Should drought stricken western states have water pipelines from the Eastern water sources

We talk about the necessity of the Keystone pipeline, yet why are we not taking excess eastern floodwater and diverting it into western storage for their water needs. Why can't this country kill two birds with one stone?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/10/missouri-river-pipeline-west-midwest-states_n_2272687.html

2seaoat wrote:We talk about the necessity of the Keystone pipeline, yet why are we not taking excess eastern floodwater and diverting it into western storage for their water needs.   Why can't this country kill two birds with one stone?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/10/missouri-river-pipeline-west-midwest-states_n_2272687.html

My thoughts exactly. If we can transport oil through pipelines, surely we can transport water.

How about the water rights of the people in the places where there is plenty? Look at how Lake Mead near Las Vegas is being drained to the point of no return by LA and other Southern California municipalities. Maybe it's time those folks in areas of terrible drought started relocating to other places?

Who will pay for the boondoggle you guys are asking to be paid for? Sorry, the taxpayer is getting screwed already. Enough is enough. Let Cali pay for desalinization plants. The Pacific Ocean has plenty of water.

The Army Corps of engineers spends billions each year to contain flood waters. If there were diversions off the Missouri and Mississippi during high water flood events, the strains on the existing dike and levee systems could be lowered and billions could be saved in flood damage. As to the users of diverted water, bonds would be issued and prior to construction of the diversion basins, channels, and pipelines taxing districts would be established where users in western states would pay for the water.

The Chicago river in the 1800s would flow into Lake Michigan. Through modern engineering the river was reversed and now flows to the Illinois and Mississippi systems. I would expect a comprehensive flood diversion project would take 30 to 50 years, but would help alleviate water shortages in the west and do a much more efficient level of preventing floods in the Mississippi and Missouri river floodplains.

Floodwater diversion from the Missouri is being considered now.
http://www.circleofblue.org/waternews/2013/world/kansas-army-corps-study-aqueduct-missouri-river-ogallala-aquifer/

http://www.howmany.org/newsarc/ideas-for-colorado-river-includer-feeder-pipeline-from-missouri-river/

Yep, those who choose to live in p poor areas have to be subsidized by those who don't. It's like paying extra home owners insurance to subsidize those who live on barrier islands. It's BS

It goes beyond California agriculture, but is a common thread in all western agricultural production including wheat. One of our most successful exports is our agricultural products and our strength of the dollar depends on those exports. The truth is the United States is top five in the world with fresh water resources, and that flood diversion and storage of fresh water with a changing climate and more extreme floods is essential. This is an investment which creates American jobs, expands American agricultural output, and saves trillions over the next fifty years in flood damage if the design criteria of the Army Corps of Engineers becomes flood water divergence and storage rather than building higher and higher walls which scour and deposit more silt into the dead zone of the Gulf. We need to think big, and make money for Americans. Our water is being wasted and causing damage in our poorly designed current systems. Agriculture alone should be sufficient, but population growth will continue to move to the SW.

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:One of the water problems out west is that major areas of California are huge agricultural regions, and it all depends on irrigation. The Imperial Valley east of San Diego would be the desert it was without water from the Colorado River. The San Joaquin Valley, where I grew up would not be able to produce agriculture without irrigation from snowmelt from the mountains or groundwater from wells.

Without California lettuce there would be no salads served in most of our nation. The 'Bunny Love' carrots you buy at your local Pensacola grocery store were grown in Lamont, CA, about 10 miles south of where I lived as a kid (Bakersfield). Almonds, pistachios, olives, raisins, grapes--just scratching the surface of what comes almost exclusively from California.

California is to blame for its water woes and the wacky environmental rules that they have in regards to eels, salamanders et al in their waterways.

2seaoat wrote:It goes beyond California agriculture, but is a common thread in all western agricultural production including wheat. One of our most successful exports is our agricultural products and our strength of the dollar depends on those exports. The truth is the United States is top five in the world with fresh water resources, and that flood diversion and storage of fresh water with a changing climate and more extreme floods is essential. This is an investment which creates American jobs, expands American agricultural output, and saves trillions over the next fifty years in flood damage if the design criteria of the Army Corps of Engineers becomes flood water divergence and storage rather than building higher and higher walls which scour and deposit more silt into the dead zone of the Gulf. We need to think big, and make money for Americans. Our water is being wasted and causing damage in our poorly designed current systems. Agriculture alone should be sufficient, but population growth will continue to move to the SW.

It can't move SW if there aren't the necessary resources.