Forums > Areas > Jalisco's Lake Chapala Region

etolsen

Aug 29, 2006, 12:01 PM

Post #1 of 18 (1234 views)

Shortcut

Water at Lakeside

Can't Post | Private Reply

I continue to hear rumors that the aquifers are drying up and the Lakeside community is not or has not done any planning on how to deal with the impending water shortage. What is the prognosis on the water situation at Lakeside? Will it have water in the next 5, 10, 20 years?

esperanza

Aug 29, 2006, 12:35 PM

Post #2 of 18 (1216 views)

Shortcut

Re: [etolsen] Water at Lakeside

Can't Post | Private Reply

<polishes up her crystal ball...to no avail...>

http://www.mexicocooks.typepad.com

Nancy Boyd

Aug 29, 2006, 1:46 PM

Post #3 of 18 (1203 views)

Shortcut

Re: [etolsen] Water at Lakeside

Can't Post | Private Reply

Where would one get information on aquifer levels?

Bloviator

Aug 30, 2006, 5:57 AM

Post #4 of 18 (1128 views)

Shortcut

Re: [etolsen] Water at Lakeside

Can't Post | Private Reply

Where do you hear thes rumors? Are they reliable carriers of rumors? Do they have good rumor sources?

The lake this year is a lot lower than it was two years ago and a lot higher than it was several years ago. There is obvious concern as to the water level, the water purity, and a whole lot of other problems.

If the aquafers are drying up, if Guad dams above the lake (I don't know where they are planning their new dam - or if it is on a tributary of the Lerma river, but they are in need of and planning a dam), if the agriculture interests in the valley continue to pump waste into the river (as I'm sure they will), if the lirio continues to increase (evidently they pumped a semi slow acting fertilizer into the lake this Spring, rather than a plant killer. It is back and seems to be increasing exponentially), and if the weather patterns fail to produce adequate rainfall for a few years, there will be a whole lot of new lakefront property available.

I heard a serious proposal (presented in a serious manner, not seriously being proposed by sane people) that because there are lots of springs under the lake that have been plugged by sludge, they should dredge the bottom of the lake and release the spring water. Can't we just see the piles of filthy dirt along the lakeshore from 12x50 miles by say 10 feet of sludge that would have to be pumped out of the lake.

Jerry@Ajijic

Aug 30, 2006, 8:27 AM

Post #5 of 18 (1099 views)

Shortcut

Re: [dlyman6500] Water at Lakeside

Can't Post | Private Reply

If a real water shortage does happen here as well as anywhere else what happens is that people cut back on usage, catch and store rain water, etc. I do not think it is very likely that in our lifetime we will have any kind of water shortage that might make the area imposible to live in.

etolsen

Aug 30, 2006, 8:41 AM

Post #6 of 18 (1093 views)

Shortcut

Re: [dlyman6500] Water at Lakeside

Can't Post | Private Reply

INFORMATION CONCERNING WATER LEVELS ETC CAME RECENTLY FROM THE DIRECTORS OF THE CHULA VISTA FRACC

tonyburton

Aug 30, 2006, 9:04 AM

Post #7 of 18 (1088 views)

Shortcut

Re: [etolsen] Water at Lakeside

Can't Post | Private Reply

There is plenty of anecdotal evidence that the water level in wells is dropping and that aquifers in the Chapala area are "drying up". There is far stronger evidence from other parts of the Lerma-Chapala basin where more comprehensive ground water studies have been undertaken. Fifteen years ago, I tried to get support (by informal approaches to homeowners who had their own wells) for a study of Lake Chapala well levels, but no-one was interested in cooperating with such a study. If the Chula Vista directors have "information" as opposed to anecdotal evidence, I, for one, would be extremely interested in hearing more about it. There is absolutely no doubt that the kinds of water conservation measures used to good effect in many parts of the world need to be implemented in the Chapala area. As I've pointed out on numerous occasions - e.g. http://www.mexconnect.com/.../tblagunasaved3.html the first municipality to tackle this issue head-on will receive its reward (eventually) in terms of kudos and credit for innovation, as well as in strictly economic and environmental terms. The long-term prognosis for water supply in the Lerma-Chapala basin is NOT good.

tonyburton

Aug 30, 2006, 9:18 AM

Post #8 of 18 (1082 views)

Shortcut

Re: [dlyman6500] Water at Lakeside -

Can't Post | Private Reply

You raise a number of good questions. Some of them can be easily answered .

There are no plans for any major new dam upstream of Lake Chapala. There are plans for a dam on the River Santiago downstream of the lake, to provide additional water for Guadalajara, and reduce its dependence on Lake Chapala.

The agricultural problem is two-fold. Pumping waste into the Lerma (such "waste" is now treated, prior to entering the river) and the additional of agricultural run-off (containing fertilizers and pesticides) do raise issues about water quality. Probably of greater concern is the volume of water being used for agricultural activities within the basin. Even a relatively small improvement in agricultural water efficiency (such as by using drip rather than flood irrigation) would have a tremendous effect on overall water budget figures for the basin.

I do not for one second believe there is any evidence that any slow-acting fertilizer was added to the lake earlier this year. A herbicide was added, however, in order to reduce the lirio. The use of herbicide in this context appears to still have the support of eminent lake scientists such as Dr. Manuel Guzman of the U. de G. Institute of Limnology, despite the change of heart of Amigos del Lago (which was a supporter of heribicde use ten years ago). It appears that herbicide use, whatever its drawbacks may be, is the only effective (costs, labor and time) short-term solution to the lirio. It has been well documented that recent (last 70 years) lirio "attacks" coincide with rising water levels following extended dry periods.

Even the number of underwater springs, let alone their flow volumes, are largely unstudied. The above-mentioned Dr. Guzman published a relatively recent account of the state of knowledge of these springs a couple of years ago. I am very interested to know who is proposing dredging the springs as a means of increasing their flow. This is not an idea I have heard previously, and I thank you for bringing it to my attention.

(This post was edited by tonyburton on Aug 30, 2006, 9:44 AM)

1ajijic

Aug 30, 2006, 10:19 AM

Post #9 of 18 (1068 views)

Shortcut

Re: [tonyburton] Water at Lakeside -

Can't Post | Private Reply

When the lake was at its' lowest I heard talk of wells drying up. Currently, I have heard nothing about the problem. There is no intention to eradicate the lirio. I believe that the goal is 12% coverage as it acts as a pollutant filter. They are using both chemical and ecological (wasps?) to regulate the lirio.
http://www.newbeginningsmexico.com

arbon

Aug 30, 2006, 11:20 AM

Post #10 of 18 (1053 views)

Shortcut

Re: [1ajijic] Water at Lakeside -

Can't Post |

"They are using both chemical and ecological (wasps?) "

"ecological wasps" are they the local members of a group that (I can't remember the name of right now)?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

tonyburton

Aug 30, 2006, 11:39 AM

Post #11 of 18 (1043 views)

Shortcut

Re: [arbon] Water at Lakeside -

Can't Post | Private Reply

I'm sure "biological control" is what was intended. The bugs in question are weevils such as Neochetina eichhorniae and N. bruchi which have been shown to have some success in controlling lirio when introduced to irrigation reservoirs in Sinaloa and elsewhere. To the best of my knowledge, studies of their breeding and eating habits on Lake Chapala have not so far indicated that they would achieve much success in the short-term (3-5 years) but do support the notion that they may be an effective longer-term method.

Bubba

Aug 30, 2006, 12:53 PM

Post #12 of 18 (1025 views)

Shortcut

Re: [tonyburton] Water at Lakeside -

Can't Post | Private Reply

When the lake was at its lowest level our well would dry out in April it was also the time water restrictions started. I mean the city water was turned off at 8 AM and back on around 5 or 6 PM, it lasted over the summer. We capped the well as it was of no use, we could not water with it when the city was cutting off the water, we built a aljibe and if / when we run out of water we will buy the water from the water trucks, like they do in many other parts of Mexico.

jaybear

Aug 30, 2006, 1:54 PM

Post #13 of 18 (1015 views)

Shortcut

Re: [Bubba] Water at Lakeside -

Can't Post | Private Reply

This is an issue well worth discussing.

As a Chula Vista resident, I am pleased that our Fracc. officers are publicizing the lower water levels in our neighborhood wells, taking steps to encourage water conservation by residents, and planning for the future. This is one reason why we like being in a Fraccionamento; we have knowledgeable directors who volunteer their time and their expertise to help us pull together and address important issues like this. They have actually implemented an increased water usage fee if one's water usage goes above a certain level based on lot size. (Of course, I might feel differently if I had gotten assessed the extra charges!)

The fact is, we all pull our water from the same underground acquifer, and as in the US and elsewhere, a lot of new construction means the acquifer gets lower, and new deeper wells must be dug to obtain water. In Massachusetts, one well-to-do town put in water restrictions only to find that the wealthy homeowners were digging their own wells to water their lawns, further reducing the amount of water that could be pulled from municipal wells. Homeowners did not understand that all the straws were sucking water from the same glass. Or, perhaps, they did not care.

Note: I am not connected by marriage or friendship with any of the Chula Vista directors, and this is an unsolicited comment.

Jerry@Ajijic

Aug 30, 2006, 6:46 PM

Post #14 of 18 (970 views)

Shortcut

Re: [jaybear] Water at Lakeside -

Can't Post | Private Reply

Judy, we did get hit with the new "excess" charges. We bought a meter to measure the moisture in the ground, put fillers (like Bricks) in our toilets and asked our gardner not to water anymore. He was watering no matter how wet the ground was. It would not have surprised us to see him standing the rain watering. We the yard needs water we can go it and he can do other things. Results...our water consumption is now well below our allotment. Thanks to the Chula Vista board we are now helping to conserve water.

j64

Sep 2, 2006, 9:30 PM

Post #15 of 18 (879 views)

Shortcut

Re: [Jerry@Ajijic] Water at Lakeside -

Can't Post | Private Reply

Toilets and Bricks: Long ago I thought adding a brick to the tank sidewall saved water. Then I found out that the slower-running, and sediment formation increase in the toilet tank, and I just can't recall the other couple negative things worth mentioning, made me empty out each of my three tanks. Finally, I found I had done right when I read an expert who-knows-what debunked that type of "Conservation." Pass it on? It brings relief.

Ron Pickering W3FJW

Sep 2, 2006, 10:21 PM

Post #16 of 18 (873 views)

Shortcut

Re: [j64] Water at Lakeside -

Can't Post | Private Reply

A brick or two in the tank simply makes the tank hold a bit less water used for each flush. It does work if the sewer lines are sloped properly to flush completely with less water such as the water saver toilets sold NoB. It all depends on the slope of the drainpipe from toilet to sewer or drainfield. The steeper the slope to the drainfield/sewer line, the more efficient less water would be up to a point. If too steep, the water will run downhill without taking the solids with it leading to plugged pipes. If not enough slope, the water will not carry the waste to the sewer. There shouldn't be any extra sediment to speak of if flushing with 2 gallons vs 5 gal of water. If there is, or it builds up,, just take the top off of the tank occasionally and wipe the sides & bottom off and flush once.
It is a conservation method and it DOES help to use less water. I do have to admit though, the Mexican custom (or necessity in a lot of cases) of putting the TP in a waste basket instead of flushing does have it's merits although not in my bathroom.
Getting older and still not down here.

Bubba

Sep 3, 2006, 6:46 AM

Post #17 of 18 (847 views)

Shortcut

Re: [jaybear] Water at Lakeside -

Can't Post | Private Reply

Water conservation is a good thing but only works when everyone is on the same page. It is common to see broken pipes sputing out water despite repeated calls to Chapala. Leaky faucets, showers and toilets are a way of life and as long as the wild growth continues without any check, the water problem will continue to worsen. Back to Chapala and Jocotopec to handle the problem which will not happen until we have a crisis. As Jaybear points out we are all drawing from the same source. It is the Mexican way it does not exist until it happens...

(This post was edited by Bubba on Sep 3, 2006, 10:12 AM)

Jerry@Ajijic

Sep 4, 2006, 7:15 AM

Post #18 of 18 (773 views)

Shortcut

Re: [Ron Pickering W3FJW] Water at Lakeside -

Can't Post | Private Reply

As for flushing efficiency, we checked it a few times. It might not work for everybody but in our case there was no problem. As for the paper, what I heard was that many of the pipes here are very old, some made of terra cotta (sp) and many just full of rust, etc. The paper desolves a much slower than waste solids and could get caught and cause a problem. It is not a good test but LCS seems to be having less toilet problems since I put up signs asking people to put paper in waste cans. In the case of LCS I think that some people were even flushing paper towels and they certainly desolve SLOWER.