Westward expansion has perhaps one of the most dichotomous histories in American culture. Set aside for a moment the revisionism of manifest destiny’s privilege where we tell our children of the greatness of our developed nation, which was stolen from the indigenous people who were here before God told us it was our destiny to have it, and reconcile with the truth that those who settled this nation west of the 100th meridian were at the very least a tenacious people.
The early western pioneers found quickly the formidability of life in the west when first they struck the ground with the tools that previously had made settling, farming, and cultivating land an arduous but possible endeavor.
The arid nature of the west, the dry weather and heat, and the absence of consistent water made it a place where the most emboldened new land owners would question the east coast banks that financed their new 160-acre spreads, “Where is the water?”
It would take decades for the industrial revolution to catch up to the fervor of western expansion and create tools, machinery, and an industry that would allow the pioneers to bend the will of the environment to their own. And they have done a notable job of it.
That is the dichotomy of wills we will speak of when discussing the proposed Lake Powell Pipeline.
I have been an outspoken voice in opposition to the project and, like many of my peers, for a time believed that responding to the proposal with alternative solutions to the need to bring consistent water to Washington County was a proper course of action.
I, like my peers, believed in the rational abilities of those who propose this audacious project and thought, at least for a time, that the Washington County Water Conservancy District was listening to the input and taking the voices of the public into consideration.
Experience has shown otherwise. If the proponents of the project are required to provide three solutions to the questionable narrative that we are running out of water, those solutions go like this.
One, we can build the pipeline. Two, we can build the pipeline. Or three, we can build the pipeline.
An attorney for the Water Conservancy District told me once that my opposition was misaligned because I did not understand the complexities of water, and to her credit, she was right.
I began to read about the history of water in the west, the reclamation bureau, and water management agencies, and I finally understood what she was saying.
Water is actually not that complex at all. It is wet and flows through the path of least resistance. What is complex is making it flow laterally and uphill towards money.
The county intends to build this project not only in defiance of common sense or anything resembling fiscal responsibility. It intends to bend the will of nature to its own and to marvel, like its predecessors, at its engineering prowess.
But it is less about the need for water than about the need to continue this narrative of western expansion wherein God shines upon anything done in his name.
And in Washington County, power and position is equated with the grace of God in a way like no other fundamentally religiously conservative area in the country, which is to say that those proponents for the project believe in earnest that if they build the pipeline, the water — which is not currently there — will come.
And the money that is also not there will come as well.
It is painful to watch nonprofit organizations like Citizens for Dixie’s Future and the Utah Rivers Council have meetings where the same 15 or so people show up to listen to these groups use statistics and logic to counter the sometimes implausible facts the Water Conservancy District puts forth.
The notion that this project will be halted by such is laughable, but do you know what is not? The possibility that the manner with which our legislators go about funding this project is not only reckless but borders on financial malfeasance.
I think the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on Applied Analysis’ Jeremy Aguero to regurgitate the narrative of the county under the auspices of being an unbiased analyst could be construed as government waste.
Follow the money first, folks, and you’ll perhaps find that it is not leading at all to more water but rather more power and position for a small group of people who are using your tax dollars to bend not only nature but public opinion to their wills.
See you out there.
Articles related to “The Lake Powell Pipeline and the myth of manifest destiny”
Why the Lake Powell Pipeline would cost Washington County families thousands of dollars
POLL: Do you think the Lake Powell Pipeline is necessary for southern Utah?
Dallas makes many good points about the Lake Powell Pipeline Project process and what’s pushing it. I think, however, that he does disservice to organizations such as Conserve Southwest Utah (formerly Citizens for Dixie’s Future as Dallas used) and Utah Rivers Council. These two groups have been working diligently to oppose this project for ten years. Have they stopped the behemoth? No. Have they had some success? Yes. They have forced the water district to reveal information that they would not have revealed by working through the state’s records commission. They have worked through the legislative auditor and succeeded in having two major audits done – one in 2014 on Utah’s Division of Drinking Water and in 2015 on Utah’s Division of Water Resources – audits that revealed major problems in the data gathering by these two organizations – data upon which the project is based. They had influence in the legislature that’s reflected in bills being enacted that require greater scrutiny regarding data and measurement of our water as a result of those audits. They’ve provided education to citizens through events to provide information that would not normally have reached citizens through other methods particularly through leaders who don’t want citizens truly informed. This has been a tough thing for these small organizations that have just a handful of people working on these issues. Fortunately, CSU was able to fine twelve able-bodied citizens who were willing to travel to Salt Lake City last legislative session to meet face-to-face with legislators. The war is not won and we may end up with this atrocious project, but doing nothing as some might choose to do ensures we will definitely have it – and without any battle waged. Words are easy, while action it not.
I too am more than a little skeptical as to whether water would be available when the pipeline would be completed many years from now.
What I find especially frustrating about the whole pipeline issue is — who finally decides whether the pipeline is built? Who finally decides how it will be financed?
If the WCWCD is the final decision maker on whether the pipeline is built it will be built. If the County Commission is the final decision maker it probably will be built. The state — who knows? It is apparent that there are no plans now to let the residents of the county have a direct say on the decision.
Who will have the final decision on how the pipeline would be financed? The WCWCD? The county? The state? Again, will the water users and taxpayers have any direct say on the financing scheme?
I too am more than a little skeptical as to whether water would be available when the pipeline would be completed many years from now.
What I find especially frustrating about the whole pipeline issue is — who finally decides whether the pipeline is built? Who finally decides how it will be financed?
If the WCWCD is the final decision maker on whether the pipeline is built it will be built. If the County Commission is the final decision maker it probably will be built. The state — who knows? It is apparent that there are no plans now to let the residents of the county have a direct say on the decision.
Who will have the final decision on how the pipeline would be financed? The WCWCD? The county? The state? Again, will the water users and taxpayers have any direct say on the financing scheme?