[Muromec]

Residential use isn't a lot, as the area is very sparsely populated, so it's about using less water-intensive crops there. Farmers will have to adapt to not having a dam for the next few years anyway, so reasoning goes -- maybe we will not rebuild the dam once everybody figured out what to do without it.

Barren is quite a stretch. Here is what a natural reserve in the area looks like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Askania-Nova. People lived in the South before the dam was build and will live there regardless of it being rebuild.

[cf141q5325]

>Residential use isn't a lot, as the area is very sparsely populated,

Crimea and Cherson are both not small.

Sorry about the use of the word barren, this isnt my first language. I meant agriculture will be over. The satellite pictures of Crimea i saw a while back looked quite drastic, this wont be any different. And as the other poster pointed out correctly, this is fertile wheat area.

What kind of alternative crop did you have in mind? I havent heard of any feasible suggestions.

[Muromec]

The point of the dam was not providing the water for Kherson city (it's on the river and doesn't have this problem), it was energy generation and irrigation of water-intensive crops, because soviet union needed cash and electricity for the industry. So all the space that could have been used to grow wheat was used to grow wheat. Since the time it was build, everything has changed quite a few times (fertiliziers, more yields, new sorts of wheat, deindustrialization of the 1990ies), so decisions made right after WW2 may not make economical sense anymore.

I suspect it will be delayed, debated and maybe we will have a smaller dam or a cascade of multiple smaller dams, but really doubt the original dam will be rebuilt to provide water security and still keep some historical sites accessible.

>What kind of alternative crop did you have in mind? I havent heard of any feasible suggestions.

I don't remember what was the suggestion and take it with a grain of salt, but I heard some ecologists debating things. Something has to happen to the land while the dam is not there regardless of the future decision, so I hope time will tell. It's quite possible to not be feasible to do either and the area will be given historical and ecological reserve status in the end.

[cf141q5325]

The time frame is a good point. Would be great if some less water intensive innovation would be the result. Bit skeptical though, once the grain export becomes a non issue again Ukraine will need all the exports they can get.

[geoka9]

> The satellite pictures of Crimea i saw a while back looked quite drastic, this wont be any different. And as the other poster pointed out correctly, this is fertile wheat area.

To be specific, Crimea is not (Kherson is). Crimea is mostly dry steppes. They used to grow quite a bit of rice there, but that was because of the dam and the water it provided.

[cf141q5325]

Thats interesting, do you know how Kherson agriculture looked before the damn?

[geoka9]

If you lived anywhere in Ukraine, you're probably familiar with Kherson watermelons, strawberries, potatoes... You name it. And lots has been written about its wheat.

[jncfhnb]

That’s due to the dam though, isn’t it? It’s not naturally able to support such things

[cf141q5325]

Arent watermelons and strawberries really water intensive as well?