Article claims that it's a Utah Mormon's religious duty to water their grass.

[BlueDreams]

Saw this video today. It’s for all the west, but it definitely applies to utah. Here’s an actual break down of water usage in our semi-arid to arid region: 

https://youtu.be/f0gN1x6sVTc

[Teancum]

17 hours ago, smac97 said:

In my experience, the only unusual thing that Utah Mormons do relative to water is to pray for more of it on a regular basis in church meetings.

 

How is that working for you all?

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

How is that working for you all?

For this year, it's working pretty well!

When I was a teenager, my area of wyoming was going through a really hot/dry summer, and since farming is one of the big industries for an area of that stake, our entire stake held a fast for a break in the heat.  The next day it was like 104 degrees or something.  Our stake president told a story of how that really bothered him, and when a visiting general authority came through, he brought it up.  The GA's simple answer was "well, it never hurts to ask, but sometimes the answer is no."

So who knows what next year will bring.

[Teancum]

14 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Yes, I see the climate change four times a year — with each change in season. 

Perhaps you should drop the biased remarks. I know you are a climate science denier but almost all those with expertise disagree with you.

[The Nehor]

10 hours ago, JarMan said:

The context, here, which would be good for you to remember, is the impact to the Great Salt Lake. It’s indisputable (at least to those who understand the issue) that replacing irrigated land with cities provides a net increased flow to the lake. I can bore you with an in-depth analysis of the numbers, but I won’t, unless you persist in showing your ignorance of the issue.

No, that wasn’t the context of the post I was responding to nor did you add put it in yours. If you wanted to talk specifically about the water level of the Great Salt Lake why did you quote my post which wasn’t talking about that at all?

10 hours ago, JarMan said:

Oh, you want specifics? Well I’m glad you asked. The article claims Utah uses more water for municipal use than any other state. What’s not pointed out in the article is that they’re not comparing apples to apples. Utah’s water use numbers (unlike other state numbers) includes outdoor use. When you look at indoor use (which is what other state’s report) Utah is actually not doing too bad. Also claimed is that Utah is using hundreds of thousands of acre feet to water lawns. This is a blatant lie that is clearly contradicted by the data.

Please let me know what other issues I can help you understand regarding water use in Utah. Today is your lucky day because you’ve stumbled across somebody who’s spent a career working in this field.

Thank you for clarifying. Having accurate numbers is important. We are still running out of water so all this does is say that Utah is not quite as much to blame relative to other states based on misleading data. That is nice but also not what I was talking about. It does not make the southwest running out of water part of some anti-growth agenda or suggest that lies are rampant.

[smac97]

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

Quote

In my experience, the only unusual thing that Utah Mormons do relative to water is to pray for more of it on a regular basis in church meetings.

How is that working for you all?

Overall?  Quite good.  

In April 2004, Elder Dennis Simmons gave a talk in General Conference: "But If Not..."

Some excerpts:

Quote

Centuries ago, Daniel and his young associates were suddenly thrust from security into the world—a world foreign and intimidating. When Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego refused to bow down and worship a golden image set up by the king, a furious Nebuchadnezzar told them that if they would not worship as commanded, they would immediately be cast into a burning fiery furnace. “And who is that God that shall deliver you out of my hands?”

The three young men quickly and confidently responded, “If it be so [if you cast us into the furnace], our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand.” That sounds like my eighth-grade kind of faith. But then they demonstrated that they fully understood what faith is. They continued, “But if not, … we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up.” That is a statement of true faith.

They knew that they could trust God—even if things didn’t turn out the way they hoped. They knew that faith is more than mental assent, more than an acknowledgment that God lives. Faith is total trust in Him.

I have had many experiences in asking God for help.  There are times when that help has come as I anticipated, many times where it has come in an unanticipated way, and still others when it has not come, when the Lord has seemingly said "No" or "Not right now."

I'm quite okay with that.  I think three big parts of having faith are A) seeking guidance/help from God, B) doing all I can to situate myself to receive the blessing, and C) maintaining humility and patience in waiting for the blessing.

Quote

Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego knew they could always rely on Him because they knew His plan, and they knew that He does not change. They knew, as we know, that mortality is not an accident of nature. It is a brief segment of the great plan of our loving Father in Heaven to make it possible for us, His sons and daughters, to achieve the same blessings He enjoys, if we are willing.

They knew, as we know, that in our premortal life, we were instructed by Him as to the purpose of mortality: “We will make an earth whereon these may dwell; And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them.”

So there we have it—it’s a test. The world is a testing place for mortal men and women. When we understand that it’s all a test, administered by our Heavenly Father, who wants us to trust in Him and to allow Him to help us, we can then see everything more clearly.

His work and His glory, He told us, is “to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.” He has already achieved godhood. Now His only objective is to help us—to enable us to return to Him and be like Him and live His kind of life eternally.

Knowing all this, it was not difficult for those three young Hebrews to make their decision. They would follow God; they would exercise faith in Him. He would deliver them, but if not—and we know the rest of the story.

This works for me.  I don't think I can or ought to make my relationship with Heavenly Father contingent on Him doing exactly what I expect and want every time.  Such an expectation is neither feasible nor wise.  

Quote

The Lord has given us agency, the right and the responsibility to decide. He tests us by allowing us to be challenged. He assures us that He will not suffer us to be tempted beyond our ability to withstand. But we must understand that great challenges make great men. We don’t seek tribulation, but if we respond in faith, the Lord strengthens us. The but if nots can become remarkable blessings.

The Apostle Paul learned this significant lesson and declared, after decades of dedicated missionary work, “We glory in tribulations … knowing that tribulation worketh patience; And patience, experience; and experience, hope: And hope maketh not ashamed.”

He was assured by the Savior, “My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness.”

Some tribulations come to me by my own hand, through my own shortcomings.  Some come to me by some other person's behavior, or through a confluence of events not within my control.

In the beautiful words of the Serenity Prayer: "God, grant me the serenity To accept the things I cannot change, Courage to change the things I can, And wisdom to know the difference."

Or, as Sean Connery's King Arthur put it: "May God grant us the wisdom to discover right, the will to choose it, and the strength to make it endure."

Quote

We must have the same faith as Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego.

Our God will deliver us from ridicule and persecution, but if not. … Our God will deliver us from sickness and disease, but if not. … He will deliver us from loneliness, depression, or fear, but if not. … Our God will deliver us from threats, accusations, and insecurity, but if not. … He will deliver us from death or impairment of loved ones, but if not, … we will trust in the Lord.

Our God will see that we receive justice and fairness, but if not. … He will make sure that we are loved and recognized, but if not. … We will receive a perfect companion and righteous and obedient children, but if not, … we will have faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, knowing that if we do all we can do, we will, in His time and in His way, be delivered and receive all that He has. I so testify in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Yep.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Teancum]

8 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Overall?  Quite good.  

In April 2004, Elder Dennis Simmons gave a talk in General Conference: "But If Not..."

My questions was specifically about praying for rain/water.  Based on the weather patterns in Utah it seems to me that your prayers are not being answered.  Really why would one need to pray to God for rain?  Does he not know the lack of rain is a problem?  If he is causing the rain not to fall can your prayers change his mind?  If you give God credit when it rains do you give God credit for the bad results of withholding the rain?

[Teancum]

15 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Okay that was funny and not funny at the same time, lol. 

You are kind.

[Teancum]

22 hours ago, bluebell said:

There's an article in The Guardian that claims that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Utah are bleeding the state dry because we believe that it's a commandment to "make the desert blossom as a rose". 

Uh, what?

I've lived here for almost 9 years (9 in October) and I have never heard this spouted by anyone, member or not.  It's not a concept that is even on my radar.  So I have to ask, are there members that actually believe/teach that we have to keep watering our lawns to be obedient to God?  I'm up here in Davis county (and our town saved so much water last year that the city is still talking about how amazing we did with letting our lawns die) and I'm not seeing it but maybe it's more south that this attitude prevails?  

I honestly have no idea.  Does this ring a bell with anyone?  Do Latter-day Saints love a green lawn more than people anywhere else in the country?

(I only quoted the first few paragraphs of the article so feel free to check out the link and read the whole thing).

 

This was a dumb article.  There is nothing in the prophecy of the desert blossoming like a rose that is used to pressure Utah member to have a green grass.  How utterly stupid of the writer.

[smac97]

2 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Quote

 

Overall?  Quite good.  

In April 2004, Elder Dennis Simmons gave a talk in General Conference: "But If Not..."

 

My questions was specifically about praying for rain/water. 

I understood that.

2 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Based on the weather patterns in Utah it seems to me that your prayers are not being answered. 

Or they are being answered with "No," or "Not right now."

2 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Really why would one need to pray to God for rain? 

If there is a need for it.

2 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Does he not know the lack of rain is a problem? 

Yes.  Omniscience has its perqs.  

This seems to be part of the plan.  "Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him." (Matthew 6:8.)

2 minutes ago, Teancum said:

If he is causing the rain not to fall can your prayers change his mind? 

Yes.  Or if the lack of rainfall stems from the natural state of things (rather than from God "causing the rain not to fall"), He can intervene in answer to prayers.

2 minutes ago, Teancum said:

If you give God credit when it rains

Sort of.  If I believe rain is miraculous, then yes.  If I believe rain is happening from the natural state of things (rather than from affirmative and specific and intentional divine intervention), I can still give thanks to God.  “Search diligently, pray always, and be believing, and all things shall work together for your good, if ye walk uprightly.”  (D&C 90:24.)

In my view, there is no downside to giving thanks to God.

2 minutes ago, Teancum said:

do you give God credit for the bad results of withholding the rain?

Generally not.  The scriptures speak of God "causing" droughts, famines, etc.  I don't feel I am situated to reach determinations as to such matters.  

Thanks,

-Smac

[Teancum]

16 hours ago, Emily said:

But even if our water supply remains constant, our population is NOT constant. I'm just moved to Utah, and I'm using water. Feels like half of California moved in with me. They also use water. The Wasatch area was already straining it's water supply before we all showed up. So either Utahns close their borders (a decade too late for that), or we all need to use less water per capita so we aren't "spending more than we make", hopefully voluntarily. The only other option is involuntary restrictions and that never makes people happy.

I grew up in Utah but have lived in the Northeast my entire adult life.  THough with family in Utah I still have spent quite a bit of time there.  THe population is outstripping the water resources.  And obviously not just in Utah.  And as you know this is one of the factor that is causing the Great Salt Lake to be low. I did live in Utah the couple years before the pumpls were built to pump water into the western desert. I recall the flooding in I believe 1984 when 13th South was made into a river with sand bags. I helped fill sandbags and stack them. I recall the new Salt Air being surrounded by water and the threat to the airport as well as similar problems to I-15 along Utah Lake. My dad did talk about the cycles for the lake and said it runs on 50 year swings.  If that is the case maybe ten more years and there will be flooding again?  Personally I do believe that humans have exacerbated climate change issues by over use of resources and by spewing to much carbon  into the air. Regardless, the west has a problem.

Where I live the economy has been pretty flat and even declined in many areas. The major city where I live was a power house economically for a hundred and fifty years and had many well known powerhouse corporations that have simply diminished.  But we have water and lots of it. My pet theory is this will be our economic boom. I used to think it might happen 50 years from now when I am long gone.  But I am wondering if it might be sooner. Who knows.

 

Ayway where i live hardly anyone waters their lawn and generally they do not need to.  We do have some dry summers and they seems to be getting a bit drier.  This summer our lawn did get a bit brown and go dormant. Then September hit and in about two weeks we caught up for our rainfall deficit.  Farmer don't irrigate here as well.  Again some summers are dry and that can impact the crops in a bad way.  But so can too much rain which we have had many times.  Anyway you all can keep your desert and I will keep the lush green country side and foliage we have as well as the wonderful streams, rivers, waterfalls and many lakes, both the Great Lakes and others.

Edited September 26, 2022 by Teancum

[Teancum]

13 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

The trouble with the leftist slur “climate change denier” (I prefer the descriptor “climate change skeptic”) is that it is misleadingly inaccurate. I don’t know of anyone who denies the existence of climate change. The question seems to be if it really is occurring on such a scale and with such urgency that we need to ruin entire economies to deal with it, a la the “green new deal” (we’ve got about eight years to go now on AOC’s “world will end in 12 years” doomsday prophecy). 

Your comment is quite humorous.  First you slam those you oppose politically then you spew your own foolishness.  Ruin entire economies? Get real.  My guess is you are simply parroting Fox News and right wing propaganda and have really read little to nothing on the issue.  Economies can boom if we approach the development of new technology and approach the change over from fossil fuels to clean renewables in a reasonable and rational way.  I do agree that there are reactionaries on the left but they are not the ones to listen to in the topic.  There are more balanced and rational minds that engage the issue.

[Teancum]

38 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I understood that.

Great.  Not sure what the point of the long sermon was foe then.

38 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Or they are being answered with "No," or "Not right now."

Maybe,  Or maybe one cannot really influence God. Let's pray for rain, but God knows there is not rain and could have sent it if he wanted. Same for praying for someone who is ill.  Well if God did not want them ill or is willing to prevent or fix it why bother with the prayer. God could have prevented it in the first place.  Its sort of like that D&C verse on blessing and healing the sick. It can work, if they are not appointed to die. Huh?  Well sure. If they are not appointed to die they won't die so why do they need the blessing in the first place?

 

38 minutes ago, smac97 said:

If there is a need for it.

Yes.  Omniscience has its perqs.  

Soo if God knows the outcome your prayer cannot influence or change things. Otherwise God is not omniscient.  

38 minutes ago, smac97 said:

This seems to be part of the plan.  "Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him." (Matthew 6:8.)

Yes.  Or if the lack of rainfall stems from the natural state of things (rather than from God "causing the rain not to fall"), He can intervene in answer to prayers.

Doesn't God cause the natural state if things?

38 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Sort of.  If I believe rain is miraculous, then yes.  If I believe rain is happening from the natural state of things (rather than from affirmative and specific and intentional divine intervention), I can still give thanks to God.  “Search diligently, pray always, and be believing, and all things shall work together for your good, if ye walk uprightly.”  (D&C 90:24.)

In my view, there is no downside to giving thanks to God.

Generally not.  The scriptures speak of God "causing" droughts, famines, etc.  I don't feel I am situated to reach determinations as to such matters.  

Thanks,

-Smac

So God gets credit for the good things but not the bad.  Seems like he should get equal footing.

[smac97]

9 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Great.  Not sure what the point of the long sermon was foe then.

Clarification and elaboration of my position.  That's all.

9 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Quote

Or they are being answered with "No," or "Not right now."

Maybe,  Or maybe one cannot really influence God.

Yes, that is a possibility.  But it contravenes what the prophets have been saying for a very long time.

9 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Let's pray for rain, but God knows there is not rain and could have sent it if he wanted. Same for praying for someone who is ill.  Well if God did not want them ill or is willing to prevent or fix it why bother with the prayer.

Because agency is central to the Plan of Salvation.  Because obedience to God is central to how we should use that agency.  Because obedience includes seeking guidance and help from God (plenty of scriptures about that).

9 minutes ago, Teancum said:

God could have prevented it in the first place. 

God "could have" done all sorts of things.  In the end, though, I don't think we can competently declare alternative courses of action as to what God "could" or "should" do.  "But behold, all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things."  (2 Nephi2:24.) 

It is, of course, a matter of faith to accept or reject these things.  I choose to accept them.

9 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Its sort of like that D&C verse on blessing and healing the sick. It can work, if they are not appointed to die. Huh?  Well sure. If they are not appointed to die they won't die so why do they need the blessing in the first place?

Per Elder Renlund: "{M}ost blessings that God desires to give us require action on our part—action based on our faith in Jesus Christ. Faith in the Savior is a principle of action and of power. First we act in faith; then the power comes—according to God’s will and timing. The sequence is crucial. The required action, though, is always tiny when compared to the blessings we ultimately receive."

Per Elder Scott: 

Quote

Life in today’s world can be at times so complicated and the challenges so overwhelming as to be beyond our individual capacity to resolve them. We all need help from the Lord. Yet there are many individuals who don’t know how to receive that help. They feel their urgent pleas for help have often gone unattended. How can that be when He Himself has said, “Ask, and ye shall receive; knock, and it shall be opened unto you”? (D&C 4:7.)

Such difficulty results either from not following His spiritual law for providing help or from not recognizing help when it comes. Well did James observe, “Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss.” (James 4:3.)

True, the Lord has said, “Ask, and ye shall receive.” (D&C 4:7.) But He also declared, “Behold, you have not understood; you have supposed that I would give it unto you, when you took no thought save it was to ask me.” (D&C 9:7.)

It is evident that He intends that we do our part. But what, specifically, are we to do?

I think there is value in us asking.

9 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Soo if God knows the outcome your prayer cannot influence or change things. Otherwise God is not omniscient.  

I don't think so.  That God knows whether I ask or not (or that my prayer is predicated on faith and obedience, or that my request is congruent with His will) does not preclude me from asking.  

9 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Doesn't God cause the natural state if things?

Yes.  

9 minutes ago, Teancum said:

So God gets credit for the good things but not the bad.  Seems like he should get equal footing.

"He doeth not anything save it be for the benefit of the world."  (2 Nephi 26:24.)

Anything that God does is per se "good," even if in the moment it is difficult, causes pain, etc.

Thanks,

-Smac

[JarMan]

2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

No, that wasn’t the context of the post I was responding to nor did you add put it in yours. If you wanted to talk specifically about the water level of the Great Salt Lake why did you quote my post which wasn’t talking about that at all?

You have to go back a few comments to see the context. I said the panic about the Great Salt Lake drying up was fear-mongering to sell papers and push an agenda. But it doesn't matter what basin we're talking about, anyway, because from a basin-wide perspective growing people takes less water than growing crops. Yet people are constantly claiming that growth is responsible for the stress on water resources. This is dishonest and it's being pushed by anti-growth people who know it's dishonest.

2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Thank you for clarifying. Having accurate numbers is important. We are still running out of water so all this does is say that Utah is not quite as much to blame relative to other states based on misleading data. That is nice but also not what I was talking about. It does not make the southwest running out of water part of some anti-growth agenda or suggest that lies are rampant.

I hate to rain on your apocalypse but Utah is not running out of water.

[The Nehor]

11 minutes ago, JarMan said:

You have to go back a few comments to see the context. I said the panic about the Great Salt Lake drying up was fear-mongering to sell papers and push an agenda. But it doesn't matter what basin we're talking about, anyway, because from a basin-wide perspective growing people takes less water than growing crops. Yet people are constantly claiming that growth is responsible for the stress on water resources. This is dishonest and it's being pushed by anti-growth people who know it's dishonest.

Then quote the context in your post.

Still pushing the more people means less water used thing? Okay…..

13 minutes ago, JarMan said:

I hate to rain on your apocalypse but Utah is not running out of water.

Completely out? No. Enough that there are going to be severe cutbacks of water throughout the American southwest? Yes.

[InCognitus]

24 minutes ago, JarMan said:

I hate to rain on your apocalypse but Utah is not running out of water.

Rain on?  Not running out of water?  Reading this thread always makes me thirsty.  

FWIW:  I hear my neighbor mowing his lush green lawn right now.   

[ksfisher]

28 minutes ago, JarMan said:

You have to go back a few comments to see the context. I said the panic about the Great Salt Lake drying up was fear-mongering to sell papers and push an agenda. But it doesn't matter what basin we're talking about, anyway, because from a basin-wide perspective growing people takes less water than growing crops. Yet people are constantly claiming that growth is responsible for the stress on water resources. This is dishonest and it's being pushed by anti-growth people who know it's dishonest.

I hate to rain on your apocalypse but Utah is not running out of water.

Have you been to the lake recently?  Have you seen areas that in past years, even last year, were covered by water that this year are dry?  I have.

[blackstrap]

I have been keeping an eye on Lake Mead. The low water levels have exposed old boat wrecks... and bodies. 

[Rain]

1 hour ago, JarMan said:

You have to go back a few comments to see the context. I said the panic about the Great Salt Lake drying up was fear-mongering to sell papers and push an agenda. But it doesn't matter what basin we're talking about, anyway, because from a basin-wide perspective growing people takes less water than growing crops.

I've never understood this.  To grow people you need to grow crops which means growing people uses more water.

 

1 hour ago, JarMan said:

Yet people are constantly claiming that growth is responsible for the stress on water resources. This is dishonest and it's being pushed by anti-growth people who know it's dishonest.

I hate to rain on your apocalypse but Utah is not running out of water.

 

[Tacenda]

28 minutes ago, blackstrap said:

I have been keeping an eye on Lake Mead. The low water levels have exposed old boat wrecks... and bodies. 

It's all so very concerning, and we do need to scare people to save water and not be so dang irresponsible. We rely on the lake affect in order to get our much lauded snowfall that Utah is famous for. We're basically doomed if the resorts don't get snow, and if the air quality gets worse with the particles from the Great Salt Lake. I've watched the person that has a youtube on Lake Mead and does daily or ? videos of it going down, down, down. And those bodies showing up etc. 

Edited September 26, 2022 by Tacenda

[JarMan]

19 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Still pushing the more people means less water used thing? Okay…..

Absolutely. Here's how it works. Agricultural land uses approximately 4 feet of water per year. Of that, about 2 feet is lost through evapotranspiration. If I put a city where the field once was the water use changes. There is still irrigation occurring on a portion of the area for lawns and gardens. But some of the land is converted to hardscape which allows precipitation to run off to streams and rivers. Indoor use for toilets and showers and things is very nonconsumptive, meaning that most of the water used inside (about 90%) returns to the hydrologic system. So let's work with some real numbers here.

Let's pretend we convert an acre of alfalfa to subdivision. The heretofore depletion to the hydrologic system is 2 acre-feet per year. But now let's build four homes on this acre. We'll say that there's a half acre of lawn and a quarter acre of hardscape. The lawn will only deplete about 0.7 acre-foot of water (lawn is less consumptive than alfalfa at about 1.4). We'll say that precipitation falling on hardscape runs off at 80% efficiency. This provide about 0.27 acre-foot to the system (assuming 16 inches of annual precipitation) that wasn't there when the land was farmed. Lastly, we need to calculate the depletion associated with the four families. They'll each divert about 0.25 acre-foot for indoor use but 90% returns to the hydrologic system, so the depletion is 0.1 acre-foot. The net depletion with the subdivision is 0.7 - 0.27 + 0.1 = 0.53 acre-foot. This is an almost 75% reduction in water lost to the hydrologic system by converting farmland to a subdivision.

48 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Completely out? No. Enough that there are going to be severe cutbacks of water throughout the American southwest? Yes.

Water is cut back every single year in the southwest. In Utah, water is literally cut back (or put back on) every single day to adjust to the hydrologic availability. It is true that in severe droughts water is cut back more than under normal conditions. But Utah and other western states have a system to deal with this, which is called the prior appropriation system or "first in time, first in right." Utahns have been living under this system since before statehood and have adapted to it. And since water and water rights can be bought, sold, or leased the market generally ensures the available supply goes to its highest value. Other western states have similar systems. But growth is not driving more severe cuts, it's driving less severe cuts.

[JarMan]

3 minutes ago, Rain said:

I've never understood this.  To grow people you need to grow crops which means growing people uses more water.

This is true from a global perspective, but not from a basin-wide perspective. Agricultural use in Utah water basins doesn't increase with increased growth, it decreases. The food to feed the people is imported from other parts of the country or world.

[JarMan]

46 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Have you been to the lake recently?  Have you seen areas that in past years, even last year, were covered by water that this year are dry?  I have.

I live about a mile from the lake and drive by it every day. As you pointed out, the lake level is declining. In fact it's currently at its lowest level in recorded history. This is a result of being in the worst drought in the last 1,200 years. Development in the past several decades, though, has increased the percentage of water available to the lake. But the line you always hear is that the recent lake decline is related to urban growth. It's just not true.

[Stargazer]

21 hours ago, Emily said:

This article is only talking about the Mormons in Utah, not members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Utah. It says so, right in the article... The Mormons in Utah.

The Mormons in Utah are always getting into all kinds of weird stuff members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have never even heard of.

LOL.

Way back in 1970 when I lived in "the mission field", a man who later was called into the Q70, John M. Madsen, was the mission president where I lived. Once he came to a branch conference and said the following in one of the leadership sessions: "We have too many Mormons in this church, and not enough Latter-day Saints!" This has stuck with me over all this time.