# Fraser River Valley getting screwed for another year



## foreverhard (Apr 14, 2009)

I want to go kayaking goddammit, and those [EDIT - expletive deleted due to member complaints, but feel free to guess what they were being called] in charge of water theft are taking 400-500 cfs through the moffat tunnel right now. Meanwhile, the local rivers have practically no water. I feel like killing something and/or blowing something up! JERKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## sj (Aug 13, 2004)

I stop in every 5 years or so just to see what's up and to tis point I was disappointed to see that we had not had the annual piss on the front Range post usually by a somewhat new commer. Thanks for keeping my faith alive. I however would choose my words somewhat more carefully . I live right below a diversion tunnel that dewaters the river in my back yard when out walking I occasionally see a Colorado Springs Water Board truck. I usually flip them off or give them the double handed Jersey salute depending on wether I have a beverage in my hand or not. forms of 1st Amendment expression that garner less attention yours perhaps. All the best sj


----------



## BruceB (Jun 8, 2010)

*Come kayak the tunnel discharge on the east side*

We have your water here on the east side. Drive over and run Alto-Alto near Rollinsville (IV) and GREAT at these levels, or below Pinecliff (V and V+)


----------



## bito (Apr 22, 2007)

HELL YA foreverhard you nailed it they need there green grass lets tell more people to move to the front range and will have no water


----------



## CeeEee (May 30, 2013)

foreverhard said:


> those mother-fucking piece-of-shit assholes in charge of water theft are taking 400-500 cfs


Where are you getting this info? Got a link?


----------



## teleski1 (Nov 8, 2004)

Foreverhard I don't know how to thank you for your wise words to the waterboard. Oh yes I do...a shot of whiskey. At least you got first d of East I. That should keep a smile on for the dry times. Fucking cocksuckers they make you feel like you have tourette's when talking about them.


----------



## lmyers (Jun 10, 2008)

CeeEee said:


> Where are you getting this info? Got a link?


Diversions | Denver Water


----------



## mjpowhound (May 5, 2006)

I'm no fan of diversions, but I went to a Colorado River Water Conservation meeting in 2008 and was surprised to learn that only about 15% of trans-divide diversions from the basin are used in front range households, with roughly half being used outside and the rest inside. So of that 500 cfs, only about 40 cfs statistically goes to water lawns on the front range. Another 40 cfs flushes toilets and runs showers. The rest is agriculture. If you want to point a more meaningful finger, it should probably be at the livestock industry, which uses far more water to produce a pound of food than other agriculture.


----------



## yourrealdad (May 25, 2004)

I think there is a bigger problem or problems at hand. You should be bitching at all the people on the planet that have started to increase the natural warming of the earth which is causing less snow here in Colorado. For those of you that don't believe in global warming, then it is your god doing his/her work. How come I never hear about anyone complaining to god/s about the lack of water? Don't they hear your prayers at night? I hear that monotheistic one can totally make it flood if he wants. Back to lots of people you could complain about those people that have unprotected sex and make lots of babies and those babies need drinking water. More sex equals more babies equals less water to kayak on. Put condoms in the schools, vasectomies for all!!!!
I can put a political twist on anything, vote for me in the 2014 elections.

Drink a beer or 10 and quit bitching, you have safe clean drinking water and relatively cheap food as the result of our water systems. Talking about getting fucked is when your water is infested with malaria or guinea worm larve Dracunculiasis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Cutch (Nov 4, 2003)

I feel your pain ForeverFuct. I mean, here we are, supposedly on the awesome receiving end of these diversions, and my local, once-mighty, South Platte river is still dewatered. Good thing they turned some of it into beer to help drown our sorrows. I'm going to water my lawn now in hopes that Union Chutes will come in.


----------



## glenn (May 13, 2009)

mjpowhound said:


> I'm no fan of diversions, but I went to a Colorado River Water Conservation meeting in 2008 and was surprised to learn that only about 15% of trans-divide diversions from the basin are used in front range households, with roughly half being used outside and the rest inside. So of that 500 cfs, only about 40 cfs statistically goes to water lawns on the front range. Another 40 cfs flushes toilets and runs showers. The rest is agriculture. If you want to point a more meaningful finger, it should probably be at the livestock industry, which uses far more water to produce a pound of food than other agriculture.


It's been a while since I was really up on the numbers but I seem to remember a massive amount of water was lost due to cheap plumbing. Basically evaporative loss in in many diversions, poor irrigation canals which seeps water into the ground during transport. Storage is another issue, but harder to engineer a workable fix.

It's ludicrous to me that all the eastern seaboard states I've lived in which get MUCH more water every year put water restrictions (watering lawn, washing cars) on residential users during dry periods, even those operating from a well, but western cities semi-arid or full on deserts wouldn't dream of it. There's more money to be made diverting water than there is conserving it.


----------



## DanOrion (Jun 8, 2004)

The real solution is to make Colorado such an unpleasant place to live that people stop moving here: High taxes, draconian regulations, re-outlaw pot and dumb down beer to 3.2. I suppose we could spend even less on schools, but that would be hard to do.


----------



## Waterwindpowderrock (Oct 11, 2003)

mjpowhound said:


> I'm no fan of diversions, but I went to a Colorado River Water Conservation meeting in 2008 and was surprised to learn that only about 15% of trans-divide diversions from the basin are used in front range households, with roughly half being used outside and the rest inside. So of that 500 cfs, only about 40 cfs statistically goes to water lawns on the front range. Another 40 cfs flushes toilets and runs showers. The rest is agriculture. If you want to point a more meaningful finger, it should probably be at the livestock industry, which uses far more water to produce a pound of food than other agriculture.




WTF?? Are you some kinda fukin vegimitarian or something??? THAT water is CLEARLY being put to good use... creating more STEAKS!!! (I don't really eat steak, but it's just more fun to bitch about the citiots like cutch watering their lawns ) 


foreverhard, being that I'm a hardly boating pussy, I thank you for posting a thread I could comment on... I appreciate that.


----------



## Issip (Apr 7, 2011)

*Rio Grande*

I understand completely.

I drove from ABQ to BV to raft the Ark last weekend because the Rio Grande has barely enough water to float a raft. I drove through the Alamosa Valley to get there, and crossed the Canejos and Rio Grande up there, each flowing huge from the runoff, at least 2-3K CFS going into that valley, but only 100CFS coming out - the gauge is almost flatline. There is no reservoir or diversion, all that water is being sprayed into the air above alalfa fields. It was over 80 degrees when I drove through and 20+ MPH winds and the mist from the irrigation sprinklers was disappearing long before it hit the ground.

The river is dry in 15 places before it reaches Texas, our wells are running dry and we are severely limiting water usage here in NM due to the extreme drought. To see the Rio Grande sprayed in the air and used to flood miles of sagebrush fields so all but the obligatory 100CFS is evaporated just plain hurt. 

I have to not think about it, because it makes me angry and sad. How can we as humans be so collectively stupid as to continue this behavior during the worst drought on record in NM?


----------



## RiverCowboy (Mar 14, 2011)

*And steaks matter!*

Steaks are definitely a good use of water.

That's why I had to leave Grand County behind, and move to Montana where we don't have water diversions to grow yummy cows. Cows are everywhere, and so is decent boating.

If you and Abbey are ever up near Missoula, look me up.

-Paul



Waterwindpowderrock said:


> WTF?? Are you some kinda fukin vegimitarian or something??? THAT water is CLEARLY being put to good use... creating more STEAKS!!! (I don't really eat steak, but it's just more fun to bitch about the citiots like cutch watering their lawns )
> 
> 
> foreverhard, being that I'm a hardly boating pussy, I thank you for posting a thread I could comment on... I appreciate that.


----------



## lmyers (Jun 10, 2008)

Issip said:


> I understand completely.
> 
> I drove from ABQ to BV to raft the Ark last weekend because the Rio Grande has barely enough water to float a raft. I drove through the Alamosa Valley to get there, and crossed the Canejos and Rio Grande up there, each flowing huge from the runoff, at least 2-3K CFS going into that valley, but only 100CFS coming out - the gauge is almost flatline. There is no reservoir or diversion, all that water is being sprayed into the air above alalfa fields. It was over 80 degrees when I drove through and 20+ MPH winds and the mist from the irrigation sprinklers was disappearing long before it hit the ground.
> 
> ...


It really is ridiculous. Currently the Rio Grande is running 2050 cfs near Del Norte, but only 58 cfs at the Lobatos bridge near the state line...

Here is some interesting information regarding SL Valley irrigation:

"The total annual water supply to the San Luis Valley averages about 2,500,000 acre-feet. About 1,500,000 acrefeet is streamflow derived chiefly from snowmelt in the surrounding mountains and 1,000,000 acre-feet is from precipitation on the valley floor. Discharge of water from the valley averages about 2,000,000 acre-feet per year by evapotranspiration and about 500,000 acre-feet per year as stream flow and ground-water underflow across the state line. The annual streamflow at the state line averages 445,000 acre-feet and ground-water underflow accounts for the remainder, currently estimated at 55,000 acre-feet. About one-half of the evapotranspiration is nonbeneficial; that is, it does not contribute to the growth of plants having economic value. Much of the nonbeneficial consumption is by phreatophytes, mostly greasewood (Sarcobatus), rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus), and saltgrass (Distichlis), in areas where the depth to water is less than 12 feet.

Crop productions are good in part of the area, but generally it results in high nonbeneficial water usage. Furthermore, the soils in the waterlogged areas have become alkaline, and the ground water has become highly mineralized because of evaporative concentration of salts."

http://nmgs.nmt.edu/publications/guidebooks/downloads/22/22_p0129_p0132.pdf


----------



## Jensjustduckie (Jun 29, 2007)

RiverCowboy said:


> Steaks are definitely a good use of water.
> 
> That's why I had to leave Grand County behind, and move to Montana where we don't have water diversions to grow yummy cows. Cows are everywhere, and so is decent boating.
> 
> ...


Ironically we could raise better steaks without irrigation and alfalfa/corn crops, I wish more people paid attention to those with innovative and positive ideas, check it out!

http://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savo...rld_s_deserts_and_reverse_climate_change.html


----------



## Issip (Apr 7, 2011)

lmyers said:


> It really is ridiculous. Currently the Rio Grande is running 2050 cfs near Del Norte, but only 58 cfs at the Lobatos bridge near the state line...
> 
> Here is some interesting information regarding SL Valley irrigation:
> 
> ...


Thanks for the link, that study confirms everything I witnessed, but what is most disturbing is that it dates to ~1970 so this has continued for well over 40 years. The evaporation is destroying their farmland, half or more is not even growing crops, yet it continues...


----------



## Matt Holder (Dec 16, 2012)

The entity you are all pissed off at is called the Denver Water Board. They have a collection ditch that gathers all the runoff from Meadowcreek reservoir to Winter Park ski area. They steal your water because someone years ago voted away the water rights (probably when WP was Denver's Winter Park). Also there is no water in the Byers canyon because it is all pumped from Windy Gap up to Lake Granby and then over to Denver.
I know it doesn't help but it might help to clarify.


----------



## deepstroke (Apr 3, 2005)

I preferred the original title for this thread. Did the OP change it or was it MB admins?


----------



## cayo 2 (Apr 20, 2007)

Gotta luv the way West Slopers like to blame Denver for everything.....we have had a lot of these threads...always impressed by how much about these issues a lot of buzzards know...it is pretty clear that inefficient agriculture, especially beef, accounts for much of the waste...no not a vegimutarian, love a good burger or steak (pork is better) just saying beef is an extremely inefficient form of nutrition......if people lived where the water is then those areas would have their way of life altered by developement in ways small town and mountain folk probably would not like (would be more efficient though) ....don 't intown residents of small towns and a lot of rural folks have lawns too?do they really use less per capita domestically than urban people?....high density progressive developement is the most efficient way to manage these resources and will be necessity for the overwhelming majority of humanity in the future with continued population growth and environmental degradation...that life style is most bitterly opposed by non urbanites so maybe in part it is a trade out for maintaining the lifestyle they prefer.....I 'd bet that rural folks have bigger families than urbanites, so do more to exacerbate enviromentsl.problems...they are more inclined to be against environmental protections on a. 'Need the local jobs basis" and blame those urbanites creating the demand....How about the contradiction in


lagoonia said:


> Thanks all.
> 
> Lmyers, let me know if you won't to paddle. You can call or text me at 3033242524.





flipper42 said:


> Im 6 foot 215lbs size 12 feet the x 64 does everything i need it to plus river running love it





ednaout said:


> Oh Yea, i had the same swim as crispy in the sit on top fluid at the rodeo hole... We both swam so that leif could get pics of how easily it is to get out of the thigh straps after flipping... Yea... Intentional.... Thats it...





cayo 2 said:


> For intro creeks road or trailside runs are good so you can get a look first and bail easily if you are in over your head or lose gear....practice catching difficult eddies on easier runs, if you can 't catchem on bigger slower rivers. you 'll have trouble on tight pushy stuff...creekin ' is not necessarily harder than big water...creeky character but not really steep or creek elfin 'runs are not so pushy just tighter and more manuevering with wood and other creek hazzards ..so bring able to stop /catch micro eddies is critical...
> 
> Lake Fork seems perfect for you :small, semi technical in spots, roadside, close to Gunny, mostly 3, a couple better drops to step up to or portage...I think WWoSR mentioned some 3 /4 creekin' above Lake City on Henson (Capitol Flats ?)....Anthracite is creeky 2 plus or carry up to Dark Canyon easy 4, is cranking right now..carry up to where you feel comfortable ...
> 
> Tim Foxton is No.Fork of So.Platte ..N Platte is mostly in Wyoming...lets fl some easy creeking


those hitching about trans divide diversions and then are FOR frakking and irresponsible


----------



## cayo 2 (Apr 20, 2007)

Kindle flakes out on long posts disregard those quotes...was trying to say that there is a big contradiction in bitching about trans divide diversions but being for frakkkng and shale developement as most on the West Slope seem to be (maybe not on this forum) ...not saying cities should not be more responsible, they should, just a lot of it is scapegoating the wrong culprits...


----------



## swimteam101 (Jul 1, 2008)

​www.Gobacktothefrontrange.com 
​Is available for revamping if anyone has the time.


----------



## M-Train (Mar 28, 2008)

He only cares about the water diversion issue because he wants to go boating. Self-righteous pricks are everywhere, but the duders who transplant to mountain towns rank high on the list of annoying ones.


----------



## yourrealdad (May 25, 2004)

cayo 2 said:


> Gotta luv the way West Slopers like to blame Denver for everything.....we have had a lot of these threads...always impressed by how much about these issues a lot of buzzards know...it is pretty clear that inefficient agriculture, especially beef, accounts for much of the waste...no not a vegimutarian, love a good burger or steak (pork is better) just saying beef is an extremely inefficient form of nutrition......if people lived where the water is then those areas would have their way of life altered by developement in ways small town and mountain folk probably would not like (would be more efficient though) ....don 't intown residents of small towns and a lot of rural folks have lawns too?do they really use less per capita domestically than urban people?....high density progressive developement is the most efficient way to manage these resources and will be necessity for the overwhelming majority of humanity in the future with continued population growth and environmental degradation...that life style is most bitterly opposed by non urbanites so maybe in part it is a trade out for maintaining the lifestyle they prefer.....I 'd bet that rural folks have bigger families than urbanites, so do more to exacerbate enviromentsl.problems...they are more inclined to be against environmental protections on a. 'Need the local jobs basis" and blame those urbanites creating the demand....How about the contradiction in
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If any of you listen to Radiolab, check out the one on cities, it backs up Cayo's point. Cities are far more efficient in almost every area when it comes to how the environment is used and treated. The problem is all you rural folks. Oh and just stop buying America. Start eating Brazil beef, it their rainforest not ours.


----------



## Chief Niwot (Oct 13, 2003)

Alto-Alto was nice yesterday, that Fraser water is not going to waste!


----------



## Waterwindpowderrock (Oct 11, 2003)

yourrealdad said:


> If any of you listen to Radiolab, check out the one on cities, it backs up Cayo's point. Cities are far more efficient in almost every area when it comes to how the environment is used and treated. The problem is all you rural folks. Oh and just stop buying America. Start eating Brazil beef, it their rainforest not ours.


Cities can't survive without MASSIVE influxes of resources from other areas. This isn't a "front range" argument by any means, it's jut the reality of increased density. Cut off a city from the outside, and it will die a very quick death.

Cut off a farm from the outside... and they'll be just fine.

Btw, as to the ones complaining about diversions being for fracking & the like... I'm sure that's the case sometimes, but IMO not the norm. Someone who pays attention to their surroundings I would hope could easily see the damage from fracking even though it's not in our back yards. (I'm glad for that at least!)


----------



## deepsouthpaddler (Apr 14, 2004)

Denver Water has been diverting water from the Fraser since the 1930's. Don't hold your breath that you will will get good paddling up there any time in the future. Denver Water's system has a max capacity, so it takes a huge snow year to have left over water in the fraser, so it might happen occasionally.

Instead of freaking out about it, maybe you should just jump in the car and go paddling. There is good water in every direction.


----------



## Waterwindpowderrock (Oct 11, 2003)

Just curious, I know they've been taking water for a long time, but it seems like the fraser has gotten worse, do you know if they're taking MORE from that drainage in the last 5-10ish years?


----------



## KSC (Oct 22, 2003)

Waterwindpowderrock said:


> Cities can't survive without MASSIVE influxes of resources from other areas. This isn't a "front range" argument by any means, it's jut the reality of increased density. Cut off a city from the outside, and it will die a very quick death.
> 
> Cut off a farm from the outside... and they'll be just fine.


I wonder. We live in a highly interconnected world. What happens when that Western farmer needs water from that dam that's no longer operating? When there are severe weather conditions and an entire year's crop is ruined? When they break their leg and need surgery? When their wife has a birthing complication? When they need a new tractor, GPS device, etc. 

Oddly enough, it seems like many of the Colorado mountain towns survive precisely because of the influx of money from the very people they constantly complain about. I've never quite understood the logic. 

Anyway, I think Kevin's right, the real problem is too many people, too few resources. But given the reality, we have to figure out how to be the most efficient. I doubt it's practical to allot everybody on the Front Range their own farm. Fortunately some people are content living in high rise condos in downtown and some need a quiet plot of land in the mountains. It's the beauty of diversity. 

So you can't curse on this forum anymore? What the fuck?


----------



## BilloutWest (Jan 25, 2013)

I'm looking for some hate mail.

The issue here isn't providing water for recreational boaters vs lawns/farms/toilets.

*The rivers and the ecosystems need the water.*
Recreational users are a side benefit.

BTW;
There isn't nearly as much money in it for the rivers, critters and their people as there is on the flush end.

Take that times a geometric increase called the worlds needs to feed and whatever other stuff and then don't look for any climate change positives to come your way.

I'll take that hate mail now.


----------



## Waterwindpowderrock (Oct 11, 2003)

one person's version of "survive" is different from another.

Eliminate the gapers, and mountain towns would be limited in what would remain for sure... but it's a different version of existence than what it currently is. I know my job would be gone, as without the gapers, the locals up high wouldn't have the numbers to require the infrastructure (schools, libraries, etc, the kind of work we do) that we provide... so I'd be gone ( or would have to go work at the mine which employs about 1/2 the people I know up here, way more than tourism). Someone would be ignorant to suggest that EITHER would survive without the other, interconnectedness like you say is very much the norm in today's global world. But so is bitching about it, and I RESERVE THE RIGHT TO CONTINUE TO BITCH!!! 

As to the farm "needing" the city though... people in those places are MUCH less needing of what the city provides than vice versa. Rural people in farming communities had been self sustaining for a long time, and most tend to continue this tradition & lifestyle. 

Me... shit, I live on a useless chunk of land that I can't even grow GRASS on... I'd be dead in a month without access to the same farms that city needs!!


Who the fuck said you couldn't curse anyhow??


----------



## deepsouthpaddler (Apr 14, 2004)

As a reply to the comment... seems like the fraser is getting worse... 


My gut feel is that in the late 90's there were big snow years, which means Denver Water has more east slope water to meet demand and needs less western slope water, so they divert less out of the fraser, and the fraser has a good snowpack too, so the fraser flows better then. When the droughts and low snowpacks of the 2000's hit... Denver water needed to pull more water over due to less east slope runoff, and the double whammy is that the fraser had a lower snowpack too, meaning lower flows on the fraser. Extrapolate this out with growing demand and increasing drought... and you get less and less water in the fraser. 

From what I remember, Denver Water has a water right that allows them to pull up to around 1000 cfs out of the fraser. For reference, the moffat tunnel is diverting 400-500 cfs right now.

The link below is an interesting presentation on water usage, revenue etc for colorado. My takeaway from reading it... west slope agriculture takes more water than front range/eastern Ag and municipal combined. The regions in colorado are interconnected economically (cool graph) with the other states regions relying on the front range for their economies more than vice versa. Water diversions make a lot of money for the state in that they support a variety of industries that do business on the front range. 


http://www.denverwater.org/docs/ass...8-2BA6CC106AFCD567/frwc_econ_presentation.pdf


----------



## DanOrion (Jun 8, 2004)

Something like 60% of the water in Grand County goes to the East Slope...in the future that amount is projected to be closer to 80%. At least you still have Gore.

What bugs me from a whitewater perspective is how infrequently the CBT project spills water into the Big Thompson. Mostly, water is piped, generates power, but not whitewater.

Sure there's a green value in both energy and project pay-back for hydropower over floating a few stinky kayakers, but I'd love to see a day when trans-basin diversions had a required whitewater recreational use that creates new whitewater on the receiving end of the pipe.

The Roberts tunnel is a pretty prime example of a transbasin diversion that massively benefits boating.


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

DanOrion said:


> ...I'd love to see a day when trans-basin diversions had a required whitewater recreational use that creates new whitewater on the receiving end of the pipe.
> 
> The Roberts tunnel is a pretty prime example of a transbasin diversion that massively benefits boating.


Agreed, Dan. Every time I drive up past Bailey to the eastern portal, I wonder what it would be to make the entire stretch a continuous whitewater feature. It's got the gradient and it's got the water. 

As more water gets piped to the Eastern slope, mitigating of the effects of dewatering a stream on the west side by creating whitewater on the eastern end of the pipe may become our last chance for preserving the recreational use of the flowing water.

We need to start thinking about this for the years to come.

-AH


----------



## cayo 2 (Apr 20, 2007)

No hatemail Billoutwest..you are right., the health of the river environment should be the foremost consideration...it isn't ...too many damn people, no matter where they live...and profit driven management of resources ensures inefficiency...

to the original point yeah it sucks that the Fraser is jacked for whitewater and otherwise..not alone either Williams Fork and Byers have basically suffered the same fate up there..


----------



## Schutzie (Feb 5, 2013)

cayo 2 said:


> No hatemail Billoutwest..you are right., the health of the river environment should be the foremost consideration...it isn't ...too many damn people, no matter where they live...and profit driven management of resources ensures inefficiency...
> 
> to the original point yeah it sucks that the Fraser is jacked for whitewater and otherwise..not alone either Williams Fork and Byers have basically suffered the same fate up there..


Ditto, except the idea that profit driven management of resources ensures inefficiency.........by definition, profit driven anything has to be more efficient.

But, still, I wanna float some stretch of river, I wanna float some stretch of river! Quit sucking my Dolores dry! And uncork Glen Canyon!


----------



## TELEYAKCO (May 17, 2007)

All this talk has the Fraser coming up!If we hit 300 cfs again,it's on!PM me if anyone is gonna be there.I'm from Alabama,so 300 cfs is BIG water!


----------



## cayo 2 (Apr 20, 2007)

Profit driven management ensures that decisions will be made on the basis of short term self interest not what is best in the long run.They are not always mutually exclusive. But when they are at odds you can nearly guarantee that they will.side with profit not responsibility.You have fallen victim to a false premise of capitalist rhetoric :that government is incapable of effective management and self interest is always more efficient, not so.It usually works out that way if you define efficiency in terms of generating profit and ignore externalities dumped on society.Our gov is pretty screwed up, mainly because they serve the interests of business more than those of the public.Who orchestrated that, you? me? or robber baron types? Why do govs in other advanced nations do a better job?Why do many Americans deny that they do? I 'll drop it now...


----------



## Schutzie (Feb 5, 2013)

cayo 2 said:


> Profit driven management ensures that decisions will be made on the basis of short term self interest not what is best in the long run.They are not always mutually exclusive. But when they are at odds you can nearly guarantee that they will.side with profit not responsibility.You have fallen victim to a false premise of capitalist rhetoric :that government is incapable of effective management and self interest is always more efficient, not so.It usually works out that way if you define efficiency in terms of generating profit and ignore externalities dumped on society.Our gov is pretty screwed up, mainly because they serve the interests of business more than those of the public.Who orchestrated that, you? me? or robber baron types? Why do govs in other advanced nations do a better job?Why do many Americans deny that they do? I 'll drop it now...


Well, blaming business for doing what it is designed to do is narrow. Business learned a long time ago, short term gain at the expense of long term well being is short sighted. 

Not to say there aren't idiots out there who take the money and run; I worked for just such an idiot for 25 years, but most of the time we could keep him in check and end up doing the right thing. Yes, there are robber barons out there, but as in nature, natural selection eventually fixes the problem.

And do not get me started on government!

Meanwhile, dammit, I still want to run Dolores!


----------



## cayo 2 (Apr 20, 2007)

That is the point., business will behave like business not a steward ..that is why you don 't want them in control of critical resources and systems, especially natural monopolies like water or utilities..just as government can be efficient business could be honest, but with globalism companies big enough to carry out large scale projects chase money and the highest ROI, in fact have a fiduciary duty to stock holders to do so.Some kind of private sub contracting to smaller local firms with government oversight is s nice fusion of concerns but that (the regulatory process) has often been corrupted by big business interests as has the contracting process.Corruption is rampant in both ..


----------



## marko (Feb 25, 2004)

What the !! ... is politics doing invading the boating forum.  Oh, that's right... sometimes politics tends to mix with the important boating issues - especially here in the West where water law and rights are insanely complicated. 

As to the OP: there are a lot of people and things getting screwed over to support modern civilization. Broaden the scope beyond the tip of your nose and your own backyard and you might see how many of the material things you possess just might have screwed somebody, or something, over for you to have those things. What's the answer to solve these frustrations and dilemmas? I don't really know the correct answer. But I do know that venting as you did on the internet (threats of violence) is a dangerous thing to do. Be careful, buddy - a young man out east was recently arrested for writing similar things on his facebook page. 



> KSC wrote.. "We live in a highly interconnected world."


Well said. I'd love to see more people start embracing this truth - and not just in regards to the front range vs. mountain dwellers.

The ones who jokingly speak of the front range vs. mountain dwellers are just having fun. The ones who bitch about it, but know the bigger truth are just frustrated and venting (I understand). But the ones who take it very seriously are just plain ignorant.


----------



## foreverhard (Apr 14, 2009)

*COCKSUCKERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

It seems I went a little overboard and had to be censored last week after I practiced extreme water conservation by not adding enough to my bourbon. It seems I made the classic western error of drinking whiskey and fighting about water.

However, even after driving 2-4 hours per day to kayak in the last week, I'm still fucking furious, and I stand behind my sentiments to those in charge of water theft: MOTHERFUCKING, PIECES-OF-SHIT, ASSHOLE, JERKS!

AND I'LL ADD "COCKSUCKERS!" THIS TIME JUST TO BE VULGAR!


----------

