With extremely low snowmelt four years ago, water authority could have asked the mayor of Las Vegas, the governor and both Nevada senators to jointly urge everyone in Clark County to reduce water consumption by at least 10 percent.

Also four years ago, the water authority could have urged the secretary of the Interior to cut 5 percent of the water delivered to every Colorado River state. This would not only have reduced water consumption for every state, but would have helped river water quality, wildlife, marinas, recreation, power production, reduced the need for coal-powered plants, and eliminated the need for an expensive new intake straw from Lake Mead.

Ten years ago, the water authority could have entered into an agreement with Uncle Sam whereby the feds pay for 50 percent of the cost of a desalting plant if Las Vegas attained 25 percent water conservation. Solar, wind or tidal energy can now power desalting plants.

Twenty years ago, local water officials could have adopted a more progressive water pricing structure. Also 20 years ago, they could have recommended laws against water speculation along the entire Colorado River system.

Thirty years ago, they could have recommended a water conservation contest among farms, cities and states in the Colorado River system. Last place contestants would lose a small fraction of their water; winners of these contests would be awarded with slightly more water.

Forty years ago, local and state water officials could have recommended increased farm water conservation and reduced subsidies for non-food crops grown by river water. The majority of the water in Lake Mead goes to farms. Per billion gallons, cities pay 10 to 20 times as much as farms for Colorado River water.

The state engineer recently awarded the water authority 40,000 acre-feet of water from rural Nevada to build more than 400 miles of pipeline that may cost the equivalent of $5,000 for every person in Clark County. If the water authority had implemented these suggestions in the past and had even minimal success in these water conservation efforts, we would easily have saved more than 40,000 acre-feet for Nevada. If they had been real successful in these efforts, it would have saved more than 160,000 acre-feet.

The Southern Nevada Water Authority is not the only villain. Other culprits include politicians, the Bureau of Reclamation, and the Colorado River Commission of Nevada. These entities had a civic and moral obligation to pursue such water conservation efforts years or decades ago. This represents serial ineptitude.

Sleeping on the job while Nevada's primary water source disappears is not the mission of these agencies. Attorneys might consider such neglect to be criminal public malfeasance.

The good news is all these water conservation options are still possible.

Mark Bird is a professor at the College of Southern Nevada.