I feel bad about a little dust, but no one is going to take that seriously. Vegas doesn't use as much water as people think. We need more. We are trying to get it from Nevada in the ground, not from rivers or streams. Most usage goes to agriculture. About 80% of Nevada's population is in Las Vegas Valley, but residents and non agricultural commercial entities state-wide only use about 20-30% (can't cite source: forgot). I've got 1000 s.f. of grass in my back yard and rocks in the front. My water bill is $100/month in the summer. I hate living in the desert, but I follow the money.

Las Vegas residents need to eliminate their grassy areas ie: private, public and parks, golf courses, etc.. and plant desert plants/vegitation. This would eliminate their need to aquire more and more water.

To Las Vegas Katbacker - The reason why your bill is so high is because the Las Vegas water authorities are a bunch of crooks. You would not believe the underhanded, dirty things that go on to acquire water there.

Vegas Katbacker, would they take a lot of dust seriously? Check out what happened when Los Angeles decided to do this to Owens Valley. It turned into a major dustbowl.

Even here in Utah there is little concern about growth and water supply and usage. Developement and growth are not associated with resources. That is the water utilities don't have a say or won't say how much growth resources can sustain. Communities all over Utah do not include available resources in limiting developement. Utah has no reserve water available for now and future developement yet this uncontrolled growth is a major depletion of resources. Available resources like water are nearing and exceeding its capacity to supply current needs. Much of Utah's water supply is from underground wells, especially in farming and ranching needs and many cities in the valley. Utah and Nevada needs to do more to control growth or we all will end up in a dust bowl. Water suppling utilities must have a stronger voice in developement and the future. Developing beyond the ability to supply water is what this war is about. Las Vegas passed the mark years ago and has progressivley confiscated all resources throughout Nevada. Water is finite in the west and so should growth. The BLM and federal government should determine the shares and restrictions of use as they do the colorado river.

Controlling or limiting growth based on resources will happen but, unfortunately, will probably come at the cost of overusing existing resources. That means that no matter how we try to conserve or limit it will always be perceived that we have enough, even if we have to go hundreds of miles to get it. If we can't learn from the example of the explosive Southern California growth then we're doomed to repeat mistakes. Growth will limit itself when there are absolutely no other options. People will leave populated areas as air quality and water decrease. Employers will leave areas and the people will follow the jobs. To this point it's been much too easy to follow money and, with subsidies, utilities are having a field day!

Las Vegas Katbacker -- you say: "Vegas doesn't use as much water as people think. We need more."

I don't know what you consider a lot of water usage but southern Nevada has the highest per capita water usage in the southwest which, as a region, has the highest usage in the country.

As far as "I feel bad about a little dust, but no one is going to take that seriously" -- I live in Snake Valley and, though a 'nobody,' I take it extremely seriously. This long valley often has strong winds and gusts. If the greasewood groundcover dies, this wind-tunnel valley certainly will feed massive amounts of dust to the Wasatch Front. That will be disastrous for health, ecology, and economy -- including impacts to the ski industry.

Serious conservation in southern Nevada is the first place to look for water there.

Just an FYI for anyone that doesn't know...

Thanks largely to community compliance with drought restrictions and participation in various water-efficiency programs (including removal of lawns), the Las Vegas Valley is continuing a trend of declining water use.

Southern Nevadans consumed 15 billion gallons less water in 2007 than in 2002, despite the addition of 400,000 residents during that span and more than 40 million annual visitors in 2007.

It is unfortunate that money talks so much louder than the rights of people who have lived their entire lives in the affected areas of this proposed water grab. Life long residents, as I see it, have the right to the water they have used since the land was settled more than the new comers to Las Vegas do. Most of the residents of the affected areas do not enjoy the luxury of picking up and moving to a new area to find their same life style. It would be much more fair to tell new comers to Las Vegas that "sorry we cannot appropriate any more water just so you can move here. We will gladly put your name on a waiting list". This approach would greatly inflate the prices of present real estate in Las Vegas and then those who follow the money can really cash in.