Wouldn’t twice the water storage capacity benefit us all?
February 17, 2014
I recently asked the question: Why doesn’t NID take this opportunity to clean out the sediment that has filled our reservoirs? I was told that they weren’t allowed to because of some crazy rule that it would be considered part of the ruling about hydraulic mining.
I just can’t figure out why a company that was in charge of supplying the area with water would not be able to clean the reservoirs from sediment that was brought down, that would decrease the capacity of the lake and eventually fill it up. Unless that was the long-term plan to start with, which I truly don’t believe was the intent.
I mean, when given lemons, why not make lemonade?
The lake was down, so why not take that opportunity to clean it out to make more water storage possible? I don’t know how much difference it would make, and I don’t know the cost involved, but what if you could double the amount of storage? Wouldn’t that help the community? With so many lakes involved, how much would that increase the water storage capacity? If so, how much further into this year would we be able to go?
Not saying that we shouldn’t be vigilant and aware, but if you had twice (or more) water storage, wouldn’t that be great?