Quantcast
Get breaking news alerts via email

Click here to manage your alerts
Utahns speak with one voice: No water deal
This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2010, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

Anyway you slice the numbers in a new poll, most Utahns say a proposed Snake Valley water-sharing agreement with Nevada is a bad idea.

About 60 percent or more of all men, women, Democrats, Republicans, independents, Mormons and non-Mormons oppose the deal, which appeared all but done before a Nevada Supreme Court ruling Thursday smashed into it.

The poll, conducted Jan. 18-20 for The Salt Lake Tribune by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research Inc., of Washington, D.C., surveyed 625 regular Utah voters. It has an error margin of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

The question: Do you support or oppose Utah signing an agreement with Nevada to share Snake Valley water, some of which would be piped to Las Vegas?

Thursday's ruling could jeopardize the project. But some kind of water-sharing agreement still could go forward. That's not what Utah voters want, according to the survey.

Salt Lake City resident Bob Brossard, a poll participant, said he is "adamantly opposed" to the accord, which would divide water under the fragile west desert valley.

"We don't know if there's enough water to maintain current use," Brossard said. "It's better to do the science before we do much of anything else."

Opposition spans political parties (68 percent of Democrats, 61 percent of Republicans and 64 percent of independents say no to the proposed deal). It spans the genders (64 percent of women and 62 percent of men don't want it).

It spans religions (65 percent of Latter-day Saints and 59 percent of non-Mormons oppose it).

But Ivins resident Hazel Smith, another poll respondent, says Las Vegas needs the water.

"If we can share some," she said, "that's probably the thing to do."

Agreement » Thursday's ruling by the Nevada Supreme Court could alter the course of events.
Article Tools

 Print Friendly
Photos