Pueblo - General Info (Leadville: universities, agricultural, moving)

[Idunn]

With apologies if not warranted, although I believe the example of another western town that embraced unbridled growth is germane when discussing the future of a place such as Pueblo, CO. Particularly if a good deal of the discussion centers on how it might significantly grow. Pueblo is not alone in this, but an example of trade-offs the citizens of Colorado will increasingly be making. For one, while it might be legally entitled to water bought, that the diversion and use of this directly affects the health and future of other regions in the state.

But, if this considered irrelevant, myself content to discuss the topic elsewhere.

[Josseppie]

Originally Posted by Idunn

With apologies if not warranted, although I believe the example of another western town that embraced unbridled growth is germane when discussing the future of a place such as Pueblo, CO. Particularly if a good deal of the discussion centers on how it might significantly grow. Pueblo is not alone in this, but an example of trade-offs the citizens of Colorado will increasingly be making. For one, while it might be legally entitled to water bought, that the diversion and use of this directly affects the health and future of other regions in the state.

But, if this considered irrelevant, myself content to discuss the topic elsewhere.

I see what you are trying to say but there is no comparison with Las Vegas to Pueblo. The kind of growth Pueblo wants to have, even my optimistic projections, pale in comparison to the kind of growth Las Vegas has had. One example is the Pueblo Springs development, which is one of our largest proposed developments. I am sure the startup costs will cost less then one major hotel in Las Vegas. Thus, the issues Pueblo faces pale in comparison to the kind of issues Las Vegas faces. I think there are better cities that can be used in the west when comparing Pueblo to see how we should or should not grow.

As far as water, the interesting thing is Pueblo's goal is to actually buy water that we don't need to divert. The goal is to get all of our water from water that easily flows down the Arkansas River anyway that way we wont have to be at the whims of the western state water pact in case there is a long drought. That is why Pueblo sold the shares of the Columbine ditch in favor of the Bessemer ditch as it flows through Pueblo and will give us more water per share.

[jazzlover]

Originally Posted by Josseppie

As far as water, the interesting thing is Pueblo's goal is to actually buy water that we don't need to divert. The goal is to get all of our water from water that easily flows down the Arkansas River anyway that way we wont have to be at the whims of the western state water pact in case there is a long drought. That is why Pueblo sold the shares of the Columbine ditch in favor of the Bessemer ditch as it flows through Pueblo and will give us more water per share.

Once again, Josseppie, you ignore facts. Like the fact that a good chunk of that Arkansas River flow is water that is diverted from the Western Slope by the Frying Pan/Arkansas Project. That water is part of the Colorado River Compact. Get your facts straight, for once. You also ignore the fact (again and again) that Pueblo's water use comes at the expense of thousands of acres of prime agricultural land dried up when water to irrigate them was diverted to Pueblo's municipal use.

[Josseppie]

Originally Posted by jazzlover

Once again, Josseppie, you ignore facts. Like the fact that a good chunk of that Arkansas River flow is water that is diverted from the Western Slope by the Frying Pan/Arkansas Project. That water is part of the Colorado River Compact. Get your facts straight, for once. You also ignore the fact (again and again) that Pueblo's water use comes at the expense of thousands of acres of prime agricultural land dried up when water to irrigate them was diverted to Pueblo's municipal use.

All I know is I was told that one of the motivations behind buying shares in the Bessemer ditch and sale our shares in the Columbine ditch is the Pueblo Board of Water Works feels that if a drought occurs in the west our shares in the Columbine ditch could be trumped by the western states while that will not be a issue with the Bessemer ditch.

[jazzlover]

Originally Posted by Josseppie

All I know is I was told that one of the motivations behind buying shares in the Bessemer ditch and sale our shares in the Columbine ditch is the Pueblo Board of Water Works feels that if a drought occurs in the west our shares in the Columbine ditch could be trumped by the western states while that will not be a issue with the Bessemer ditch.

That is likely the matter of the seniority of the water rights. Yeah, Pueblo might be "safe" in a drought because it owns senior rights. But it also means that Kentucky Bluegrass lawn-watering trumps growing crops or maintaining streamflows in a drought year. It may be legal, but it's still sick and wrong in my book.

[Josseppie]

Originally Posted by jazzlover

That is likely the matter of the seniority of the water rights. Yeah, Pueblo might be "safe" in a drought because it owns senior rights. But it also means that Kentucky Bluegrass lawn-watering trumps growing crops or maintaining streamflows in a drought year. It may be legal, but it's still sick and wrong in my book.

That wont happen for 20 years. Here is a article in today's Pueblo Chieftain:

"The Pueblo Board of Water Works has offered to lease back the water it is purchasing on the Bessemer Ditch for 20 years to all sellers."

The link: The Pueblo Chieftain :: Bessemer buy won't dry up farms right away

[jazzlover]

Originally Posted by Josseppie

That wont happen for 20 years. Here is a article in today's Pueblo Chieftain:

"The Pueblo Board of Water Works has offered to lease back the water it is purchasing on the Bessemer Ditch for 20 years to all sellers."

The link: The Pueblo Chieftain :: Bessemer buy won't dry up farms right away

So, it's OK when it happens in 20 years? That's like me saying I'm going to shoot somebody, but--hey--I'm not going to do it for 20 years. That makes it right?

[Josseppie]

Originally Posted by jazzlover

So, it's OK when it happens in 20 years? That's like me saying I'm going to shoot somebody, but--hey--I'm not going to do it for 20 years. That makes it right?

My understanding is the farmers children do not want to farm, thus, they are going to sale their water rights anyway. That is why the farmers voted to allow the sale by such a high margin as more and more people in Pueblo county do not want to farm. By Pueblo buying the water it keeps the water in the valley and allows the current generation to continue to farm then when they retire their kids can develop the land or just sale it and go on to do what they want.

Like it or not Pueblo is slowly becoming a urban county, that won't happen over night but I suspect over the next 50 years you will see this large town develop into a nice metro area. That still leaves south eastern Colorado for farming and ranching and Pueblo will always be the hub city, I don't see what is happening here happen there. As proof of that just look down where the ranchers are fighting the expansion of Pinion Canyon because they do not want to lose their ranch. Also, I don't see places like La Junta and Lamar wanting to grow to become large cities.

[Proleadership03]

Originally Posted by Mike from back east

Need to stick close to the topic of Pueblo.

Comparisons to what happened in Las Vegas may be germane but let's not get too wrapped up in the excesses of Las Vegas, as there's no way that Pueblo will ever be another Las Vegas.

A Las Vegas Devlopment Company have a huge part of pueblo springs ranch project, and too me las vegas is big part of pueblo present & future!

This comment for this thread.

[jazzlover]

Originally Posted by Josseppie

My understanding is the farmers children do not want to farm, thus, they are going to sale their water rights anyway. That is why the farmers voted to allow the sale by such a high margin as more and more people in Pueblo county do not want to farm. By Pueblo buying the water it keeps the water in the valley and allows the current generation to continue to farm then when they retire their kids can develop the land or just sale it and go on to do what they want.

Like it or not Pueblo is slowly becoming a urban county, that won't happen over night but I suspect over the next 50 years you will see this large town develop into a nice metro area. That still leaves south eastern Colorado for farming and ranching and Pueblo will always be the hub city, I don't see what is happening here happen there. As proof of that just look down where the ranchers are fighting the expansion of Pinion Canyon because they do not want to lose their ranch. Also, I don't see places like La Junta and Lamar wanting to grow to become large cities.

Dude, you can't farm in southeastern Colorado without irrigation water--except for dryland wheat, which people are figured out can be a pretty iffy proposition. Today, cities can easily pay more money for farmer's water than those folks can make farming. But, that's today. We are rapidly reaching the point that this country will not be able to feed itself; and, even if it can, agricultural products may be one of the few things we can export. Colorado, too, used to be a net agricultural exporter, and could produce much of what it needed to feed itself. No longer. That may be necessary again, when cross-country "just-in-time" transportation of food becomes prohibitively expensive. It sure would be nice if people could think beyond next week, and realize what sprawl and population growth is doing to this place. It's not just the place that may be ****ed from their foolish actions, it may be them. You can't eat suburbia--unless you legalize cannibalism. Maybe that's next.