Great information, thank you. I was wondering this because the river at Hite pre lake was about 3450'. That would make the water at Hite around 75 feet deep. At Mille Crag Bend it was around 3470', so the lake at 3527' without sediment would still extend far past Hite. Thats a lot of water.
What Changes When We Hit 3,525?
- Thread starter Ed_on_WD
- Start date
- Status
shots fired... there are actually some people from so cal on this site and now you have hurt my feelings...
just kidding, you're right, we can all do better and be better.
Eagle Rock
Active Member
Thinking about the lake without 1963-2022 sediment is tricky, because a lot of that sediment is currently high and dry. At Hite, for example, there's perhaps 140' of sediment, of which only 75' is below the current lake elevation, while the rest is above the current lake but below full pool. For a picture of sedimentation over time in the upper end of the (former) lake, see the graphic at the bottom of the 2nd page of Oct 2021 Science Trip Report Website.pdf
Coho975
Well-Known Member
FG is at 75%, Fontenelle is at 50%. No snow here in SW WY below 7500'. Snow pack on the north slope of the Uintas is below average. Not sure about the Winds.
Dorado
Keeper of San Juan Secrets
I live in Pinedale, and have never seen such a paltry snow pack in 25 years. The Upper Green River Drainage in Wyoming is at 77%, but it seems even lower than that considering there is almost no snow on the ground once you get out of the mountains. There is some hope that we will at least start getting some snow starting this weekend...
Thanks. All the sediment boggles my poor mind. We would always go to Hite in the 70's and it was super nice. I was thinking along the lines if the sediment wasn't there, the lake, even at this low elevation, would still extend 15 miles or so past Hite. I never realized the sediment was that deep until I started digging in to it.
Yep, and I live in SoCal, people are clueless to all of this...........
Colorado Expat
Well-Known Member
Lake Mojave regulates water deliveries to Mexico, which are governed by an international treaty signed in 1944. So there is not much leeway in how it is managed.
Lake Havasu essentially serves as the forebay for both the Central Arizona Project Aqueduct, which goes to Phoenix, and the Colorado River Aqueduct, which goes to LA. So nobody is going to be making any significant changes to the level of that lake either.
Both those lakes are also rather small and shallow compared to Mead and Powell, so even if they could be drawn down, it would not get you much in the grand scheme of things.
Dorado
Keeper of San Juan Secrets
You should search the site. Lots of threads and in depth analysis by JFR and others on this issue. As the lake recedes, the bulk of the sediment deposition will keep moving downstream towards red canyon and change things we are all familiar with…
Bill Sampson
Escalante-Class Member
Years ago I asked this exact question on this forum. Waterbaby told me that there is a water agreement that keeps Lake Mojave and Lake Havasu at their present level. It may be time to reassess that agreement
Let's see---- water in = water out??? For both LP and Mead!!! I know simple is usually TOO simple!!! ( Yes I am well aware of the compact requirements!!) Just sayin!!
Coho975
Well-Known Member
Seem to be reaching a point where there is no other option.
Havalina
Escalante-Class Member
You act as if the Mexican government is in charge of their country. Their LEO’s all wear baklavas for self preservation. They can no more control the border than we can. Last October one of the cartels sent the new police chief of Tijuana a severed head his first day on the job. Lastly, we would just lose in court. We need to quit subsidizing agriculture in a wasteful way and put building moratoriums in place until we can provide a secure source of water to those municipalities. All those hay fields and such need to be in the crp and ecp programs, until we get this sorted out.
I do agree with your way of thinking though.
Last edited:
Chukardog
Active Member
I once had a man that worked with me, who was law enforcement in Mexico, he had to leave Mexico to save his and his families lives because he did not cooperate with cartel, he was a good man
Coho975
Well-Known Member
Affordable food is the bedrock of any stable society.
Havalina
Escalante-Class Member
I am not talking about the ones growing food for consumption. I am talking about the hay farmers that are producing for export. The crp program would keep them a float. I think that we signed revolving 10 year leases for the crp. The ecp provides drought management funding and expertice for more efficient irrigation. If we are subsidizing them, then they are just on a different form of welfare, but it is still welfare. Of course a lot of this is a mute point, because most of the farmers traded for junior water rights for cheaper water up front. Now, that restrictions are coming to fruition they will just start pumping more to make up for the loss from the colorado.
Last edited:
Paladin
Well-Known Member
I am an agricultural water user in Colorado. My family and extended families have been in AG for over a hundred years.
I have raised hay and everything else: hay, corn, beans, etc. and every vegetable and fruit you can think of. I have had multiple NRCS and CSU grants.
I have no idea what you are talking about. Don't know about hay for export. I would remind you that hay weighs 65# per bale and sells for $140 to $185 per ton. No one is going "export" very much at those numbers. BTW, hay is used primarily for the meat (beef) industry: "food for consumption."
I have never heard of a farmer trading for a junior water right.
"most of the farmers traded for junior water rights for cheaper water up front. Now, that restrictions are coming to fruition they will just start pumping more to make up for the loss from the colorado." Are you kidding?
BTW, nice boat.
- Status