3 ms·

I have been to Lake Powell dozens of times at various water levels. It was a wonderful place to visit when it was completely full in the late 80s. It is a wonde

I have been to Lake Powell dozens of times at various water levels. It was a wonderful place to visit when it was completely full in the late 80s. It is a wonderful place to visit now when the water level has dropped over 100 feet. To be sure, the landscape is 'different' at every water level. At low levels, features that were hidden underwater are exposed. At high levels, you can take a boat deep into canyons that were inaccessible by foot. Southern Utah and northern Arizona is full of beautiful landscapes. There are millions of acres of twisting canyons, colorful rock formations, and towering spires. There are those who lament that any piece of it is 'developed' for a road, a town, or a man-made lake; but most of them would not be happy until every facet of human existence has been erased from the Earth.

hall0ween 4y ago
Generalizations and white-washing here I see. The water estimations, and subsequent use, occurred without meaningful thought about sustainability. (But no matter, who needs sustainability when you have economy ;) The southwest states are going to have a rough go in terms of water because of poor decision making. Then and now. And I don’t mean policy alone, individual decisions add up (e.g., those out of place riverboat-looking boats on Lake Powell).
mint2 4y ago
I don’t follow the last paragraph, first it acknowledges and claims the areas are beautiful landscapes and then it goes on to portray people who want to protect them as straw man extremists… there are a ton of people who want to protect those areas but don’t advocate for the extinction of the human race as the paragraph implies, why would that straw man be made?
- didgetmaster 4y ago
  I didn't say that everyone who wants to set limits on development of natural areas is an extremist; but if you listen to some of the rhetoric from some real extremists who want to limit all development to zero and tear out existing infrastructure (like Glen Canyon Dam) in order to restore everything to its original state then you know it is not just a straw man.

hall0ween 4y ago

Generalizations and white-washing here I see. The water estimations, and subsequent use, occurred without meaningful thought about sustainability. (But no matter, who needs sustainability when you have economy ;) The southwest states are going to have a rough go in terms of water because of poor decision making. Then and now. And I don’t mean policy alone, individual decisions add up (e.g., those out of place riverboat-looking boats on Lake Powell).

mint2 4y ago

I don’t follow the last paragraph, first it acknowledges and claims the areas are beautiful landscapes and then it goes on to portray people who want to protect them as straw man extremists… there are a ton of people who want to protect those areas but don’t advocate for the extinction of the human race as the paragraph implies, why would that straw man be made?

didgetmaster 4y ago
I didn't say that everyone who wants to set limits on development of natural areas is an extremist; but if you listen to some of the rhetoric from some real extremists who want to limit all development to zero and tear out existing infrastructure (like Glen Canyon Dam) in order to restore everything to its original state then you know it is not just a straw man.