60,000 per year! Wow. I guess I have been in the dark about LV.

I really don't know much about LV's growth rate, or any statistics about the > city, but i stumbled across this web site talking about LV potential with > supporting major league sports.>

"The potential fan base for MLB in Las Vegas is growing by leaps and bounds. > Local officials estimate that a new home is built every 20 minutes, as 5,000 > people move to the city every month. 88 new schools are being built, and the > number of hospitals has tripled over the past few years.> In 1980, Las Vegas' population was 164,674. By 2000, that number had almost > tripled to 478,434. In 2003, the population was estimated at 528,617 in > 2003. Greater metropolitan Las Vegas now accounts for a majority of the 2.3 > million people living in the state of Nevada.>

In addition to the new residents, tourists continue to pour into Vegas. More > than 30 million people visit the region every year to get away from life in > the more ordinary parts of America. The average tourist spends $500 over a > three-night stay. That adds up to nearly $18 billion being pumped into the > area's economy annually. That money pays workers and helps businesses > prosper, enabling the creation of more jobs and further expanding the metro > area's population base.">

60,000 per year! Wow. I guess I have been in the dark about LV.>

http://www.askmen.c­om/sports/business_1­00/121b_sports_busin­ess.html

Las Vegas cannot sustain that level of growth. Once they max out thier> share of Colorado River water, they're done. How many neighboring> states are gonna let thier water be siphoned off to fill fountains and> water golf cources in Vegas? They should slow down now so it'll be a> soft landing rather than a screeching wreck.

It's true, and insane. These mega cities in the Southwest are going to be> facing major water shortage problems in the foreseeable future.

Jake Brzeskiewicz wrote:>

What about the Phoenix, AZ area? It's growing almost as fast with what> seems to be a much more lasses-faire approach to managing water from> that same source.>

"Presnwap" <presnwap@cox.netNO­SPAM> wrote:>

It's true, and insane. These mega cities in the Southwest are going to be> facing major water shortage problems in the foreseeable future.

What are the 2025 population forecasts for major metropolitan areas

how much they will continue to grow?

[Mr. Kozel:]>

According to the 1998 data presented here>

http://ag.arizona.e­du/AZWATER/awr/sept9­8/feature1.html>

for Phoenix and Tucson, the 2025 projections are (water overdraft given> in acre-feet):>

POPULATION (EST.) DAILY WATER> OVERDRAFT> Phoenix 4,948,423 372,932> Tucson 1,290,966 46,600>

'Water overdraft' is the difference between groundwater taken out and> used and water returned to the ground, while 'safe yield' is the> notional maximum amount of water a water management area (there are> three in Arizona, centered on Tucson, Prescott, and Phoenix) can take> out of the ground and expect to be replenished naturally.>

This article is somewhat out of date, but does make it clear that> living within a water budget is a continuing concern in Arizona. I> suspect that much current development in the Southwest is basically> speculative in character, with the developers and the homebuyers> counting on there somehow being enough cheap water to support a> comfortable lifestyle even if the water providers eventually have to> resort to distilling seawater or towing icebergs, or progressively more> draconian water conservation measures.>

It has to be noted that there is room for continuing improvements in> efficient use of water. I recall reading figures in the Los Angeles> 'Times' (can't quote specific issue, sorry) which suggested that 'per> capita' daily water consumption is actually much higher in Tucson and> Phoenix than in L.A. due to slow implementation of water-saving> measures.

It has to be noted that there is room for continuing improvements in>efficient use of water. I recall reading figures in the Los Angeles>'Times' (can't quote specific issue, sorry) which suggested that 'per>capita' daily water consumption is actually much higher in Tucson and>Phoenix than in L.A. due to slow implementation of water-saving>measur­es.

"The potential fan base for MLB in Las Vegas is growing by leaps and > bounds. Local officials estimate that a new home is built every 20 > minutes, as 5,000 people move to the city every month. 88 new schools are > being built, and the number of hospitals has tripled over the past few > years. <snip>>

When you drive into Las Vegas from the south, you dscend into the> valley about ten miles south of the Strip, and I noticed that there> are new homes being built on that fringe, right up against where the> land becomes too steep (at least for now). That whole valley will> probably become filled with development before long.

If the BLM will sell the land, development will creep south along> I-15 toward the Calif. border, and northwest along US 95 toward Indian> Springs. Less likely toward Mesquite or Searchlight.>

There's talk of building housing in Arizona south of Lake Mead NRA once > the bridge on US 93 across Black Canyon (Hoover Dam) is complete. No idea > what they'll do for water out there...>

The southern limit could be the Mojave Preserve about 10 mines south of> Primm, and over to the US 95 as far as Bullhead City. The entire western> edge of Lake Mead NRA would be a wall of condos and 'snout houses'....