Skunked Again-
I appreciate your opinion and respect you and every other farmer out there. The nation should be grateful for everything that farmers do and for the risks that they take. That said, the cold, hard fact is that 70% of water use in Utah is agriculture related. Water intensive crops like alfalfa are grown in a desert environment which may have been OK 20 years ago, but with population demands and drought, the excess water that used to make it to the GSL just isn't there anymore. Farmers should be able to continue with their livelihoods, but programs aimed at switching to less water intensive plants should be required to be phased in over time. Not a complete turnover in a few years, but I believe modest changes (maybe 5% per year of total acreage) would give time for farmers to adjust and not have the rug pulled out from under them. Farmers should also be allowed to let water flow downstream as a "beneficial use" to the GSL of their water rights, and I believe this change is in the works now.
As to brine flies and bird species eating other food sources elsewhere, sure. But remember, we are not talking about Greenwing teal or plovers on the east coast. We are talking about Greenwing teal and plovers in the intermountain region where the GSL is their biggest and most important stopover point during migration or nesting area in the spring. These birds have evolved to depend on the lake and its brine flies and shrimp for food. Sure there are other sources but they pale in comparison to those two. Take them away and the food web collapses and this is already underway with the flies. No food, no birds.
The GSL is a terminal lake meaning that all the crap that we pump into it and its tributaries gets deposited right there. Sure there is more exposed non- lake bed desert land surrounding the actual lakebed, but contaminants from mining, industry, agriculture have been, and are, deposited on the lake bed itself from GSL tributaries. As that lakebed dries and then the wind blows, dust laden with accumulate AND CONCENTRATED heavy metals is picked up by the wind and deposited along the Wasatch Front and beyond. Those and other toxic chemicals in the dust are known detractors to human health. Just like you wouldn't want to inject arsenic, you don't want to breath it because it's toxic. All of that exposed lakebed is a health issue in the works. Cover that lakebed with water and the issue largely goes away.
It's a known fact that lake effect snow is partly what makes the snow in Utah so special. No lake, no lake effect, and lower quality snow. Will it "ruin" the resorts? Probably not, but it will not help them, or the industry at all. Lake effect is also responsible for snowfall totals along the Wasatch Front, including the Cottonwood Canyons, so not sure where you're going with that.
I get it, we all like to fish and it takes water to do so. I hate to think what it might take to get the lake back to just a stable position, but given the ecological and health issues, I can see that it can't just be business as usual anymore. Regardless of what you, I or anyone else thinks, we don't live in the Utah of the 1980s, 1990s, etc. Water is finite and without serious changes in the ways we use and conserve it, we are on the way to serious consequences in the not too distant future. This isn't a global warming or climate change power grab - it's simple science and economics supply/demand staring us in the face.
For those that might be interested, here is a good read on some of the current events associated with the GSL.
Great Salt Lake set to vanish in 5 years, experts warn Utah lawmakers in dire report | KSL.com
https://www.ksl.com/article/50551165/gre...ire-report
I appreciate your opinion and respect you and every other farmer out there. The nation should be grateful for everything that farmers do and for the risks that they take. That said, the cold, hard fact is that 70% of water use in Utah is agriculture related. Water intensive crops like alfalfa are grown in a desert environment which may have been OK 20 years ago, but with population demands and drought, the excess water that used to make it to the GSL just isn't there anymore. Farmers should be able to continue with their livelihoods, but programs aimed at switching to less water intensive plants should be required to be phased in over time. Not a complete turnover in a few years, but I believe modest changes (maybe 5% per year of total acreage) would give time for farmers to adjust and not have the rug pulled out from under them. Farmers should also be allowed to let water flow downstream as a "beneficial use" to the GSL of their water rights, and I believe this change is in the works now.
As to brine flies and bird species eating other food sources elsewhere, sure. But remember, we are not talking about Greenwing teal or plovers on the east coast. We are talking about Greenwing teal and plovers in the intermountain region where the GSL is their biggest and most important stopover point during migration or nesting area in the spring. These birds have evolved to depend on the lake and its brine flies and shrimp for food. Sure there are other sources but they pale in comparison to those two. Take them away and the food web collapses and this is already underway with the flies. No food, no birds.
The GSL is a terminal lake meaning that all the crap that we pump into it and its tributaries gets deposited right there. Sure there is more exposed non- lake bed desert land surrounding the actual lakebed, but contaminants from mining, industry, agriculture have been, and are, deposited on the lake bed itself from GSL tributaries. As that lakebed dries and then the wind blows, dust laden with accumulate AND CONCENTRATED heavy metals is picked up by the wind and deposited along the Wasatch Front and beyond. Those and other toxic chemicals in the dust are known detractors to human health. Just like you wouldn't want to inject arsenic, you don't want to breath it because it's toxic. All of that exposed lakebed is a health issue in the works. Cover that lakebed with water and the issue largely goes away.
It's a known fact that lake effect snow is partly what makes the snow in Utah so special. No lake, no lake effect, and lower quality snow. Will it "ruin" the resorts? Probably not, but it will not help them, or the industry at all. Lake effect is also responsible for snowfall totals along the Wasatch Front, including the Cottonwood Canyons, so not sure where you're going with that.
I get it, we all like to fish and it takes water to do so. I hate to think what it might take to get the lake back to just a stable position, but given the ecological and health issues, I can see that it can't just be business as usual anymore. Regardless of what you, I or anyone else thinks, we don't live in the Utah of the 1980s, 1990s, etc. Water is finite and without serious changes in the ways we use and conserve it, we are on the way to serious consequences in the not too distant future. This isn't a global warming or climate change power grab - it's simple science and economics supply/demand staring us in the face.
For those that might be interested, here is a good read on some of the current events associated with the GSL.
Great Salt Lake set to vanish in 5 years, experts warn Utah lawmakers in dire report | KSL.com
https://www.ksl.com/article/50551165/gre...ire-report