water when there was a river instead of the lake, so anyone could rent a boat anytime to go see it. The lake is rising? Guess what, it's spring, it's the height of snowmelt. It rises for 10 weeks, then drops for 41. The only reason it's as high as it is is that Lake Mead is being allowed to drop, now at its lowest level since 1965. That can't last forever.

Lake Mead has always received their 8.23 million acre feet of water which is their water rights under contract.
That even occured in the low water years because of Lake Powell. If it wasn't for Lake Powell Lake Mead would be dry during the early 2000s because there wasn't half the water in the river that was called for so they would have pulled all the water off of Mead.
The ranchers on the upper Colo river wasn't so lucky they had to sell off the cattle herds because they didn't have the water tyo raise the hay for feed.
Just think of the millions of dollars in cleanest energy that the radicals produced every year would be lost.

8.23 MAF statement is actually wrong. It is the minimum release required, it is not what is released every year. Millions in clean energy only makes sense if you forget about the billions it cost to construct the dam (what portion of that was spent on energy?), the billions that the water that evaporated from the Lake Powell have cost so far, and the ungodly amounts of fossil fuels being burned on the lake in not-so-clean recreation.

If you stop for a second and I have not looked up the exact date but it was early 60s millions of dollars of electricity over 40+ years adds up to many billions more than the dam costs. On top of that Lake Mead would not exist either. Y^ou are right about the minimum release but that is what the contract calls for. Many of the wetter years the releasees were much more but that was what the contract calls for even before Lake Powell was built. Many of the years the Colo River did not flow the 8.23 thats why Lake Powell dropped about 150 feet in a few years. Lake Mead is more open and at lower elevation so evaporation is higher per acre.
Most of western Ariz and a lot of Calif. would not have had water in the early 2000s.
Just look at the jobs and the devestation of the western economy would be effected.
The only people that would benefit would maybe be a very few river rafters. That is if they had any money after the economic crash.

You're right, there is more evaporation from Mead than from Powell. But there is less evaporation from Mead that from Mead and Powell combined, and it is the latter scenario that you advocate, is it not? The original 1922 compact called for 8.23 MAF per year average over every 10 year period. That could easily have been met without Powell over the last 100 years or more. That is without even mentioning that 80% of the lower Colorado water is spend on agriculture, most of which is very inefficient. If drip irrigation were used instead, 50% less water would have been used. Either way, there is plenty of water in the river if it is used wisely. It all depends on what your priorities are.

Powell is a lot more shaded than Mead and cooler temps in the summer. Your basing some of your information on distorted facts put out by the drainers.
I watched the lake levels ever since it was full and I live near the Colo river. I know there wasn't the water in the river as you say. If its what you say then Lake Powell would be full and dropped 150 feet in a few years.

Powell is "shaded"? By what, may I ask? In any case, I am not comparing evaporation from Powell to that from Mead - that is only applicable if one is talking about replacing one lake with another. Are you? Your insistence on comparing Powell alone to Mead alone seems to imply that you favor storing water in Powell if favor of Mead, thus draining Mead. That would not make you a "drainer" by any chance, would it? I, on the other hand, am comparing Powell and Mead to Mead alone, if you care to actually read my post. As for the "distorted facts", the river flow and the adequacy of the 8.23 MAF 10 year moving average is actually a Bureau of Reclamation study. Unless they too are drainers.