Water Management and mismanagement
Articles on the issues, politics, and subterfuge regarding how water resources are managed, fought over, and misappropriated.
A theme throughout is the declining support by the public for the conventional wisdom maximizing water use for the most economic return to the water user because the economic benefit to the water user can conflict with the greater Public InterestThe Public InterestThe public interest is the primary legal hurdle all water use must overcome if they wish to use water that belongs to the public (by law, in Oregon, all water belongs to the public). However, special interest lobbies have overwhelmed the law for decades and ignored the public interest in ways that have created significant negative impacts to the health, welfare, and safety of the public (these terms are also legal standards). Those who say the public interest cannot be known are the biggest water users and their political allies; meanwhile the rest of the world goes on daily writing and enforcing laws which are deemed explicitly to be for and in the public interest, and when they are not, the public challenges them in the courts. in not draining aquifers, drying up streams, and permanently damaging watersheds all life depends upon.
How powerful land barons shaped the epic floods in California’s heartland How powerful land barons shaped the epic floods in California’s heartland By Jessica Garrison, Susanne Rust, Ian James, Aida YlananHow powerful land barons shaped the epic floods in California’s heartland By Jessica Garrison, Susanne Rust, Ian James, Aida YlananThis article discusses the black hole of state water management in the Tulare region has persisted due to lingering vestiges of the chaotic forces that shaped the Wild West. Land barons have controlled the way diffuse water flows in ways that have benefitted them at others' expense. With the flooding of 2023, the results have become civil rights issues. Interestingly, the fighting parties are water users; however, their bar fights have spilled out into the greater public sector and have negatively impacted the public health, safety, and welfare. As a result, for the first time the state is considering how to insert itself as it has done into every other corner of the state and enforce water laws that are in the greater public interest. The law regarding diffuse water, which is water that has yet to enter channels, canals, or rivers, has a few variations, where some view diffuse water as a 'common enemy' for all to shunt off their properties equally; another is that historic natural flows protect landowners from complaints when others are negatively impacted, and a third version looks at the overall situation and water managers for the state implement water flows in the greater public interest. Notably, there is no 'Seniority' regarding the flows of stormwater as there is with the pumping of water from rivers -- prior appropriation. The vast sums of stormwater are unregulated and the land barons in the Tulare region call the shots with their heavy equipment to preserve their own interests.
My City Has Run Out of Fresh Water. Will Your City Be Next? by Guillermo GaratMy City Has Run Out of Fresh Water. Will Your City Be Next? by Guillermo GaratUruguay has been renowned for its lush water sources for all time -- more so than the Pacific Northwest, and certainly more so than the rest of the West. Blind hubris, the worst kind of pride, keeps us from thinking what happens elsewhere can't happen here. It is only when we think the worst atrocities of the past and most terrifying nightmares of the future can't happen is when we have set the stage for both to occur in the present. This journalist tells of their own story of how agriculture and mining has destroyed their precious water sources in ways that are atrocious and terrifying.
Europe’s water crisis: How bad is it and what can be done? by Estelle Nilsson-JulienEurope's water crisis: How bad is it and what can be done? by Estelle Nilsson-JulienThis article discusses the reckoning Europe is facing as water becomes more scarce and demand inexorably increases as well. From the article: 'Some crops may even have to be written off, the Spanish Coordinator of Famers and Ranchers Organizations has even warned.' Similar to the American West, which uses 80% of diverted water to irrigate crops, Europe has come around to the conclusion that some crops use too much water for too little return. They are considering what are the most beneficial uses of water and are faced with having to decide what is wasteful and what is most necessary. This is exactly the situation the American West is in; irrigating forage crops that drain aquifers and dewater streams is losing steam both ecologically and among public sentiment.
California is moving to outlaw watering some grass that’s purely decorative by Ian JamesCalifornia is moving to outlaw watering some grass that’s purely decorative by Ian JamesThis article discusses how the state of California is severing from municipal water rights the irrigation water use related to watering grass that is decorative only. States across the West have always had 'Highest & Best' beneficial uses of water, and it seems like the use of municipal water for irrigating decorative grass has been identified as among the 'Lowest & Least' beneficial uses of water. This is significant because states, especially Oregon, have been loathe to admit the term 'Irrigation' can be zoomed in on and the question of 'Irrigation of What?' can be asked and answered. Yes, states across the West can and should rein in non-beneficial uses of irrigation water to address the ongoing depletion of aquifers, surface waters leading to permanent aridification (Oregon had another below-average water year, and the El Nino may prolong the drought north of the CA border).
New book by Peter H. Gleick tells the story of water across three ages, offering a path forward ~ Book review by Joan MeinersNew book by Peter H. Gleick tells the story of water across three ages, offering a path forward ~ Book review by Joan MeinersThis article is a book review of 'The Three Ages of Water' by Peter H. Gleick. The premise of the book is that during the first age humans lived at the mercy of water; then in the second age, they learned to control it, which led to prosperity and destruction. The third age is yet to come and will either by defined by sustainability or demise -- the two factors that define the second age. From the end of the review, journalist Meiners says the book argues: 'that a basic emotional attachment to water may ultimately help people do what is necessary to protect it. Institutions can be modernized, if popular vote demands it. And, if corporations and governments can be moved toward social responsibility and environmental stewardship, modern technology can be harnessed for water preservation rather than continuing on the damaging path of water exploitation.'
Water a critical commodity and it’s being frittered away — Editorial by the Yamhill County News-RegisterWater a critical commodity and it's being frittered away -- Editorial by the Yamhill County News-RegisterThis editorial summarizes the NYT article linked below titled 'America Is Using Up Its Groundwater Like There’s No Tomorrow,' and discusses the findings as they relate to Yamhill County. From the Editorial: 'But most states, including Oregon, have lacked the will to rein in the well-heeled, well-connected titans of corporate agriculture and large-scale development. Plainly put, they’ve been caught fiddling as Rome burns. Oregon represents a good case study: The state Water Resources Department has conducted assessments identifying areas of “concern” and “significant concern.” But records show 83% of development applications being approved in areas of concern and 79% in areas of significant concern, the higher-risk category encompassing most of rural Yamhill County.' The takeaway point here is that large water lobbyists have bullied their way through Salem and the staff at the OWRD to force approval of 'sub-prime' water rights that never should have been permitted. The recent public claims by the irrigators that the state bears responsibility to misleading them that it was ok to 'drill, baby drill' are flat out falsehoods: the witness statements to the contrary are on the record: big water users forced their way to compel bogus water right applications and now ancient aquifers are drying up for good imperiling the irrigators' operations.
America Is Using Up Its Groundwater Like There’s No Tomorrow
Lawmakers approve plan to strengthen oversight of California water rights by Ian JamesLawmakers approve plan to strengthen oversight of California water rights by Ian JamesFrom the article: 'California legislators have passed a bill that aims to close a long-standing loophole in the state’s water laws: Until now, regulators haven’t had clear authority to investigate the water rights of some of the biggest water users. These senior water right holders, with claims dating to before 1914, use roughly a third of the water that is diverted, on average, from the state’s rivers and streams. They include cities and individual landowners, as well as agricultural irrigation districts supplying farms that produce nuts, rice and other crops. The bill, Senate Bill 389, passed in a 50-17 Assembly vote on Tuesday and is expected to be among the bills presented to Gov. Gavin Newsom for signing.' 'The legislation expressly authorizes the State Water Resources Control Board to investigate all water rights claims — including riparian rights and pre-1914 rights — and to determine whether the rights are valid.' '“It’s about giving the water board the tools that it needs to do its work,” said Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), who introduced the bill. Allen pointed out that California’s existing water rights allocate far more water than is available in an average year, and said the State Water Board is tasked with making the system function at a time when climate change is putting growing strains on water supplies. He said the agency needs to have this oversight authority to “make sure the system is working and that we actually have enough water for everybody.” “This is essential to their ability to ensure that we have a sustainable water system in our state,” Allen said.'
Opinion: American dams are being demolished. And nature is pushing that along by Richard ParkerOpinion: American dams are being demolished. And nature is pushing that along by Richard ParkerThis Op-Ed discusses the erosion of conventional wisdom that dams are uniformly good: reality is grinding the antiquated inequities into sand and the ideologies that special interests cling to are crumbling. As with all facile ideas -- all dams are good -- the details reveal the opposite: too many dams cause much more damage than they provide benefits, and the public is taking notice. Storing water in the ground and building up forests as massive sponges to hold water and prevent runoff to the ocean hold more water than 100 times all the concrete barriers humans ever built at a fraction of the cost to taxpayers and to great benefit to the ecosystem. Who are the losers in this scenario? The dam people.
Groundwater Banking and Water Markets
Is groundwater trading the future of California water? by Gregory WeaverIs groundwater trading the future of California water? by Gregory WeaverThis article discusses how, like any bank, the California Groundwater Banking is owned and operated by private interests to profit. This, regardless of the fact the groundwater bank was originally owned and operated by the state of California which paid $74 million to buy the land above the aquifer to manage the water-banking for the greater public interest. This article and links inside the text describe how the private sector got control of the public sector asset. In California, as with all the western states, all the water of the state belongs to the public and private water right holders may only have use of the water for specific purposes. The water management has been forced away from public control for public benefit and put into the hands of private control to establish 'markets' where some water right holders trade groundwater instead of growing their crops -- they can avoid the overhead costs of running a farm and make income just on the sale of their water. This regime has the effect of pushing the water from low income-producing field crops consumed in the nation to high income-producing tree-nut crops exported overseas. The Groundwater bank is 1 million acre feet of water that functions like any other bank and is under the control of the biggest farm owner in the state who is buying/ leasing up the water rights of vegetable farmers. The water for others is now in private control; if municipalities need the formerly publicly-controlled water, they have to buy it on the 'market' at a price set by the private owners.
Massive Farm Owned by L.A. Man Uses Water Bank Conceived for State Needs by Mark Arax in 2003Massive Farm Owned by L.A. Man Uses Water Bank Conceived for State Needs by Mark Arax in 2003This article precedes the one just above by Gregory Weaver by 20 years, and discusses the way the private sector took control of the public sector water bank. From the article: 'Critics say Resnick’s control of the water bank is a glaring example of the perversion of water marketing -- how a handful of California’s most powerful and wealthy men continue to grab the state’s most precious natural resource. The state purchased the 20,000 acres along I-5 and funded the initial planning and plumbing, a public investment totaling $74 million. But the water bank went from public to private hands after a series of closed meetings between state water bureaucrats and large water contractors, including Paramount.' Just as every bank has customers, water banks also have owners; however, equating water to money is heinous. Water is too precious to be reduced to pure economic value where it flows to the highest income-producing crops at the expense of the livelihoods of the public in the present and those in the future. Increasingly, the alchemy of turning water into money has become a dangerous, soulless, and wicked venture with too many negative impacts to justify the inurement of the few who control it.
LOIS HENRY: Is John Vidovich planning to sell off the valley’s lifeblood? Or is he just the newest water baron on the block?
Small farmers are up against California’s $1.1 billion carrot industry in a vicious fight over groundwater: ‘We are being totally overrun’ by Amy TaxinSmall farmers are up against California’s $1.1 billion carrot industry in a vicious fight over groundwater: ‘We are being totally overrun’ by Amy TaxinThis article discusses how large irrigation operations, in this case, big-carrot, are draining aquifers putting smaller regional farms at risk for going out of business. The big irrigators are suing the small farms to rein in their water use, so it's not just that the water for small regional farms is being depleted; it's also the attorneys' fees and court costs, which big ag has no problem covering but small farms struggle to pay for. From the article: 'He is one of scores of farmers, ranchers and others living near the tiny town of New Cuyama who have been hauled into court by a lawsuit filed by two of the nation’s biggest carrot growers, Grimmway Farms and Bolthouse Farms, over the right to pump groundwater.' To hear the Big-Ag irrigators' complaint is an exercise in gaslighting since their lawsuit against the small farmers is about accusing the small farms of taking too much water: '“I don’t want the aquifer to get dewatered because then all I have is a piece of gravel, no water, which means it’s desert ground, which is of no value to anybody,” said Dan Clifford, vice president and general counsel of Bolthouse Land Co. “What we’re trying to get is the basin sustainability, with the understanding that you’re going to have a judge calling balls and strikes.”' The concept of Water Markets is about avoiding lawsuits and the Big-Ag irrigators buying up (trading) the small farm water to use for their big operation; however, these Big Ag operations would rather sue to stop them from groundwater withdrawals than pay for the water on a Water Market. Note: the groundwater, or what's left of it, is in the aquifer, and the large irrigation operations have chosen to limit the small farmers' water use rather than pay for the use of the water. Either way, the small regional farmers get pushed out.
Thousands of California wells are at risk of drying up despite landmark water law by Ian JamesThousands of California wells are at risk of drying up despite landmark water law by Ian JamesThis article discusses how politics pushed implementation of the restrictive 2014 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) into 2040, and how that 26-year delay has incentivized irrigators to pump as hard and fast as possible until either the aquifers drain completely or the state laws stop them. It's like addicts told they will be cut off in one month, so they consume the poison as hard and fast as possible to get as much in while they still can regardless whether they die or come to the stopping point. Meanwhile, people who need water to live in their homes and cities are put at risk. The result is a serious and increasing civil rights issue. From the article: 'As climate change intensifies California’s drought cycle, there is widespread agreement among scientists, government officials and water managers that halting chronic groundwater depletion is critically important.'
Sweeping California water conservation rules could force big cuts in some areas by Hayley Smith, Ian James & Sean GreeneSweeping California water conservation rules could force big cuts in some areas by Hayley Smith, Ian James & Sean GreeneThis article discusses a new approach to water conservation for cities and suburbs, whereby the state sets general water conservation goals that localities meet in a fashion tailored to their specific place-based realities. What a desert city must do is different from what a coastal city might; also, large metropolises may meet the goal standards differently than a small city might. This system of statewide goals with place-based water use planning is precisely the type of governance needed to succeed in long term conservation. The giant elephant in the room is agriculture, which uses 80%+ of all diverted water. Since the cities and suburbs -- all non ag water use -- account for less than 20% of all water use, the Ag sector will have to also conserve water in the same way. We will NEVER wring out enough water conservation savings from the cities and suburbs alone, and now the state must also put the irrigators on a similar budget using the same conceptual framework: statewide planning goals with place-based water use planning.
Las Vegas Needs to Save Water. It Won’t Find It in Lawns. By Nat Lash, Mark Olalde and Ash NguLas Vegas Needs to Save Water. It Won't Find It in Lawns. By Nat Lash, Mark Olalde and Ash NguThis article discusses the problems trying to get people to remove grass in order to save water, and sets this problem against the vastly larger problem of stopping irrigators of hay and alfalfa, much of which gets exported out of the region. Note: about 75% to 85% of all water use is irrigation; all other humans uses combined are the remainder. Early on in the article, the authors state: ' The Colorado River, which supplies 90% of the Las Vegas Valley’s water, has been hit by a megadrought, and Lake Mead has fallen to historic lows. The agriculture industry uses the vast majority of the dwindling river, but Las Vegas and other cities that also rely on the Colorado must scramble to find savings. Meanwhile, the federal government is mulling drastic cuts to their water supply.' Then later, after discussing all the hard work trying to squeeze as much conservation out of the cities, they quote Kyle Roerink, executive director of the Great Basin Water Network “When you pulled out your last blade of grass, when you fixed your last pipe, there comes a point when you can’t get any more efficient.” The authors follow with information 'In Arizona, officials announced last week that the state would no longer approve new residential development near Phoenix that relies only on groundwater. But the agriculture industry is an even bigger consumer of Western water that could yield savings dwarfing anything available in cities. Farming accounts for an estimated three-quarters or more of the water used across the Colorado River Basin. It can cost a few hundred dollars to pay a farmer to forgo using an acre-foot of water for a year, depending on the location, and in the thousands to buy that water outright.'
Audit finds California water agency not adequately considering climate change in forecasts by Ian JamesAudit finds California water agency not adequately considering climate change in forecasts by Ian JamesThe state of California Department of Water Resources was audited by the state and it was found that the water agency has been overestimating the amount of water available to a significant degree. This benefits large water users who have been the most powerful lobbying force in the West over the past 100 years. From the article: 'The report by State Auditor Grant Parks said the Department of Water Resources has “made only limited progress” in improving its water-supply forecasts to account for climate change, despite acknowledging more than a decade ago that it needed to improve its forecasting methods. The audit also concluded that DWR “has not developed a comprehensive, long-term plan” for the State Water Project, the system that delivers water from Northern California to Southern California and supplies almost 27 million Californians, to proactively respond to more severe droughts. The auditor said that in 2021, amid the driest three-year period on record, DWR significantly overestimated the state’s water supply. In February of that year, the report said, the department projected that runoff would be at least twice the volume that actually flowed in the majority of the watersheds that are included in forecasts.'
Water concerns prompt new limits on growth in Arizona by Jeremy Childs and Ian JamesWater concerns prompt new limits on growth in Arizona by Jeremy Childs and Ian JamesThis article discusses how the 100-year outlook on available groundwater in Arizona is insufficient to permit unlimited growth in residential and commercial development. The governor has called for limits to growth to protect both existing residents and future homeowners who could suffer water shortages. This is an issue in other arid regions throughout the West, such as east of the Cascade Mountains in the Oregon desert. (This is where developers skirt limits on residential growth by saying they are erecting 1,000-home 'resorts' that are otherwise permitted due to a loophole carved out by Oregon lobbyists 40 years ago.)
Global fresh water demand will outstrip supply by 40% by 2030, say experts
Secretary of State Advisory Report: State Leadership Must Take Action to Protect Water Security for All OregoniansSecretary of State Advisory Report: State Leadership Must Take Action to Protect Water Security for All OregoniansFrom the Executive Summary: Water insecurity is a reality for many Oregon residents and a growing risk for many more. Ongoing drought conditions and concerns around the quality, safety, and accessibility of water have demonstrated the need for better governance to protect Oregon’s water security. This advisory report addresses gaps in Oregon’s water governance that can lead to or worsen water insecurity and lead to inequitable outcomes for higher-risk communities. We offer suggestions for state leadership on how to improve these gaps in governance. The state has made some efforts to address water security concerns. The passage of House Bill 5006 in 2021 led to significant investments in local infrastructure projects, increases in agency staffing, and the creation of the State Supported Regional Water Planning and Management Workgroup. Several state agencies have demonstrated a commitment to finding broad, cross-cutting solutions to water security concerns through ongoing efforts to improve water data, include more diverse communities in decision making, and engage in planning and coordination. While these developments hold promise, Oregon is underprepared to provide meaningful support to many communities facing water insecurity and has more work to do to meet the state’s immediate and long-term water security and water equity needs.
Federal government considers major water cuts to protect Colorado River by Ian JamesFederal government considers major water cuts to protect Colorado River by Ian JamesThis article discusses how the U.S. federal government is likely going to have to impose water use restrictions among the Colorado River water users of seven states who cannot agree among themselves to reduce their water use. It's no different than if all seven have guns pointed at each other and fear lowering their weapons: the U.S. federal government must come in with overwhelming Constitutional power and force their hands. The resolution will upend the most inequitable system of water use in the nation -- the system called Prior Appropriation that work by seniority. Just like preferring first-borns of monarchies or other forms of seniority which disenfranchise all others, Prior Appropriation says whoever got to the river or water spigot first gets the water regardless of the use and welfare of the majority. To make matters worse, all the water in the west belongs to the public of the various states, but they are stripped of control, management, and governance by this antiquated, retrograde, uncivil system. Now, the U.S. will likely impose water use cuts across the board, ignoring the inequitable system that would require desiccating Arizona in favor of growing alfalfa for China, Japan, and Saudi Arabia.
US considers imposing Colorado River water cuts to western statesUS considers imposing Colorado River water cuts to western states(Same story as above link but from a different paper -- The Guardian)
Lawmakers want no new water rights permits issued until the state audits Oregon’s water resources — by ALEX BaumhardtLawmakers want no new water rights permits issued until the state audits Oregon’s water resources -- by ALEX BaumhardtThis article discusses the need to pause all water right applications in the state of Oregon until the OWRD assesses the water availability in all the basins throughout the state. Of particular note is the purposeful disregard in this article (and in the statements by the politicians) for the intense and unrelenting lobbying pressure big Ag put on the Oregon Water Resources Department staff and Water Resource Commissioners to approve water rights applications over decades. Straining credulity are statements by department staff falling on their swords in the article: 'In 2017, scientists at the department did not know whether groundwater was available to support the needs of 121 of 153 new water rights it issued, Danielle Gonzalez, policy section manager, said in an email.' Water rights are not issued in the state of Oregon without full groundwater and surface water studies by registered hydrogeologists. This is the law, clearly stated in ORS 537.620 and 537.621. The explicit reason why the OWRD would now say they 'did not know whether groundwater was available' is because of the intense, overwhelming lobbying pressure to approve water rights despite the staff scientists legal requirement to present their findings and recommend disproval. How is it possible that the OWRD knew in 2022 certain legally-required scientific information that it did not know just a few years earlier, saying: 'In 2017, scientists at the department did not know whether groundwater was available to support the needs of 121 of 153 new water rights it issued.' What about every year in the past 50 years when the law required specific knowledge of hydrogeology to approve water right applications? The scientists at the OWRD did not just discover the necessary scientific information that would reveal that 121 of 153 new water rights were erroneously approved. HB 3368, the proposed bill to study the water availability throughout the state, provides political cover for the negligent failure of the state to consider the legally-required science in the water right application process that was otherwise drowned out by large water user lobbying over the past 50 years.
Justices uphold groundwater plan in ruling that could ‘significantly affect water management by Daniel RothbergJustices uphold groundwater plan in ruling that could 'significantly affect water management by Daniel RothbergThis article discusses the 2022 ruling by the Nevada Supreme Court to address the perilous loss of groundwater by taking a 21st century approach and dislodging the so-called 'conventional wisdom' of the 19th century idea of Prior Appropriation. This precedent-setting decision requires cutback from all water users. The decision also addresses the antiquated idea requiring use of water rights or risk losing them; 'use it or lose it' has led to a lot of non-beneficial uses of water which is legally described as a waste of water. Legal scholars and hydrologists have been calling for water use reform for over 30 years, and now it is coming due to the bracing water scarcity facing areas throughout the west.
2023 could be ‘session of water bills’ in the [Nevada] Legislature by Daniel Rothberg2023 could be 'session of water bills' in the (Nevada) Legislature by Daniel RothbergThis article discusses how the Nevada state legislature is trying to address water agency actions and court rulings by passing laws -- it's a power contest; as such, it is another front in the bar fight over water. Meanwhile, as the lawmakers scuffle to protect the largest water users, nature shrugs. Las Vegas is a symbol of fiction, an oasis in the desert, a virtual reality. The exact same is said about the agriculture crop circles in the driest state in the nation. Some of the state's elected leaders think they can legislate laws to bend nature to their will. This strategy is doomed to failure. Their only hope is to limit water use to the highest and best purposes in the 21st century and rid themselves of the 19th century idea that whoever got to the water first in the past has first right to the water. (Of course, they took the land and the water from Indigenous People and then invented the system of prior appropriation...) Perpetuating the juvenile idea of seniority among the settlers has required statements by the District Court of Clark County of Nevada, which declared: 'Science in and of itself cannot alter common law and statutes.' Indeed, some Nevada lawmakers this session are trying to protect this ruling and legislate around science. The court said that irrational will apart from scientific considerations must also be part of the lawmaking process. Ironically, this court decision is, in and of itself, an example of making up statements irrespective of science and fact to justify laws based on will. Some of the forthcoming laws are likewise based in politics not nature.
Opinion: Nevada can’t shed its ugly past while continuing to exploit Native people and lands by Taylor RoseOpinion: Nevada can’t shed its ugly past while continuing to exploit Native people and lands by Taylor RoseThis editorial discusses how Settlers in Nevada took over the land and water from the Indigenous people who lived there. Speaking of Patrick Anthony McCarran, the Nevada political leader, the author explains: 'Often his initiatives involved systematically denying Native Nevadans access to resources — particularly water — while redirecting them to his growth-minded constituents. In one episode, McCarran went out of his way to enable non-Native squatters on the Pyramid Lake Indian Reservation, which he called a matter “of equity and justice toward the white settlers.”' And so the author concludes: 'Pat McCarran achieved his vision for the desert: When he died in 1954, Las Vegas was one of the fastest growing cities in the country. Southern Nevada now contains over 2 million people, with a Native population of less than 1%.' It wasn't equity the that built Nevada; rather it was inequity.
Los Angeles DWP battles to keep spigot open at Mono Lake By Louis SahagúnLos Angeles DWP battles to keep spigot open at Mono Lake By Louis SahagúnThis article discusses how Los Angeles is once again drawing down Mono Lake that is about 300 miles north of the city because it grabbed water rights to it in 1941. By 1983, the city dropped the lake by 45 feet and ruined it. Then the state of California agreed that it had the legal responsibility by virtue of the Public Trust Doctrine to prevent destruction of the water source and forced the city to restore the lake to reasonable levels. Now with drought and demand, the city has flouted the legal requirements and is faced with a reckoning equal to the subterfuge it perpetrated over 80 years ago when it took that water through deceit: the city hired agents to pose as ranchers and farmers to buy up the water rights in the region so as not to cause an uproar that the city of Los Angeles was taking their water.
Column: Shrinking water supply will mean more fallow fields in the San Joaquin Valley by George SkeltonColumn: Shrinking water supply will mean more fallow fields in the San Joaquin Valley by George SkeltonThis editorial discusses how the inevitable increase in water scarcity will require the fallowing of fields in California. The writer suggests: 'Plant fewer thirsty crops, such as almonds that have proliferated. Expedite groundwater regulations and aquifer recharging. Get serious about inevitable desalination.'
Water Rights and Water Law Reformation
‘A foundation of racism’: California’s antiquated water rights system faces new scrutiny by Ian James‘A foundation of racism’: California’s antiquated water rights system faces new scrutiny by Ian JamesThe west is running out of the single most precious resource to run society: water. Those who have traditionally experienced inequity, oppression, and loss for all manner of reasons in society are at the forefront expressing concern about the poor management and non-beneficial use of the water resources in the west because they are among those who are the first humans experiencing the negative impacts. We're also hearing from the salmon and the trees. To say that the largest developed water users are the most impacted is a cruel folly no different than saying the wealthiest people in society stand to lose the most. 80% of all developed water use goes to irrigation; this is where the the bulk of water savings will necessarily have to come from. We'll never wring enough water out of the other 20% used by the cities, suburbs, and industries to mitigate aridification. The water crisis is on the way to becoming a permanent catastrophe. The people, fish, and forests who are among the first to dry and die out are those we're hearing from. When we start hearing about the failed policies from those who are beneficiaries of our inequitable system of water rights and water management, it will be too late to act.
Winters v. United States, 207 U.S. 564 (1908)Winters v. United States, 207 U.S. 564 (1908)This U.S. Supreme Court Decision holds that water was inherently appurtenant to the Indian reservations when they were formed based on the common sense understanding that the land would be uninhabitable without access to water sufficient to live by, which included irrigating crops. All but one justice consented in the Winters decision.
Water Is a Human Right. Let’s Create a Society That Affirms This. By Cherise MorrisWater Is a Human Right. Let’s Create a Society That Affirms This. By Cherise MorrisThis editorial discusses the partisanship between corporate persons who argue that 'Water is a Product' and human persons who believe 'Water is Life.' Corporate persons wish to profit off Water precisely because Water is life and all living beings need Water to live. Private ownership of large Water sources is a way to seek rent off of those who periodically get thirsty or need Water for other reasons. The model is similar to the few gas companies who own the fuel for cars, Big Ag which owns the food-like substances people eat, investors who own 36% of all housing, bankers who control all the mortgages, etc. Owning the Water human persons need is just more of the same; what makes privatizing Water so cynical is idea of owning what was once a ubiquitous substance that comprises 70% of human bodies is now becoming owned as it becomes more scarce. The reason is do to the law of supply and demand: when supply is widespread, there's no sense in owning it to sell to others; however, as supply goes down, demand goes up and Water ownership pencils out since sales become more possible.
California Legislature Could Make Overdue Changes to Water Rights if These Three Bills Pass
Reforms sought for water rights in the state
Oregon Aquifers
Oregon sets ambitious goal for testing nitrates in Umatilla Basin groundwater by Monica SamoyaOregon sets ambitious goal for testing nitrates in Umatilla Basin groundwater by Monica Samoya...And we thought the Romans were brutish for plowing salt into the fields of their enemies. This article discusses the increase in nitrates polluting domestic well water in recent decades in Morrow and Umatilla Counties. The people have a similar civil rights issue as the residents of Flint Michigan have; however, the problem for the Oregonians is that industry caused the problem due to a failure of the state to hold water in trust for the public, it's primary environmental fiduciary duty. The U.S. EPA has threatened to step in and act as a trustee on behalf of the county residents if the state refuses or fails to competently do it fiduciary duty.
‘We’re not going away.’ EPA pressures Oregon to clean up groundwater pollution by Monica Samayoa‘We’re not going away.’ EPA pressures Oregon to clean up groundwater pollution by Monica SamayoaThis article discusses how the state of Oregon has failed to address groundwater pollution that severely negatively impacts local domestic home wells. Of note is how ineffectual the so-called 'voluntary agreements' are in solving the crisis when such water management requires costly mitigation by highly trained professionals. Now the federal government is threatening to step in with the EPA taking charge to correct what the state cannot or will not do. Frankly, if this were a region of high net-worth individuals, either the state would clean it up or they would just move to another area. Such inequity is the face of injustice.
Race to the bottom: How big business took over Oregon’s first protected aquifer
Managing and mismanaging Oregon’s groundwater
The Dalles settles public records lawsuit over Google’s data centers, will disclose water use to The Oregonian
Race to the bottom: How Central Oregon groundwater sells to the highest bidders
Race to the bottom: Draining Summer Lake
Homeowners, developers and farmers compete for groundwater in Central Oregon
The Search For Solutions To Harney County’s Water Crisis
Ranchers’ rebellion: the Californians breaking water rules in a punishing drought
Judge: Oregon Water Resources Department exceeded authority in shutting off Klamath wells
The Colorado River
These five articles from the LA Times, The Guardian, and the New York Times all discuss, with some important variations, the frailty, and short-term fix the southern states belonging to the Colorado River Compact the U.S. federal government forced them to agree upon. In lieu of potentially worse cuts setting a precedent that the feds would control the field, the states finally agreed to accept what some view as an extortionary payout of $1.3 billion in grants to forgo water that Nature would soon withhold without such payments.
1) Breakthrough Colorado River deal reached, outlining big water cuts for three years
2) Editorial: Colorado River water deal gives California another reprieve. For now
3) California emerges as big winner in Colorado River water deal
4) Historic Colorado River deal not enough to stave off long-term crisis, experts say
5) A Breakthrough Deal to Keep the Colorado River From Going Dry, for Now
And here are two files with over 1,500 comments from readers of the New York Times as to what they think about the Colorado River crisis:
Comment Set #1
Comment Set #2
Despite deal, Colorado River’s long-term water crisis remains unsolved by Ian James & Hayley SmithDespite deal, Colorado River’s long-term water crisis remains unsolved by Ian James & Hayley SmithThis article discusses the band aid -- stop gap measure to reduce a small amount of Colorado River water use -- that three states agreed to in order to avoid the pain of the U.S. federal government severing one-third of their water use across the board. It has yet to be accepted by the feds who offered a $1.2 billion payout for their compliance. This deal doesn't invest the funds into long-term infrastructure and efficiency fixes, it serves as more as an extortionary payout to farmers to avoid the potential for a water war in the courts. Such a challenge cannot be avoided in the near future if the contest comes down to preferring cities in Arizona over growing alfalfa in the California desert without the ongoing need for more cash payouts.
A Water War Is Brewing Over the Dwindling Colorado RiverA Water War Is Brewing Over the Dwindling Colorado River by Abrahm Lustgarten, Pro PublicaThis article discusses the predictable problems arising from a significant and permanent depletion of available water to extract for uses that are increasingly appearing to be profligate. Two choices are plan now to manage the pain or wait for the forces of Nature to cause much worse pain later. Because all users don't want to sacrifice, they look at each other with contempt. A Stanford hydrologist says what many of us are saying: end the archaic 19th century idea of prior appropriation like Australia and Israel have done and devise a whole new paradigm for water management that fits within the new normal of the 21st century. Claims this cannot be done are only made by the very small minority of big water users who have a near death grip on the government officials through lobbying and influence peddling.
Letters to the Editor: To save the Colorado River, start from scratch on divvying waterLetters to the Editor: To save the Colorado River, start from scratch on divvying waterThese letters discuss the absurdity of the 1922 titled 'Law of the River' in the face of Natural Law that cares not a wit for human-made laws. They also discuss the folly of growing water thirsty crops and developing communities in deserts where there is no water other than what can still be taken from afar.
Navajo Nation’s long quest for water — and for the federal government to keep its promises — ends up at Supreme Court By Lawrence HurleyNavajo Nation’s long quest for water — and for the federal government to keep its promises — ends up at Supreme Court By Lawrence HurleyThis article highlights the disregard the states and the U.S. federal government still have for the Navajo Nation exemplified by the fraud inherent in the so-called Prior Appropriation water right doctrine. Prior Appropriation claims that whoever was first in time using water is first in line to use it. When white settlers moved west, they staked claims to water sources that Indigenous People had been using and then defended these claims in newly-formed courts until laws were passed creating a statutory system called Prior Appropriation modeled after the claim-staking method. But the states and the U.S. federal government had little to no regard for the Indigenous People who were native to this land and ignored their prior interests and claims to water use going back millennia by ignoring them in water deals between the states and agricultural irrigation districts. The arbitrary application of the Prior Appropriation doctrine to prefer white settlers and their newly-formed states exposes a cold-hearted fraud that undermines the idea of first come, first served. The case before the U.S. Supreme Court is about whether and how the U.S. federal government is to hold in trust the water the Navajo Nation needs to thrive just like any other humans. If the unjust past is prologue, then the SCOTUS will mince words to construe justifications for continued disregard of these humans. If the so-called principled conservative majority actually stands on Constitutional principles, including the penumbra that addresses the trust relationship between the Navajo Nation and the U.S. government by way of treaties and agreements, then perhaps these humans will have more equal access to water that they had used since time immemorial. We have to ask ourselves when will the settlers ever stop assaulting and attacking the Indigenous Peoples, if not by slaughter, disease, and isolation, then by access to water in the desert?
Colorado River in Crisis: A Times series on the Southwest’s shrinking water lifelineColorado River in Crisis: A Times series on the Southwest’s shrinking water lifelineThe eight-part series is an extensive discussion about how the Colorado river has reached a crisis, the magnitude of which, is equal in scale to the millions of lives and acres of farmland that survive off it. From the introduction to the series: 'The Colorado River can no longer withstand the thirst of the arid West. Water drawn from the river flows to more than 40 million people in cities from Denver to Los Angeles and irrigates more than 5 million acres of farmland. For decades, the river has been entirely used up, leaving dusty stretches of desert where it once flowed to the sea in Mexico. Now, chronic overuse and the effects of climate change are pushing the river system toward potential collapse as reservoirs drop to dangerously low levels. A water reckoning is about to transform the landscape of the Southwest.'
Hobbs hits the ground running in pivotal year for Arizona waterHobbs hits the ground running in pivotal year for Arizona water BY Zack BudrykThis article discusses the need for the new Governor of Arizona to hit the ground running on addressing the need for significant water cutbacks. Highlighted in the article is: 'It will take “a lot of leadership” from Hobbs, said Terry Goddard,* to try to develop a plan that makes hard choices, such as whether to continue routing water to areas that grow alfalfa while cities experience cutbacks.' And: 'Ultimately, said Dave White,** Arizona’s water issues are more complex than simply whether there is enough water, but rather what usages are given top priority.' *Chairman of the Central Arizona Water Conservation District **Director of Arizona State University’s Global Institute of Sustainability and Innovation
A 150-year-old San Luis Valley farm stops growing food to save a shrinking water supply. It might be the first deal of its kind in the country
New York investors snapping up Colorado River water rights, betting big on an increasingly scarce resource By Ben Tracy, Andy Bast, Chris SpinderNew York investors snapping up Colorado River water rights, betting big on an increasingly scarce resource By Ben Tracy, Andy Bast, Chris SpinderThis article discusses the dystopian science fiction reality of giant Hedge Funds buying up properties in the west to grab water rights for speculation purposes. This means buying them up and speculating on their worth in the future as the rivers and aquifers dry up. Necessary to this scheme is the lobbying required to change the water laws to permit the water rights to serve other purposes than farm/ agricultural water use: these investors want to hold this water over the heads of those in cities and suburbs and charge them 'market rates.' This is nothing less than weaponizing water rights against the public.
Saudi firm has pumped Arizona groundwater for years without paying. Time to pony up
On its 100th birthday, the Colorado River Compact shows its age: The foundational document was flawed from the start.
As the Colorado River Shrinks, Washington Prepares to Spread the PainAs the Colorado River Shrinks, Washington Prepares to Spread the PainThis article discusses at length how the Colorado River has declined and forced the states that rely on it to come up with a plan that creates a hierarchy of uses from the highest and best beneficial uses to the least beneficial uses. This departs from the 19th century idea that whoever tapped the river first gets all the water they need regardless of what they are actually using the water for. While beneficial use of water has always been the law, powerful lobbyists have drowned it out with their political influence. Now the time has come to decide what to water based on survival, and it's irrigated alfalfa fields in the desert vs. people's homes.
As Colorado River shrinks, water evaporation becomes critical to California’s future supplies by Ian JamesAs Colorado River shrinks, water evaporation becomes critical to California’s future supplies by Ian JamesThis article discusses the politics how evaporation was left out of the calculations of Colorado River water availability and use when the so-called 'Law of the River' compact was established. Nowadays, with the river water crisis causing unprecedented shortages, the call to account for evaporation as a percentage of the water allocation to users has finally come due. When there was enough water, nobody cared; now with insufficient water, everyone but the largest users care. The largest users are in southern California where evaporation wastes 18% to 32% of water that vaporizes in the dry heat. More than anything, this article demonstrates the increasing will to shift away from 19th century policies as the facts change in the 21st century.
Colorado River crisis so severe lakes Mead and Powell are unlikely to refill in our lifetimes. By Rong-Gong Lin II, Ian JamesColorado River crisis so severe lakes Mead and Powell are unlikely to refill in our lifetimes. By Rong-Gong Lin II, Ian JamesThis article discusses how the major reservoirs behind the dams on the Colorado River will likely never fill up again because the only reason they ever did fill up was because demand for water was not so high. Today, however, seven states with water rights are maxing out there usage limits, drying out the river. This is what over-appropriation of surface water looks like. The human-made problem, driven by politics is worsened by the megadrought over the past 23 years that has reduced stream flow by 20% and the long-term outlook due to climate change may lead to reductions in stream flow as high as 40% by 2050. With increasing demand for water and reduced streamflows that end of the Colorado River is nigh.
Major water cutbacks loom as shrinking Colorado River nears ‘moment of reckoning’
Nearly 20% of California water agencies could see shortages if drought persists, state report shows
Surfing in the California desert? Developer’s plan sparks outrage over water use, drought
Their pleas for water were long ignored. Now tribes are gaining a voice on the Colorado River
Nevada considers allowing Las Vegas water agency to limit residential use
The push to dismantle America’s decrepit dams
Making a salad might be getting more expensive. Could climate change be to blame?