08-19-2013, 02:25 AM
Damnation FL, there’s hope for you yet. That was actually a good response for the most part. I’ll offer a couple of very minor critiques that I feel are constructive criticism in an effort to improve your analytical skills. I’m hoping you’ll see and understand that.
Good, I'm not doomed! Yep, I'm still young and learning and understand.
Do not depend on others to find solutions for you. Seek out your own solutions to life’s problems. You’ll be a much better person for it.
I try not to. I've definitely learned that many times and especially for my medical concern:my back.
Good answer, but way to simple. How do you get the end user (us) educated to the point that we know it’s in our best interests to turn them off?
Hah I know! I don't necessarily have an answer to that but it would have to involve incentives and consequences such as poor launching conditions for boats, less recreational use(both for fishers and boaters), fish species dying, and of course having a hefty bill. If somehow we got the message across that if we don't start doing better with water, then lakes and reservoirs are going to have poor or no launching access which means: possible damage done to boats in the process of trying to launch, no fishing from boats, or no "boating"/water sports. It'd also be worth mentioning that high temperature and low water levels=poor oxegon=fish dying(only problem is only fishermen would care about this).
BS; there is way too much government control on society as it is right now. We damn sure don’t need more.
Totally different topic/discussion but it'd definitely be worth talking about what government should and shouldn't be involved with.
As I’ve already mentioned – graduated rates that increase with increased usage. See there, we actually agree on something.
Yup. As sinergy pointed out, much of water usage is business and industry. So not only does the increased water price with usage need to be enforced with individual home owners, but especially businesses.
No easy answer here. Canals were made to get water to food plants and are still used primarily for that purpose. If you shut them down we don’t eat. But cutting back on delivery to non-food plants may be worth looking at.
I definitely agree with you on the the delivery of non-food plants part but still think we could lower the water levels even to ones that are watered. Obviously we must eat but like I've said, near my house the canals are totally full all year and then come fall they're turned off. Even lowering the water level by 6 inches to a foot over the course of the many miles canals are is saving a lot of water. It's also not like they couldn't start releasing more water if the irrigation canal water levels really were dropping to fast for farmers to water their crops.
Why not make it a money thing; people understand money and hitting their pocketbooks gets their attention immediately. One size fits all (everybody getting the same number of gallons) will not work for the simple reason that no two users have exactly the same water requirements.
Yeah I totally agree; didn't really think about different water requirements of people.
Most of those ideas have been around since I was a kid and I’m 71 years young. Still good points today but not outside the box thinking.
Yeah, those were it I could think of right off the bat.
Good points and valid. And a much better approach than just complaining about water waste. Complainers are just an irritating part of the problem. Start being more proactive by offering ideas to fix the problems and become part of the solutions.
Yep I will try. I do think however like sinergy pointed out that the main probles of water use are industrial/business use. I don't really have any solutions right now for that but maybe someone will come up with something.
[signature]
Good, I'm not doomed! Yep, I'm still young and learning and understand.
Do not depend on others to find solutions for you. Seek out your own solutions to life’s problems. You’ll be a much better person for it.
I try not to. I've definitely learned that many times and especially for my medical concern:my back.
Good answer, but way to simple. How do you get the end user (us) educated to the point that we know it’s in our best interests to turn them off?
Hah I know! I don't necessarily have an answer to that but it would have to involve incentives and consequences such as poor launching conditions for boats, less recreational use(both for fishers and boaters), fish species dying, and of course having a hefty bill. If somehow we got the message across that if we don't start doing better with water, then lakes and reservoirs are going to have poor or no launching access which means: possible damage done to boats in the process of trying to launch, no fishing from boats, or no "boating"/water sports. It'd also be worth mentioning that high temperature and low water levels=poor oxegon=fish dying(only problem is only fishermen would care about this).
BS; there is way too much government control on society as it is right now. We damn sure don’t need more.
Totally different topic/discussion but it'd definitely be worth talking about what government should and shouldn't be involved with.
As I’ve already mentioned – graduated rates that increase with increased usage. See there, we actually agree on something.
Yup. As sinergy pointed out, much of water usage is business and industry. So not only does the increased water price with usage need to be enforced with individual home owners, but especially businesses.
No easy answer here. Canals were made to get water to food plants and are still used primarily for that purpose. If you shut them down we don’t eat. But cutting back on delivery to non-food plants may be worth looking at.
I definitely agree with you on the the delivery of non-food plants part but still think we could lower the water levels even to ones that are watered. Obviously we must eat but like I've said, near my house the canals are totally full all year and then come fall they're turned off. Even lowering the water level by 6 inches to a foot over the course of the many miles canals are is saving a lot of water. It's also not like they couldn't start releasing more water if the irrigation canal water levels really were dropping to fast for farmers to water their crops.
Why not make it a money thing; people understand money and hitting their pocketbooks gets their attention immediately. One size fits all (everybody getting the same number of gallons) will not work for the simple reason that no two users have exactly the same water requirements.
Yeah I totally agree; didn't really think about different water requirements of people.
Most of those ideas have been around since I was a kid and I’m 71 years young. Still good points today but not outside the box thinking.
Yeah, those were it I could think of right off the bat.
Good points and valid. And a much better approach than just complaining about water waste. Complainers are just an irritating part of the problem. Start being more proactive by offering ideas to fix the problems and become part of the solutions.
Yep I will try. I do think however like sinergy pointed out that the main probles of water use are industrial/business use. I don't really have any solutions right now for that but maybe someone will come up with something.
[signature]