Water: $2,500,000,000.00

[The Sicatoka]

The cost of keeping the tap running to meet the Red River Valley's water needs in the year 2050 won't be cheap: between $500 million to $2.5 billion, according to a study released Tuesday.

http://www.in-forum.com/articles/index.cfm?id=93667

That's just to ensure that there is enough water in the RRV (13 counties in ND plus 3 Minnesota cities) for the next 50 years!

Now toss in that the city of Fargo is looking at infrastructure rehabilitations (to replace and update existing systems), like ...

Going forward, the city will need to repair and replace water mains and water storage facilities.

The city

[The Sicatoka]

From the second link:

For wastewater needs, about $144 million would come from the possible dome tax extension.

Didn't they just try to extend the dome sales tax in Fargo for an arena?

[PCM]

Many of us in the Red River Valley complain about the wet cycle we've been in, but I'll take that over a dry cycle any day. Given the current population of the valley and the huge increase in demands on the water resources, a drought similar to that of the 1930s would be absolutely devastating to this region.

[The Sicatoka]

As wet as this wet cycle has been, it's scary to think how dry the next dry cycle could be.

Remember, less than 100 years ago the Red between Fargo and Moorhead was dry and people could walk between the cities.

[Smoggy]

Basically any area that is dependent on rivers is facing a water shortage in the future. Droughts happen. Try being Phoenix. They are a boom city and I have seen reports of them being out of water by 2010. Doesn't mean it'll happen.

Even worse is Vegas. Why? Well, Arizona "owns" the rights to the Colorado river. I believe their are some weird "deals" where Nevada gets to take water. But if Arizona starts needing more water, then Nevada is in trouble. Of course I may be totally wrong on this. I've heard this "ownership" talk from Arizona residents. Maybe AZSIOUX can help?

[PCM]

Basically any area that is dependent on rivers is facing a water shortage in the future.  Droughts happen.  Try being Phoenix.  They are a boom city and I have seen reports of them being out of water by 2010.  Doesn't mean it'll happen.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sooner or later it will happen.

[Diggler]

Good thing you added the decimal places. I was worried it might be difficult to finance if it cost anything over $2,500,000,000.34. Thankfully it will be easy to finance though.

[tony]

Well, if much of this cost is because Fargo metro triples in size by 2050 (and I think that's what the planners are saying), then I guess it's a case of taking the bad with the very good. Personally, I'd rather be dealing with the problem of the Valley outgrowing it's water supply because of growth than the solution of having the Valley's growth stagnate.

There is plenty of good news. First, they've started planning and looking for solutions before there is pressing problem. Second, if the F-M population really does nearly triple, there will be a lot more people to share the cost. Third, because the most likely solution involves reviving Garrison Diversion, there will be probably be Federal help to pay for things (so far that's only $200 million).

[The Sicatoka]

... they've started planning and looking for solutions before there is pressing problem.

Definitely. It's a much easier problem to discuss when there's still water coming out of the tap.

Now come the options for Fargoans (and surrounding community people if Fargoans choose "sales tax") on how to pay for Fargo's infrastructure needs.

http://www.in-forum.com/articles/index.cfm?id=93774

What hasn't been talked about is how the regional water issue (13 ND counties and 3 MN cities) plan would be paid for. Going back to Garrison would mean some Federal monies, but the Feds are looking for locals to take on a greater and greater share of project dollars (see: recent push by Feds for states to match Federal grants for Amtrack). There would have to be some form of regional system to pay for a water supply project of a magnitude to supply the whole Red River Valley.

PS -

The water and wastewater master plans were presented by ... and Steve Burian of Advanced Engineering and Environmental Services Inc.

There's a nice article about Burian's UND athletics career and the scholarships he's set up for athletics and the engineering department in this month's "Sioux Illustrated." (Hey, it's still SiouxSports.com, right? )

[PCM]

Third, because the most likely solution involves reviving Garrison Diversion, there will be probably be Federal help to pay for things (so far that's only $200 million).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen. Plus, have you been to Garrison Dam recently and seen the level of the reservoir? What's going to happen when a widespread drought hits the region, the reservoir is low and downstream interests are demanding that water be released? Do you think the businesses that depend on Garrison for tourism will want to send water to the Red River Valley? Also, as the Devils Lake outlet demonstrates, contending with the Canadians is another issue to overcome. Talk about a can of worms.

Yes, it's good that the F-M area is growing. And, yes, it's good that there are plans being made for future water resources. But those who think this is a simple issue to solve in the face of growing demands for water are kidding themselves if they believe there's a cheap, easy solution on the horizon.

[ScottM]

Basically any area that is dependent on rivers is facing a water shortage in the future.  Droughts happen.  Try being Phoenix.  They are a boom city and I have seen reports of them being out of water by 2010.  Doesn't mean it'll happen.

Even worse is Vegas.  Why?  Well, Arizona "owns" the rights to the Colorado river.  I believe their are some weird "deals" where Nevada gets to take water.  But if Arizona starts needing more water, then Nevada is in trouble.  Of course I may be totally wrong on this.  I've heard this "ownership" talk from Arizona residents.  Maybe AZSIOUX can help?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I *believe* that when the water rights to the Colorado River were divvied up in the 1920s or so, Nevada had the last priority as it had the least population, and smallest contact with the river. However, even as Vegas and the surrounding area "needs" more water for golf courses, lawns, Bellagio's fountains, etc., I doubt AZ, CO and UT are going to be very sympathetic. Moreover, as those other states continue to add to their own needs, I think "water rights" will be a very contentious issue, especially when the next drought hits.

[IowaBison]

[The Sicatoka]

Plus, have you been to Garrison Dam recently and seen the level of the reservoir?... Do you think the businesses that depend on Garrison for tourism will want to send water to the Red River Valley?

Also, as the Devils Lake outlet demonstrates, contending with the Canadians is another issue to overcome.

Ouch.

Those are two nasty aspects to this that'll take at least a decade to get the politics resolved on (much less the actual resource and environmental issues).

Here's another:

The Army Corps in St. Paul controls the Red basin. A whole different division of the Corps (Omaha? Kansas City?) controls the Missouri's upper basin. Who sets and defines "right level" for the Red?

[dagies]

Sounds like they need to build a pipe from Devil's Lake.

[The Sicatoka]

Sounds like they need to build a pipe from Devil's Lake.

That's the "Devils Lake Outlet" that Hoeven is pushing forward and the Canadians and others are trying to stop. The water from the lake would go into the Sheyenne (near Tioga?) and into the Red near Harwood and then on to Winnipeg. The Canadians don't want Devils Lake water coming their way.

[bigmrg74]

[tnt]

I try not to worry too much about things that far into the future. We are supposed to be hit by asteroids and California is going to break off into the ocean too. With all the things that supposedly cause cancer these days, we have more things to worry about on a day to day basis, nevermind the fact that we eat too much to begin with.

[ESPNInsider]

I think there is a pretty simple solution to this:

If we really do run short we will all have to do our part and buy a couple of the HUGE bottles of water they have at the G stations. We will take buses 15 miles south of GF and empty the bottles into the river, it will be perfect!

[dagies]

That's the "Devils Lake Outlet" that Hoeven is pushing forward and the Canadians and others are trying to stop. The water from the lake would go into the Sheyenne (near Tioga?) and into the Red near Harwood and then on to Winnipeg. The Canadians don't want Devils Lake water coming their way.

Ah. I didn't realize the outlet was going to go in that direction. They could send it down to Wahpeton and let Fargo drink it on the way north.

[PCM]

I try not to worry too much about things that far into the future.

How far in the future will the next drought be? It might not happen in my lifetime. On the other hand, it could start this summer. Nobody knows for sure, which is why it's best to start planning now.

[IowaBison]

How far in the future will the next drought be? It might not happen in my lifetime. On the other hand, it could start this summer. Nobody knows for sure, which is why it's best to start planning now.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

well when i was growing up on devils lake as a kid in the 80's they were worried the thing was going to go dry.

[The Sicatoka]

I didn't realize the outlet was going to go in that direction.  They could send it down to Wahpeton and let Fargo drink it on the way north.

They want to use the Sheyenne to empty Devils Lake because then they only have a short outlet path (under 20 miles).

The Sheyenne goes to Valley City, Lisbon, Kindred, Horace, West Fargo, Harwood, then the Red. To get it down to Wahpeton would be a tough trick.

However, Fargo can still drink water from the Sheyenne even though the Sheyenne empties into the Red north of the city: There is a cutover channel (underground pipe) south of Fargo that allows water from the Sheyenne to be diverted to the Red. (It's out along Cass County 6.) That's the reason why that first link talks about getting the water to the Sheyenne so much: If it's in the Sheyenne it can get to the Fargo water purification plant (via that cutover).

As a last note, Baldhill Dam, north of Valley City on the Sheyenne, was built not for flood control as much as to ensure water supply for downstream (aka Fargo and Grand Forks).

[The Sicatoka]

well when i was growing up on devils lake as a kid in the 80's they were worried the thing was going to go dry.

The lake goes through this dry up then flood out then dry up cycle all the time if you look at it geologically and not like we tend to (immediately).

What few want to discuss is how close Stump Lake (where Devils Lake is overflowing into now) is to overrunning its natural outlet (naturally geologically sealed now) which would effectively allow that lake to outflow overland and end up in Canada by natural means.

[PCM]

well when i was growing up on devils lake as a kid in the 80's they were worried the thing was going to go dry.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Right. Five or six years ago, I saw some aerial photos showing channels that were dug to drain surrounding lakes into Devils Lake during the drought you mentioned. Unfortunately, those same channels are now causing areas around the big lake to flood more rapidly than they would have naturally.

The more we try to fix nature, the further we get behind. There will come a day when people wonder why we were in such a hurry to get rid of that water.

[siouxjoy]

Ouch.

Those are two nasty aspects to this that'll take at least a decade to get the politics resolved on (much less the actual resource and environmental issues).

Here's another:

The Army Corps in St. Paul controls the Red basin. A whole different division of the Corps (Omaha? Kansas City?) controls the Missouri's upper basin. Who sets and defines "right level" for the Red?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My home town is right on the Missouri River and there is a huge battle going on regarding releasing water downstream. The farmers downstream use the river water for irrigation, and the towns upstream use it for tourism (fishing, boating, etc.). Well, which livelihood is more important? The governors from each state are fighting each other tooth and nail. According to the hometown paper, the last time the govs met, Montana's governor almost got into a fistfight with Missouri's governor (I'm pretty sure it was Missouri, not 100 percent, but there was almost a fight). If it comes down to draining Garrison, it will get very, very ugly. It doesn't seem so 'round here, but the western part of ND, SD and eastern MT has been going through a really tough drought the last few years.