WaterWired

Westlands Water District: Reaping Riches in a Wretched Region - Subsidized Industrial Farming and Its Link to Perpetual Poverty

Lloyd G. Carter just published this provocative article in the Golden Gate University Environmental Law Journal.

Here are the first few paragraphs of Reaping Riches in a Wretched Region: Subsidized Industrial Farming and Its Link to Perpetual Poverty:

In the last few decades, well over a billion dollars in taxpayer aid has been provided to a few hundred growers in the Westlands Water District (Westlands), which is part of the San Luis Unit of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation‘s Central Valley Project (CVP)  in Central California. The CVP is the largest publicly funded water-management system in the United States, and the Westlands is the biggest agricultural irrigation district in America. At nearly 1000 square miles, the Westlands is still dominated by a few pioneer dynastic families although congressional backers of the San Luis Unit half a century ago promised that 6100 small family farms would be created if Northern California river water was brought to the desert on the West Side of the San Joaquin Valley (Valley). The promise was never kept, and the larger landowners are still in control.

While Westlands, considered one of the nation‘s most politically powerful irrigation districts, has produced an undisputable bounty of cotton and field crops over the decades in western Fresno and Kings counties, irrigation of this mineral-laden desert has also created huge environmental problems, and the wealth generated has not trickled down to farmworkers or the surrounding poverty-stricken communities.

The Twentieth Congressional District, encompassing Westlands and a portion of the western San Joaquin Valley down through Kings and Kern counties, has the dubious distinction of being the poorest of the 436 congressional districts in America.

The region is rife with social problems ranging from high unemployment8 to gang and drug problems, high teen-pregnancy rates, an appalling high school dropout rate (25-35%), and other side effects of poverty.

Enjoy (or not)!

"The subsidized factory farm economy, it seems, doesn‘t have much of a trickle down effect for the families and communities of workers who bring in the harvest."

"In fact, it appears as though this system has helped to foster a culture of unsustainable farming practices, caused large scale environmental degradation, and has created a massive socioeconomic rift between land owners and their primarily Latino workforce. " -- Lloyd G. Carter, from the article

This 31st of October, a Scary Post: Exempt Wells!

Might as well celebrate Halloween with a really frightening post. Las Vegas? Pat Mulroy? 'The Source'?The Delta? Atlanta?

No - really frightening.

Exempt wells!

Yes, those low-capacity wells threaten to overwhelm Western water managers and others, because, like zombies, there are so many of them, they keep coming, and they can't be killed. 

What with Elinor Ostrom's Nobel Prize for her work on common-pool resources, it was appropriate that someone should conflate exempt wells and CPRs. Rob Emanuel over at H2ONCoast did that quite nicely with this post.

Cally Carswell wrote a piece in the the High Country News with the wonderful title, "Death by a thousand wells".

Both Cally and Rob focus on the PNW, although Cally discusses other areas in the West.

This is a problem that's going to get worse before it gets better.

"We're going to have a water war. You can just see the knives are sharpening."  -- Rachael Paschal Osborn, executive director of the Center for Environmental Law and Policy, referring to the exempt well issue in Washington

Lloyd G. Carter's Video Presentation: California's Water Mess - Is Anyone Doing Anything Right?

Lloyd G. Carter, born and raised in Fresno, former journalist, and current Cailfornia deputy attorney general in the Criminal Division, spoke here at OSU on 28 October 2009 about California's Water Mess: Is Anyone Doing Anything Right?

I'm glad I finally got the chance to meet, hear, and have dinner with him. Fascinating guy - an ambulatory encyclopedia of California water issues and fact. And stories!

Interesting factoid from Lloyd: Sacramento, Modesto, and Fresno don't have residential water meters.

Check out his blog/WWW site, The Chronicles of the Hydraulic Brotherhood.

From that site:

Lloyd G. Carter, former UPI and Fresno Bee reporter, has been writing about California water issues for more than 35 years. He is President of the California Save Our Streams Council. He is also a board member of the Underground Gardens Conservancy and host of a monthly radio show on KFCF, 88.1 FM in Fresno.This is his personal blog site and contains archives of his news career as well as current articles, radio commentaries, and random thoughts.
 

Here is the video's URL.

Enjoy!

"We need more water. We need more storage. We need to build more storage, and we have to build conveyance, the canal, all of those kinds of things . I know the environmentalists don't like to create and talk even about conveyance. They don't like that. And they don't like to build more water storage. I understand it when you come from their point of view. They were up there in my office. We were all talking yesterday about it. They want to do another five-year study. There is no more study. We have studied this subject to death." -- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA), 14 June 2007

“I have just one statistic, one only, and that is 25 million people depend on Delta water for the drinking water of the state. And the probability of a big earthquake over 6.7 is 75% in the next 30 years. And if that were to happen, there are all indications that the Delta would collapse, the water would be gone, there would be no water for drinking, there would be no water for agriculture, there would be no water for fish, marsh, ecosystems.” -- Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), 2007.

Ooops! Judge: No SNWA Pumping From Cave, Delamar, and Dry Lake Valleys

A Nevada two-fer today!

Boy, do we ever live in interesting times!

From Henry Brean's story in today's Las Vegas Review-Journal (the map is from the article):

For the moment at least, the Southern Nevada Water Authority has lost the water it hoped to pump to Las Vegas in the first phase of its proposed pipeline across eastern Nevada.

In a strongly worded order issued last week, a district judge overturned a 2008 state ruling that granted the authority permission to tap groundwater from three valleys in central Lincoln County.

Judge Norman Robison ruled that State Engineer Tracy Taylor "abused his discretion" and "acted arbitrarily, capriciously and oppressively" when he cleared the authority to pump more than 6 billion gallons of groundwater a year [about 18,500 AF/year]  from Cave, Delamar and Dry Lake valleys.

The senior judge from Gardnerville wrote that the state's chief water regulator traditionally requires "specific empirical data" before allowing groundwater to be transferred out of a basin. This time, though, the state engineer is "simply hoping for the best while committing to undo his decision if the worst occurs," Robison wrote.

Authority officials are expected to challenge the judge's ruling, which spokesman Scott Huntley described as biased and "flat-out wrong."

"We believe there are numerous grounds for appeal," Huntley said. "There was some evidence the judge may have come into the case with a prejudged opinion."

Note that this decision does not directly affect the plans to pump from Snake Valley on the Nevada-Utah border but there may be repercussions. Read Emily Green's excellent analysis that goes far beyond the R-J article.

Looks like it is back to the drawing board (or hearing room, or courtroom) for the SNWA.

Read the entire story here. The comments are quite interesting.

"I think we're just digesting it right now to be honest with you." -- Susan Joseph-Taylor, chief hearing officer, Nevada Division of Water Resources

Exclusive Photo Report from Snake Valley, Nevada-Utah

Former student and longtime friend Michael Dale, along with lovely spouse Malynn and Roffie, el perro gigante (130 pounds!) sent me these exclusive photos from Snake Valley, the basin that straddles the NV-UT border and is the object of Las Vegas' hydraulic affections.

They went to Baker, NV, in Snake Valley, at the right-hand end of the purple line (U.S. Route 50) in the accompanying map. They visited Great Basin National Park, Nevada's only NP. Here is a map of the GBNP.

Michael and Malynn took these pictures knowing full well that I would want to post them so I have received their permission to do so.

Michael noted that Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) is not real popular in rural Nevada, and today's quote reflects a sign seen a number of times along U.S. Route 50, the so-called Loneliest Road in America (unless, of course, you're stuck on it during a NoVa traffic jam in Arlington or Fairfax Counties, VA).

Shown above is Wheeler Peak,  just a shade over 13,000 feet [thanks for the correction, Bob.] Michael, a native Virginian, tells me it was originallyJeff Davis Peak but was renamed Union Peak when Nevada joined the Union in the Civil War. The name was eventually changed to the present moniker after the Army surveyor, and Jeff Davis Peak was bestowed upon the third highest peak in the park.

Now for some pictures of pipes found around Baker and Snake Valley. I don't think captions are necessary.

SNWA and its boss, Pat Mulroy, are not well-liked here. Duhhhh...

No, Roffie! Don't soil Pat's pipe!


Michael noted that there is much concern about Snake Valley becoming another Owens Lake, with the SNWA pumping desiccating the valley, producing huge dust storms.

A colleague of mine, who has no axe to grind, thinks that is unlikely since the playa lake in Snake Valley is not a discharging (wet, fed by groundwater) playa but a dry playa. So he is skeptical of claims that pumping will produce an Owens Valley scenario.

But let's figure this out before going ahead with the pipeline.

Interestingly enough, Michael noted the effects of agricultural diversions on Sevier Dry Lake in western Utah, which is a source of dust that periodically sweeps towards the Wasatch Front. They saw such a cloud rising from the desert floor. You don't hear much about this.

Harry's pipe.

Roffie was a good doggie and didn't mess up the pipe. I suspect the locals would not have minded if he had. 

 

 

 

 

Finally this gorgeous shot looking east across Snake Valley with Utah and the Confusion Range in the background.

This is spectacular country! I've been away from it for too long. Thanks, Michael and Malynn - and Roffie.

"Anybody Butt Harry Reid." -- typical political sign on Highway 50 in eastern Nevada

The Pavlovian Response to Western Agricultural Water

The title of this post could be that of a PhD dissertation in agricultural economics or some similar discipline. But whether the term is used improperly or not it's designed to pique your curiosity.

Shaun McKinnon of The Arizona Republic wrote this piece on the water used by Arizona agriculture and how urban water managers are thinking of some of that water for cities.

It's a story that rings true in most, if not all, Western states: agriculture uses by far the greatest amount of water, has many senior water rights, but contributes a disproportionately low share to a state's GDP. So water managers begin salivating about purchasing/leasing some of those senior agricultural water rights for urban growth.

Why, I seem to recall that none other than Western water expert/reputed mob lawyer Mayor Oscar Goodman of Las Vegas made a comment a few years ago that Vegas wouldn't run out of water, because they could just buy the IID (Imperial Irrigation District) water. Oh, Oscar, this ain't criminal law.

So choose your preference - you want more growth, replete with a sea of red-tiled rooftops, or verdant fields of alfalfa with riparian strips along irrigation ditches? That's how one farmer in New Mexico's Middle Rio Grande Valley put it to an audience several years ago.  

Unfortunately, it's usually not that simple a choice.

McKinnon's article is even-handed - no "good guys vs. bad guys" stuff.

What really struck me was this statement:

Most planners start with the idea that water shouldn't limit growth. [emboldening mine]

Huh?

That attitude is a major part of the water problem in the Southwest, as is the problem embedded in today's quote:

"Because I can." -- Middle Rio Grande farmer, when asked why he flood-irrigated his land.

A Nobel Laureate for Us Common WaterWonks

It is not too often that those of us in the water community can claim some disciplinary kinship with a Nobel Laureate, especially one from the economics realm. But this year we can take pride in seeing Elinor (Lin) Ostrom of Indiana University share the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences.

She is the first woman to win this particular Nobel, first awarded in 1969. She is also a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.

And she is not an economist - well, maybe a political economist -  but was trained as a political scientist.

Her connection to water comes via her specialty: common-pool resources and their governance. She wrote her PhD dissertation (UCLA) on groundwater management, and that was just the beginning (see quote at bottom).

Here's what the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said in recognizing her for her analysis of economic governance, especially in the commons:

“Elinor Ostrom has challenged the conventional wisdom that common property is poorly managed and should be either regulated by central authorities or privatized,” the academy said. “Based on numerous studies of user-managed fish stocks, pastures, woods, lakes, and groundwater basins, Ostrom concludes that the outcomes are, more often than not, better than predicted by standard theories.”

She's the first Nobel Laureate whose material I read long before she won her prize. I have read a number of her papers, and her 1990 book, Governing the Commons, also comes to mind. I've also met several of her students.

Her is a link to her IU CV with a number of hot links to her publications.

And, for some additional significance of her award, the Indiana Daily Student said it all in its editorial:

Additionally, because of the nature of Ostrom’s work and her position in the political science department, it is a demonstration of the increasing importance of interdisciplinary focus in research.

Previously, Ostrom herself has stressed the importance of developing an “interdisciplinary language” among researchers. This, she says, is necessary because the problems and issues with which they are dealing cross disciplinary lines and cannot be solved by looking exclusively through one prism.

Finally, the award is an indication of the increasing relevance of testing established theories about numerous economics against actual situations, especially as dozens of developing countries make their way out of poverty and into the globalized economy.

You can find more links at the IU site.

Rob Emanuel has an excellent post on Ostrom and her work. David Zetland has a great post over at Aguanomics about Ostrom and her co-winner , Oliver Williamson.  David is pleased at the awards, and says both are people who deal with the messy realities of how things get done in an imperfect world. 

Dr. Williamson, at UC-Berkeley, can now get a lifetime free parking space in the Noble Laureate Grove. Go, Ollie!

So are you wondering what some other economists thought about Ostrom's award? Zetland has that covered, too.  I doubt you'll be surprised at some of the comments.

"I grew up in Los Angeles ... The ocean is right there. And if you pull the groundwater down, surprise, surprise, the saltwater comes in. And if they had not found a way of reducing the quantity of water they pumped, and doing a variety of other things, they would have had to give up the groundwater basin to saltwater. I was very fortunate, I started that as a seminar paper, and I kept going and going." -- Elinor Ostrom

Cooperation and Water Buffaloes

The other day an article from the Salt Lake Tribune caught  my eye. The article begins:

About halfway through secret four-year negotiations on how a reluctant Utah could share the Snake Valley aquifer with Nevada, a Silver State official and a Las Vegas water utility threatened they could take the matter to court or to Congress, memos and e-mails show.

The correspondence, released under an open-records request from the Great Basin Water Network, illuminates Nevada's no-surrender insistence that Snake Valley water be split 50-50, even though Utah officials believed that impossible.

The documents also appear to undermine recent assurances from Mike Styler, executive director of the Utah Department of Natural Resources, that the proposed water-sharing agreement is as good for Utah as it is for Nevada.

Obviously, the Las Vegas water utility is the Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) and we know that whatever the SNWA wants, the State of Nevada will be inclined to support. So it looks like Nevada was playing hardball with Utah. Nothing wrong with that, right?

But what has happened to the new era of 'cooperation' and 'interdependence' in Western water issues heralded by SNWA boss Pat Mulroy in a talk in DC last July? I guess cooperation means different things to different people.

And while I am on the subject of Mulroy and Western water, I will recall Matt Jenkins' story in the 12 October 2009 High Country News about Mulroy and her groundwater pumping project: 

Mulroy understandably bristles at any reference to Chinatown. Yet she has achieved a degree of power that might even make Mulholland envious. Mulroy has largely set the terms of Western water over the past two decades. She has challenged what she calls the conservative "belt-and-suspenders" mindset that has traditionally prevailed among Colorado River water bosses. And, most controversially, she has led a two-decade-long effort to build a massive groundwater project that will tap huge aquifers lying beneath the Great Basin in eastern Nevada and pipe billions of gallons of water to Las Vegas.

Mulroy does like to tout her challenges to the status quo. She deserves kudos for challenging the 'water buffaloes' and their precious Colorado River Compact. But she really is no different from them. She touts unbridled growth in a region of the USA whose water resources can ill handle more growth, and she seeks supply-side solutions. She makes policy, although she will deny that.

The fact is, she's just a water buffalo, albeit one who wears gold lamé shoes.

"It's a desert, stupid." -- bumper sticker produced by the water conservation folks, City of Albuquerque, early 1990s

GAO Report on Energy-Water Nexus: Federal Water Use Data Improvements &Trends in Power Plant Water Use

The Government Accountability Office has produced a report on the Energy-Water Nexus: Improvements to Federal Water Use Data Would Increase Understanding of Trends in Power Plant Water Use.

That's a mouthful!

Here is the download: Download D1023

Probably good to read at bedtime to ensure a good night's sleep. 

If you're like me and don't want to read the 78-page report, here is the one-pager:

Download D1023high

Enjoy!

"I can promise you that when I go to Sacramento, I will pump up Sacramento." -- Arnold Schwarzenegger

Emily Green's The Week That Was in Water, 11-17 October: Cojones for EPA, Fracking, Leave It To Beavers & Otters, UC Library

Whenever I see Emily's post (OMG, did I say that?) with this title I recall the early 1960s BBC TV satire That Was The Week That Was (TW3). It lasted only a few years in the UK and a couple of episodes made it to American TV. David Frost was the MC. It was funny, although a lot of the British political satire went over the head of a 14-year-old American boy and a lot of others in the colonies. Even The Dickster was perplexed. 

But I digress.

Check out what Emily has for us:

1) The EPA will rescind the permit for the Spruce Mine in West Virginia:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency officials today announced the gigantic news that they have formally moved to veto the Clean Water Act permit for the largest mountaintop removal mine in West Virginia history.

The mine, as currently configured, would bury seven miles of streams.

Looks like the EPA has rediscovered some cojones. I was always baffled at  how the coal companies could get away with the mountaintop removal mines. Check that - I understand. Go,Lisa!

2) Hydraulic fracturing ('fracking', or 'fraking', if you're a fan of BSG) to enhance natural gas production. Here is the New York Times opining about banning drilling in New York City's watershed. WTF?

3) And Leave It to Beaver, folks! Beavers as a watershed restoration tool? Groundwater recharge? My former University of New Mexico colleague Cliff Dahm was doing this over 20 years ago.

4) Otters return to New Mexico (no, not the family of the Idaho governor).

5) Closing UC's Water Resources Center Archives! Why don't they have an auction - maybe some California legislators! 

And lots, lots, more!

I will close with a joke from TW3. Old-timers will get it; the rest of you can check out the Profumo Affair.

Q: Who is the world's worst carpenter?
A: Christine Keeler. One screw and the whole Cabinet fell apart.

Lawyers, Guns, and Money...and Water

No, I'm not talking about gunplay here - just thought I would toy with the title of the great Warren Zevon song, Lawyers, Guns and Money. It's apropos.

Dorian Roffe-Hammond sent me the following  items about the involvement of lawyers in the Georgia water issue and Gov. Sonny Perdue's water task force. As Jerry Seinfeld might say, "Not that there's anything wrong with that."

Here are the first few paragraphs of an article by David Beasley from the 9 October 2009 issue of Global Atlanta:

Atlanta law firm Arnall Golden Gregory LLP (AGG) has launched a new water resources team, betting that water, or the lack of it, will be a contentious legal issue for years to come.

"All the rain we had recently didn’t change a thing,” Bruce Jackson, a partner in the law firm who, along with fellow partner John Gornall, is leading the eight-member water resources team, told GlobalAtlanta.

Although heavy rainfall temporarily filled lakes and streams, most of the water flowed downstream and is now on the way to the Gulf of Mexico or the Atlantic Ocean. “It’s gone,” said Mr. Jackson.

What remains, however, is a federal lawsuit pitting Georgia, Alabama and Florida in a long-ranging fight centering on Atlanta’s main water source, Lake Lanier. Georgia is currently on the losing side of the contest. 

More from the article:

Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue recently named Mr. Jackson to the Water Contingency Plan Task Force, a panel that will figure out what Georgia will do if it is forced to severely cut withdrawals from Lanier.

"While I am confident we will be successful in securing the ability to draw water supply from Lake Lanier, we cannot take that for granted and must plan accordingly,” the governor said when appointing the panel. “We will consider conservation measures as well as opportunities to enhance our water supply options.” 

As the tri-state water wars increase in intensity, Arnall Golden Gregory sees a need for lawyers who specialize in the field. It envisions representing state and local governments and business owners in legal disputes over water while also working for foreign companies seeking to sell their water-saving products and technology here.

“People are going to need lawyers to deal with these issues as they develop,” said Mr. Jackson.

After purchasing retirement property in Colorado, Mr. Jackson developed first-hand knowledge of the water wars in the Western U.S. and knows how intense they can be. He points out that in Colorado, water commissioners, who have the right to shut off water sources, carry weapons when they go into the field.

Mr. Jackson has completed several courses in water law and is licensed to practice law in Colorado.

Someone is preparing for the future (lucrative) water landscape in Georgia and environs.

There was also another article about AGG and Jackson in 13 October 2009 edition of The Fulton County Daily Report. This segment from Andy Peters' article caught my eye:

Jackson is among 80 real estate developers, bankers, politicians, business community representatives and others on the task force, which is planning for the contingency that a water deal with Florida and Alabama is not approved by Congress by 2012.

Again, shovers and makers abound; nine of the eighty are lawyers.

Later in the article Jackson discussed the concept of a water court, like the one that Colorado has, as a mechanism to help Georgians deal with water issues:

Jackson said he has been asked to convene a panel of experts on western U.S. water law to compile a list of the “best practices” of water laws in the western U.S. He said one confirmed member of Jackson's panel is Colorado Supreme Court Justice Gregory J. Hobbs, a noted authority on water law and the author of “The Citizen's Guide to Colorado Water Law.”

Because the western U.S. has fewer water resources available, western states have been dealing with water-law issues for much longer than the eastern U.S., Jackson said. Georgia should be able to learn from how the western U.S. has established its laws to deal with a much lower quantity of water, said Jackson.

The West's reliance on prior appropriation of water has led some states, including Colorado, to establish water courts, and Jackson suggested such an approach may be what's needed in Georgia.

Somewhat like a bankruptcy court, water courts require the holder of a water permit to post a notice if he wants to make a significant change to how he's using the water. Any concerned or affected party has the chance to state their case on whether the proposed change should be approved. The water court judge makes the final determination, although, unlike a bankruptcy court, a water court judge does not have the authority to force all parties to abide by a specific plan, he said.

“Those concepts can easily translate to Georgia, and there are many ways to go about it,” Jackson said. “I like the idea of an adjudicated water system because of its transparency.”

The establishment of water courts in Georgia would require that the state conduct much more extensive measuring of water resources than is currently done, Jackson said.

The fact that Easterners may be looking to the West for guidance on water issues is interesting. It reminded me of a time about ten years ago when a retired University of New Mexico professor headed to Georgia to lead a new water policy institute at a state university.

I soon received a call from a Georgia newspaper reporter inquiring about the reputation and motives of the man, whom I did not know that well. It became clear to me that the reporter was out to do a 'hatchet job', and even expressed amazement to me that someone from the West could even begin to understand Georgia, its people, and its water issues. He even suggested that perhaps the fellow should just take his ideas and return to New Mexico. I realized that whatever I said would be misquoted and/or misunderstood, so I politely extricated myself from the interview.

We sure do live in interesting times.

"Send lawyers, guns and money...the shit has hit the fan." -- Warren Zevon, Lawyers, Guns and Money

Will Sonny's Task Force Answer His Prayers?

In August I posted about the water predicament in Georgia, and specifically, the Alanta metropolitan area (19 August 2009 and 20 August 2009).

Dorian Roffe-Hammond, who is well aware of my interest in all things 'Atlanta water', sent these items my way.

The first is a 7 October 2009 press release from the office of Gov. Sonny Perdue (R-GA), who's been known to pray for rain:

Governor Announces Members of Water Contingency Task Force

ATLANTA – Governor Sonny Perdue today hosted the first meeting of the newly-formed water contingency task force and announced the business, government and environmental leaders from around the state that have agreed to serve on the group.

“I am very appreciative of the time and effort these leaders from across Georgia have committed to the important task at hand,” said Governor Perdue. “I have asked this group to look at any and all possible solutions and let the facts drive their recommendations.”

Today’s first meeting of the task force focused on the history of water litigation and negotiations as well as discussion of the Governor’s four-pronged approach to dealing with Judge Magnuson’s July ruling. One of the strategies includes contingency planning, which is the focus of the task force.

Coca-Cola Enterprises Chairman and CEO John Brock and Tim Lowe of Lowe Engineers are serving as co-chairs of the task force, which will meet throughout the fall and present recommendations before the January 2010 legislative session.

“The Governor has named an outstanding group of leaders to serve on this task force,” Brock said. “We are eager to begin work on the charge the Governor gave us today – to develop a contingency plan that considers both conservation and water supply. This issue will affect Georgia for decades to come.”

“This task force brings together business, conservation and government leaders from throughout our state and it is that equal representation of all interests that will allow us to be successful,” Lowe added. “To a member, this task force is committed to working together to ensure that our state is well-prepared to meet our water needs long into the future.”

More than 80 leaders have agreed to serve on the task force. The members are:

Brock, John, Coca-Cola Enterprises (co-chair)
Lowe, Tim, Lowe Engineers (co-chair)
Amos, Paul, AFLAC
Anderson, Richard, Delta Air Lines
Armstrong, Kerry, Duke Realty
Bannister, Charles, Chair, Gwinnett County Commission
Barella, Jose, Merial
Bennett, John, Chair, Coosa-North Georgia Regional Water Council
Black, Gary, Georgia Agribusiness Council
Blake, Frank, The Home Depot
Blanchard, Billy, Columbus Bank and Trust
Boner, Rex, The Conservation Fund
Cagle, Casey, Lt. Governor
Carruth, Bill, Chair, Georgia Board of Natural Resources
Chase, Donald G., Chair, Upper Flint Regional Water Council
Clark, Chris, Commissioner, GA Department of Natural Resources
Collier, Darin, Worthing SE
Cornelius, Ken, Siemens
Cross, Ron C., Chair, Savannah-Upper Ogeechee Regional Water Council
Currey, Brad, Rock-Tenn Company
Davis, Scott, UPS
Dempsey, Lynn, Dempsey Auction Company
Deriso, Sonny, Atlantic Capital Bank
Dillard, Doug, Dillard & Galloway, LLC
Dunlap, Kit, Chair, Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District
Eason, Darvin, Chair, Suwanee-Satilla Regional Water Council
Eaves, John, Chair, Fulton County Commission
Ellis, Burrell, CEO, DeKalb County
Fischer, Christian, Georgia-Pacific
Floyd, Bill, Mayor, City of Decatur
Fox, John, Emory Healthcare
Franklin, Shirley, Mayor, City of Atlanta
Garrard, Gardiner, The Jordan Company
Garrett, Mike, Georgia Power Company
Gellerstedt, Larry, Cousins Properties
Glover, Taylor, Turner Enterprises, Inc.
Green, Steve, Stephen Green Properties, Inc.
Harbin, Ben, Chair, House Appropriations
Harris, Duane, Sea Georgia Adventures
Hatcher, Bob, MidCountry Financial Corp.
Hays, Richard, Alston & Bird
Hill, Stephen, Solvay Pharmaceuticals
Hodge, Al, Greater Rome Chamber of Commerce
Howard, Pierre, Georgia Conservancy
Hughes, Dale, Cox Enterprises
Hyland, Greg, Mueller Water Products
Jackson, Bruce, Arnall Golden Gregory
Johnston, Bob, MEAG Power
Ketchum, Mark, Newell Rubbermaid
Lakly, Shelly, The Nature Conservancy
Lanier, L. Brinson, Chair, Altamaha Regional Water Council
Lesser, Craig, The Pendleton Consulting Group
Maltese, Joe, City of LaGrange
Markwalter, Jack, Invesco
McSpadden, Richard, Chair, Upper Oconee Regional Water Council
Nash, Al, The Columns Group, Inc.
Nuti, Bill, NCR Corporation
Olens, Sam, Chair, Cobb County Commission
Pate, William, Atlanta Convention and Visitors Bureau
Poitevint, Alec, Southeastern Materials, Inc.
Price, Mike, Oglethorpe Power Corporation
Rice, John, GE
Richardson, Elmo A., Chair, Middle Ocmulgee Regional Water Council
Royal, A. Richard, Chair, Lower Flint Regional Water Council
Scheible, Dave, Graphic Packaging
Sheldon, Donna, House Majority Caucus Vice-Chair
Sitherwood, Suzanne, Atlanta Gas Light
Smith, Gary, Strategic Value Properties
Smith, Jack, Chair, Fayette County Commission
Smith, Lynn, Chair, House Natural Resources & Environment
Smith, Rick, Equifax Inc.
Stack, Tim, Piedmont Healthcare
Tankersley, Jan, Bulloch County Commissioner
Tapp, Helen, Trust for Public Land
Tarbutton, Charles, Sandersville Railroad Company
Thomas, Mike, Clayton County Water Authority
Thompson, Benjamin, Chair, Coastal Georgia Regional Water Council
Tolleson, Ross, Chair, Senate Natural Resources & Environment
Tuggle, Clyde, The Coca-Cola Company
Weber, Dan Chair, Senate Education
Wells, John, Interface Americas
Wilheit, Philip, Wilheit Packaging
Williams, Virgil, Williams Group International, Inc.
Willis, Betty, Emory University
Windom, Matt, Chair, Middle Chattahoochee Regional Water Council
Wood, Jenner, SunTrust Bank
Wood, Paul, Georgia EMC

Sure looks like a lot of movers and shakers (or shovers and makers) on that list!

The second is an editorial from the 9 October 2009 edition of the Athens Banner-Herald:

Editorial: Perdue's water task force will bear watching

In the Banner-Herald's Oct. 1 editorial headlined "Perdue continues to surprise on water issue," the editorial board credited Gov. Sonny Perdue with "heads-up leadership" in connection with his announcement that he was appointing a task force to develop contingency plans for water supplies.

The governor's appointment of the task force is part of the state's response to a federal judge's recent ruling that metropolitan Atlanta, which draws much of its water from North Georgia's Lake Lanier, should not have access to that water. That's because providing water was not one of the purposes for which the lake, a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers project, was created.

The judge's ruling is among the latest developments in the long-standing "water war" among the states of Georgia, Florida and Alabama over access to water from the Chattahoochee River, which was dammed to create Lake Lanier. The ruling gives the states three years to come up with an agreement on the Chattahoochee's water. If no agreement is reached, water withdrawals from Lake Lanier will be cut back to 1970s levels, effectively a "death sentence" for metropolitan Atlanta.

Understandably, the ruling has touched off a flurry of activity at the state level. The governor has opted for a four-pronged approach: appealing the ruling, seeking the help of the state's congressional delegation, negotiating with Alabama and Florida, and developing contingency plans.

As a framework for dealing with the issue, those approaches make perfect sense. But that doesn't mean those approaches shouldn't bear further scrutiny as they move from plan to reality.

For instance, when the governor first announced creation of the task force late last month, his office indicated it would comprise dozens of business, government and environmental leaders. This week, when the names of the 80 appointees were announced, the list seemed a bit top-heavy with business leaders, while environmental interests were less in evidence.

That could be a problem insofar as one of the strategies the task force is likely to consider, according to a Wednesday report in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, is looking outside the metropolitan Atlanta area for water.

In some parts of the state, sharing a water supply with metropolitan Atlanta might be an attractive option, inasmuch as it could mean a substantial revenue stream for local governments in areas from which water might be drawn. It is, however, difficult to predict what environmental consequences might arise from such transfers of water.

And, perhaps of more immediate relevance to those locales from which water might be taken, sending water to metropolitan Atlanta might, over time, lessen the ability of those locales to attract economic development.

As this newspaper has noted, setting up the water task force was a good idea. But the question of whether that task force will come up with a set of good ideas remains very much open.

WaterWired's Take
The task force is a good idea. However, it does seem rather underrepresented vis-a-vis environmental/conservation groups and weighted more heavily towards those who might be termed pro-development. I wonder whether such a group would recommend a strong demand-side approach instead of a supply-side one. 

And it strikes me that such a group might be representative of those who are responsible for the Atlanta area's unbridled growth and concomitant lack of enlightened water planning and management that have created the current water situation.  

But then again, business people are real good at planning and managing, right?

"Atlanta has based its growth on the idea that it could take whatever water it wanted whenever it wanted it, and that the downstream states would simply have to make do with less. Following the court's ruling today, this massive illegal water grab will be coming to an end." -- Alabama Gov. Bob Riley, referring to the recent court ruling (thanks to Watercrunch)

Dr. Robert Hirsch: Next Generation Trend Methods

Dr. Robert Hirsch of the U.S. Geological Survey gave this presentation on Next Generation Trend Methods a few days ago at the University of Vermont.

Download the pdf:

Download NGTM_October_2009_rev_(RHirsch)

Great stuff from a man who knows what he's talking about. Enjoy!

"If your experiment needs statistics, you ought to have done a better experiment." -- Ernest Rutherford 

Honduras Hydrophilanthropy

My Honduran friend Rolando López took these photos in the village of Monte Vista in the Sierra de Omoa in northwest Honduras. The villagers are finishing a gravity-flow potable water system, funded (I believe) by two Rotary Clubs (one in the USA, the other in Honduras).

These are the kinds of systems my students and I helped build in the Sierra de Omoa from 2001 through 2005. The Ann Campana Judge Foundation is supporting a similar project in Brisas de Cuyamel, at the foot of the mountains, just off the road from Omoa to the Guatemala border.

Nothing like the rainy season!

Oh, yeah!

Digging the foundation for the ferroconcrete water tank. Looks like it'll be about 5,000 US gallons. A professional mason will construct it. 
 

Nice shot of the dam. That is the sedimentation trap in front, just above the pipe.

 
Looks like there's an algal bloom.

The pipe that runs from the dam to the water tank. Each house in the village will have its own tap.

"Grief shared is half grief; joy shared is double joy." -- Honduran proverb

Water Alternatives Issue - Hydraulic Bureaucracies: Flows of Water, Flows of Power

Most of the current (October 2009) issue of the open-access journal Water Alternatives is devoted to Hydraulic Bureaucracies: Flows of Water, Flows of Power. There are some great articles here, including one by Aguanomics czar David Zetland:

The end of abundance: How water bureaucrats created and destroyed the southern California oasis

Download Zetland Art2-3-4

You can download the papers for free, although you may have to register.

Articles

Is water lagging behind on aid effectiveness? Lessons from Bangladesh, Ethiopia and Uganda
Katharina Welle, Josephine Tucker, Alan Nicol, Barbara Evans
Water Alternatives 2(3): 297-314  

Institutions that cannot manage change: A Gandhian perspective on the Cauvery dispute in South India
Narendar Pani
Water Alternatives 2(3): 315-327    

Theme Section: Hydraulic Bureaucracies: Flows of Water, Flows of Power

Hydraulic bureaucracies: Flows of water, flows of power
François Molle, Peter P. Mollinga, Philippus Wester
Water Alternatives 2(3): 328-349    

The end of abundance: How water bureaucrats created and destroyed the southern California oasis
David Zetland
Water Alternatives 2(3): 350-369   

"Agua para todos": The new ´regionalist´ hydraulic paradigm in Spain
Elena Lopez-Gunn
Water Alternatives 2(3): 416-439   

The hydraulic mission and the Mexican hydrocracy: Regulating and reforming the flows of water and power
Philippus Wester, Edwin Rap, Sergio Vargas-Velázquez
Water Alternatives 2(3): 395-415    

Hydraulic bureaucracy in a modern hydraulic society - Strategic group formation in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam
Hans-Dieter Evers and Simon Benedikter
Water Alternatives 2(3): 416-439    

The fluctuating political appeal of water engineering in Australia
Lin R. Crase, Suzanne M. O’Keefe, Brian E. Dollery
Water Alternatives 2(3): 440-447    

Beyond bureaucracy? Assessing institutional change in the governance of water in England
Nigel Watson, Hugh Deeming and Raphael Treffny
Water Alternatives 2(3): 448-460

The Water Resources Board: England and Wales’ venture into national water resource planning 1964-73
Christine McCulloch
Water Alternatives 2(3): 461-475

Viewpoint

The right irrigation? Policy directions for agricultural water management in sub-Saharan Africa
Bruce Lankford
Water Alternatives 2(3): 476-480    

Book Review

Global corruption report 2008: Corruption in the water sector (Zinnbauer, D. and Dobson, R. 2008).
Undala Alam
Water Alternatives 2(3): 481-482   

Enjoy! I will!

"Man is a complex being; he makes the deserts bloom and lakes die." -- Gil Stern

Just Say No to NAWS?

About a week ago Noah Hall's Great Lakes Law blog published an item about the NAWS (Northwest Area Water Supply) project of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. The story related how the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center had filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief on the side of Manitoba, Canada, and others who oppose Reclamation's project.

View a map of the project.

I have to admit that what piqued my curiosity was reading about a transbasin surface water diversion project involving the USA and Canada whose acronym begins with "NA", as in "North American"). Yes, I'm thinking of projects like NAWAPA and NARA designed to move water from Canada to the USA, and then within the USA itself.

But NAWS is not one of these big-picture projects. It's a water-supply project for northwestern North Dakota that is 'small potatoes' in the grand scheme of things - a maximum of about 26 million gallons per day (80 AF).  So why the concern among the likes of Noah Hall, the province of Manitoba, and the federal government of Canada?  It represents the first USA project to transfer water from the Missouri River basin to the Red-Souris basin, which is in the Hudson Bay basin. So Manitoba and Canada are concerned about the possible introduction of aquatic invasive species and pathogens, and so is Hall.

From the Great Lakes Law blog:

The NAWS Project is the first United States transbasin water transfer project to breach the barrier between the Missouri River Basin and the Hudson Bay Basin.  The diversion could transfer invasive species and diseases into downstream waters in the United States and Canada, and threatens the quality and quantity of water supplies.  The proponents of the project have not properly examined less damaging alternatives and options, such as water conservation and recycling.  Nor have the project’s proponents undertaken a full review of the environmental impacts of the water diversion.  For additional background on the NAWS project and other related projects, see the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center’s Transbasin Water Diversions webpage

Conservationists have long been concerned with the risks of the NAWS project to water resources.  The NAWS water diversion represents the first ever federal project involving an interbasin water transfer linking the Missouri River Basin to the Hudson Bay Basin.  For better or worse, it could become an important precedent-setting project for other water diversions.  Given the stakes, the Bureau of Reclamation should have adhered strictly to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act with a thorough and comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement.  Instead, the Bureau of Reclamation is trying to rush through a novel and potentially devastating project that creates a danger for all fresh water basins in the United States, particularly the Great Lakes.

In addition to setting a precedent for other water diversions, the NAWS project threatens water quality and aquatic life in the Missouri River Basin and Hudson Bay Basin.  The diversion of water from one separate drainage basin to another will also impact residential, commercial and recreational water use.  The reductions of water levels in combination with the impacts from climate change pose an increased risk of invasion of non-native species and subsequent transfer of invasive species through the pipeline to the Hudson Bay Basin.

Doesn't sound as though NAWS has been thought out completely.

"Human beings were invented by water to transport it uphill." -- Unknown  

Where the Riled Things Are: Stewart Schools Hannity

I try to steer clear of politics but when it comes to water, that is often hard to do. So let's talk about the San Joaquin Valley.

The folks over at Fox News - Sean Hannity in particular - have gotten a lot of mileage out of the 'fish vs. farmers' kerfuffle in California's San Joaquin Valley. Comedian Paul Rodriguez has also weighed in on the issue, supporting Latino farmers and their group, the Latino Water Coalition, which is not so much a 'grassroots' organizaton as it is a front for agricultural lobbyists.

Here is Alex Leo's take.

The other night Jon Stewart took Hannity to task, schooling him on some history, the food chain, and a few other items.

Check out the video clip.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Where the Riled Things Are
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Ron Paul Interview

 "The government should stop meddling in the business of the farmers, who would actually still be living in a desert if not for government meddling." -- Jon Stewart

EWB-OSU Report: Water Accessibility and Potability Project, Las Mercedes and El Naranjito, El Salvador

The Oregon State University chapter of Engineers Without Borders just submitted its final report for a project funded by the Ann Campana Judge Foundation.

Download El_Salvador_Water_Project_EWB_OSU

This work is part of EWB-OSU's overall El Salvador Water Project.

Excellent work!

"But let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream!" -- Amos 5:24

 

Workshop Summary: Water Issues in the ACF and ACT Basins, Southeast USA

Given the hydrometeorological events of the past few days it's hard to imagine a drought in the Southeast USA. But let's not lapse into euphoria because we think the drought is over. For one thing, the torrential rains and flooding have devastated humans and property alike. So even if the drought is over there is too much grief to celebrate.

Last spring there was a workshop on water issues in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) Basin and the Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa (ACT) Basin. The workshop was organized by the Water Science and Technology Board of the National Research Council.

Here is a link to the prepublication copy of the workshop summary. Or, you can download a copy below:

Download 12693

My last post on the Atlanta area water woes was 21 August 2009.

Next time Gov. Sonny Perdue (R-GA) prays for rain I won't laugh.

"Political sidestepping will not be tolerated." -- Rep. Nathan Deal (R-GA), to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, concerning releases from Lake Lanier (2007)

Jim Thebaut's 'Running Dry South Africa' Promotional Video

Jim Thebaut, the 'Running Dry' guy, just announced that a promotional video for his next project, Running Dry South Africa, is online at YouTube.

You'll not hear the dulcet tones of Jane Seymour, who narrated Jim's previous two films. The narrator for this one is Lebo Mashile, the poet, performer and actress (Hotel Rwanda) who is recognized as one of South Africa's most popular young artists and known to millions of international fans. [Thanks to Carol Eisner for correcting me.]

I'm anxiously awaiting the release of the full-length film.

"After climbing a great hill, one only finds that there are many more hills to climb." -- Nelson Mandela

Washington Attorney General: Department of Ecology Can Limit Groundwater Withdrawals

About two months ago I posted a story about the Washington Department of Ecology banning additional unpermitted ('exempt') wells in a portion of Kittitas County. The graphic below is from David Lester's story in the Yakima Herald-Republic.

Well, we've had some new developments since then.

Yesterday, state Attorney General Rob McKenna's office issued an opinion stating that the Department of Ecology can halt new groundwater appropriations, upholding its temporary moratorium on new wells in upper Kittitas County.

The wells originally in question are unpermitted or so-called 'exempt' wells, often used to supply water to individual homes. The Department of Ecology issued the ban in July 2009, claiming the wells were impairing streamflows and senior water rights.

State and local officials had asked the AG's office to weigh in. It did, allowing the Department of Ecology to ban both new permitted and unpermitted wells. But the department cannot impose stricter limits on exempt well withdrawals than those already allowed under state law.

Read more from Associated Press writer Sharon Dininny's story in The Seattle Times.

I am curious to see if there are any ripple effects from this opinion. Exempt wells are hot topics throughout the Western USA and other areas as well.

“I would not waste my life in friction when it could be turned into momentum.” -- Frances Willard

Noah Hall: Protecting Freshwater Resources in the Era of Global Markets - Lessons From Bottled Water

Noah Hall, who runs the excellent Great Lakes Law blog, recently posted an item, Protecting Freshwater Resources in the Era of Global Water Markets: Lessons Learned from Bottled Water. The post is based on an article of the same name that will be published in the University of Denver Water Law Review. You can download a prepublication copy.

I like the points he makes, especially about how disputes involving bottled water have led to meaningful reforms in our water laws, especially regarding groundwater.

Here are the abstract and conclusion.

Abstract:

Throughout human history, water has defined our sense of place.  American water law reflects the connections between water and local people, communities, and the environment.  Against this backdrop, global water markets have developed to sell and export this increasingly precious resource.  Water markets are recognized in international trade law and take many forms, from tankers of freshwater crossing the Mediterranean to bottles of spring water coming to America from distant pacific islands.  While the scale of water sales and exports is still relatively small, this emerging market represents a new challenge for management of water resources.

This article examines the challenge of protecting freshwater resources in the era of global water markets by looking at the most mature and developed example – bottled water.  Bottled water in America dates back to colonial times, but over the past decade it has become a massive global industry.  As bottled water has grown, so has the backlash against it.  The resulting lawsuits and legislation offer a glimpse of the future of domestic water law in the global water market era.  Bottled water fights provide important lessons for how the law should (and should not) respond to globalization of water use.  By learning from these lessons, we can meet the challenge of global trade in water by developing effective legal protections for our freshwater resources.

Conclusion:

Along with climate change, globalization may be the most significant challenge for state water law in the twenty first century.  The pressures on water resources are no longer limited to local users and property owners, but now include supply for a global water market.  Bottled water is the oldest and most mature water market that transcends state lines.  Bottled water disputes have forced state courts and political leaders to reevaluate old doctrines and water management regulations.  In most cases, bottled water disputes have lead to meaningful and useful legal reforms, especially in the area of groundwater management.  However, in some cases bottled water disputes have exposed problematic flaws in state water law and protectionist knee-jerk reactions by state political leaders that would do nothing to better protect water resources.

Unsatisfied by modest reforms in the courts and legislatures, bottled water opponents have turned their hopes to the public trust doctrine and taxing water bottlers, strategies with significant legal and political weaknesses.  Instead, bottled water opponents and state leaders should take the challenge of bottled water as an opportunity to further reform water management law with an emphasis on resource protection, science-based decision making, and water conservation.  These approaches will help protect water resources from the pressures of globalization while respecting property rights and international trade law rules.

Good stuff!

“O Lord, help me not to despise or oppose what I do not understand.” --William Penn

Cadiz is Now a 'Conservation' Project

In the past five weeks or so I have posted a number of items about the ill-fated Cadiz Groundwater Storage and Dry-Year Supply Program.

Emily Green has done all the heavy lifting on this, so I'll invoke her once more: she now reports that the aforementioned project has morphed into a 'conservation' project.

You can hear all about it on KPCC's AirTalk radio program: Scott Slater (General Counsel of Cadiz, Inc.), Elden Hughes (Sierra Club), Richard Sierra (San Bernardino Union of Carriers, Building & Construction Laborers, Local 783) and Green discuss the project.

I'll let you guess who's for it and who's against it.

Like a bad penny, this thing keeps coming back.  

“You cannot depend upon your eyes when your imagination is out of focus.” -- Mark Twain

Red Snow Warning: The End of Welfare Water and the Drying of the West

Chip Ward's essay appeared in The Huffington Post a few days ago. I highly recommend it, but it's not for the faint-hearted.

Thanks to Elaine Hebard for alerting me to this.

Ward discusses the Colorado River basin:

The West is as dry as the East is wet, a vast and arid landscape of high plains and deserts broken by abrupt mountain ranges and deep canyons. Unlike eastern and midwestern America, where there are myriad rivers, streams, lakes, and giant underground lakes, or aquifers, to draw on, we depend on snowpack for about 90% of our fresh water. The Colorado River, running from its headwaters in the snow-loaded mountains of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming, is the principal water source for those states, and downstream for Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, and southern California as well.

While being developed into a crucial water resource, the Colorado became the most dammed, piped, legislated, and litigated river in America. Its development spawned a major federal bureaucracy, the Bureau of Reclamation, as well as a hundred state agencies, water districts, and private contractors to keep it plumbed and distributed. Taken altogether, this complex infrastructure of dams, pipelines, and reservoirs proved to be the most expensive and ambitious public works project in the nation's history, but it enabled the Southwest states and southern California to boom and bloom.

The downside is that we are now dangerously close to the limits of what the Colorado River can provide, even in the very best of weather scenarios, and the weather is being neither so friendly nor cooperative these days. If Portland soon becomes as warm as Los Angeles and Seattle as warm as Sacramento, as some forecasters now predict, expect Las Vegas and Phoenix to be more like Death Valley.

If the Colorado River shut down tomorrow, there might be two, at most three, years of stored water in its massive reservoirs to keep Los Angeles, San Diego, Phoenix, Las Vegas, and dozens of other cities that depend on it alive. That margin for survival gets thinner with each passing year and with each rise in the average temperature. Imagine a day in the not so distant future when the water finally runs out in one of those cities -- a kind of slow-motion Katrina in reverse, a city not flooded but parched, baked, blistered, and abandoned. If the Colorado River system failed to deliver, the impact on the nation's agriculture and economy would be comparable to an asteroid strike.

A little more to whet your appetite:

Sure, everyone agrees that we have to change, but we in the West are fond of focusing blame on personal bad habits that waste water -- and they couldn't be more real -- rather than corporate habits that waste so much more. The fact is that we Westerners have never paid anything like what our water truly costs and we lack disincentives to waste water and incentives to conserve it. Behind all that fuss you hear from us about the damn government and how independent-minded we Westerners are, is a long history of massive dam and pipeline projects financed by the American taxpayer, featuring artificially low prices and not a few crony-run boondoggles. Call it welfare water.

You can read more of his essays here.

"Human populations in the West will also shift and dwindle, with jarring consequences for all of America, if we do not learn quickly that watersheds have limits, especially within arid and unpredictable climates." -- Chip Ward

Stygoscape: Fall 2009 Issue

Check out the latest issue of Stygoscape, the newsletter of the Transboundary Ground Water Interest Group (TBGWIG) of the National Ground Water Association.

Another great job by founding editor Todd Jarvis!

"If I could read English I would put this at the top of my list." -- Moses

Will the Pacific Northwest Become Drier?

Some of us in the Pacific Northwest have become smug about global warming. We have been led to believe that  "conventional wisdom"  (whatever that is) suggests that as the Pacific Northwest warms, the total amount of precipitation and runoff (streamflow) will remain about the same as it is now, but the character of both will change: more of the precipitation will occur as rain and more of the runoff will come earlier in the year as snow melts earlier. Our "conventional wisdom" is based primarily upon the results of coupled global warming - hydrologic models. 

But now the Oregonian reports the results of a new study by USFS researchers suggesting "conventional wisdom" may be incorrect. The studies that led to "conventional wisdom" were based on mean or median values of precipitation; the current study looked at the driest 25% of years since 1948 and found that runoff decreased by 30% or more in most stream and by nearly 50% in some basins.

From Joe Rojas-Burke's story:

Researchers with the U.S. Forest Service looked for changes in the amount of water flowing out of mountain basins since 1948 at 43 rivers and streams across Oregon, Washington, Idaho and western Montana.

Few rivers showed significant declines in runoff until researchers isolated the driest 25 percent of years.

Then nearly three-quarters of river basins showed severe decreases in water flow. Runoff fell by 30 percent or greater in most streams, and by nearly 50 percent at some locations during dry years.

"And those are really important years," says study author Charlie Luce, a Forest Service research hydrologist in Boise.

"Those are the years that test the trees, whether they live, die, or catch on fire. Those are the years that test the fish, that test the farmers and the water managers." The journal Geophysical Research Letters published the study online Aug. 22.

Rojas-Burke reminds us that the Luce study does not prove that dry years are getting drier because of less rain and snow, just that rivers run much lower than they formerly did.

The story continues:

"It is not clear whether precipitation is decreasing, or whether water use is increasing," says Julia Jones, an associate professor in the department of forest ecosystems and society at Oregon State University. [Note: Jones is actually a professor in the Department of Geosciences.]

In the Northwest, forests consume huge amounts of water. Dense, tall stands of native Douglas firs can soak up more than 40 percent of the precipitation that falls in a river basin.

Several land use changes since the 1950s have tended to increase water use, Jones says. Fire suppression has allowed forests to expand in some basins. Clear-cutting of old growth and replanting young, fast-growing trees has increased water consumption in summer. In some watersheds, deep-rooted trees that extract more water than grasses are overtaking abandoned farm fields and pastures.

Warmer springs and falls, due to climate change, could extend the growing season of trees and shrubs -- and their water intake.

No matter the cause, if the trends are real, Jones says, the potential for water conflicts will increase.

Jones' point is a good one.

The story concludes:

"Climate models embody the theory as we understand it," Luce says. "Now we've got a new set of observations that don't quite agree with the theory. People can go out and refine the theory."

Read a copy of the abstract.

As far as I'm concerned, this story illustrates the fact that we haven't yet figured out climate change effects on water resources in the Pacific Northwest. Even if "conventional wisdom" proves correct, we'll still have problems. But with less precipitation and runoff, those problems will intensify.

"Some days I’m optimistic. And then I have my Cassandra days.” -- Philip Mote, Director, Oregon Climate Change Research Institute

California Dreamin': Legislature Fails to Pass Water Bills

California's water crisis continues. The legislature failed to pass legislation to 'solve' the state's water crisis.

Read all about it from Emily Green and Aquafornia.

“Don’t send me Mickey Mouse bills. Send me the big stuff.” -- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA), to the California legislature

Southeast USA Water: Shoulds, Shouldn'ts, and Some Wouldas, Couldas

Susan Percy published this piece in the September 2009 issue of Georgia Trend. It deals with the current state of water affairs vis-a-vis Georgia, Florida, and Alabama. And, of course, that 800-pound gorilla,  the Atlanta metro area.

Thanks to Dorian Roffe-Hammond for sending this my way.

I've posted a number of items about this issue - the last one on 21 August 2009 called for a watermaster (or special master) to resolve issues in the ACF Basin. That last post contains links to my other posts.

Here's Percy's article:

OK, so a federal judge has said that the Army Corps of Engineers shouldn’t have allowed Atlanta to draw water from Lake Lanier for all these years, and that the metro region should have reined in its rampant growth and even that Atlanta’s leaders should have thrown a little money at the Buford Dam project when they had the chance, back in 1948.

That’s a lot of shoulds and shouldn’ts.

I have a few of my own to add: The governors of Georgia, Florida and Alabama should have been more responsible and aggressive in seeking a resolution to the water dispute – they had nearly 20 years to work on it. They shouldn’t have procrastinated and postured, simply because that was easier and less politically risky in the short term. They shouldn’t have left the matter to be resolved in federal court. They should have exhibited, individually and collectively, some leadership.

Politicians in Georgia and adjoining states who need a scapegoat should check their facts before they claim that any and all problems, water-wise or otherwise, are Atlanta’s fault. They should take the time to figure how much of their economic well-being is tied to Atlanta’s.

And the Army Corps of Engineers, hardly the brightest bulb on the circuit even in good times, should have been a lot smarter about clarifying its authority, its information and its procedures and should have picked up the pace in terms of updating its operating manual.

Three years ago I sat in on a hearing in Gainesville during which Georgia’s Senators Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson and Congressman Nathan Deal took the Corps of Engineers to task over several matters, including its egregiously-outdated operating manual and the 22-billion gallon “mistake” the Corps made that dropped the water level in Lake Lanier by almost two feet during the drought. The Corps attributed the error to a faulty gauge.

Chambliss told the Corps’ South Atlantic Division commander, “If that kind of mistake was made on the battlefield, it would have cost American lives.”

This is not a governmental body with an impeccable track record, as residents of New Orleans might attest to.

But here’s the real point: Some 3.5 million American citizens who happen to live in the Metro Atlanta region are dependent on water released from Lake Lanier. Some were born here. Some moved here for work, for school, for family reasons, or simply because they took a liking to the place. I’m guessing very few of them actively entered into a conspiracy to eliminate mollusks in Florida.

(Understand, I don’t take environmental concerns lightly; any resolution of the water wars, whether it comes from the states or Congress, has to address the impact on the whole region’s environment, as well as the needs of the people who live here.)

Those 3 million-plus Metro Atlantans have a right to be here. Appropriately, they didn’t have to apply for permits or ask permission to relocate. They are not squatters. Very few of them entered the state and took up residence illegally. Some of them probably came from Alabama and Florida. But they are Georgians now, and they deserve their fair share of available water.

So let’s get on with finding a solution, even though that task has been made more difficult by the judge’s ruling and the three-year timeline he imposed.

Gov. Sonny Perdue has indicated Georgia will consider several options, including appealing the judge’s decision, working closely with the state’s Congressional leaders and reaching out to other parts of the country that find themselves in a similarly vulnerable position relating to their water supplies.

But perhaps the most encouraging response came in the form of the special task force the governor has appointed. He might have come late to the water-problem party, but he has brought some 130 business and government leaders, headed by Georgia Power CEO Mike Garrett, to help find a solution.

The business community’s involvement brings to the table a group of people who understand the value of planning, evaluating, negotiating, strategizing and acting – not just putting off decisions so someone else gets to deal with it.

They should make a real difference.

I generally liked her viewpoint. My thoughts on Ms. Percy's column:

• She's not a big fan of the Corps of Engineers (Duhhh...). 
• Does Gov. Sonny Perdue's task force contain only business and government leaders? Didn't they help create this mess? How about a variety of stakeholders? Environmentalists. Academics. Laypersons. Small business owners. Outsiders.
• Is the governor reaching out to his Florida and Alabama counterparts? How about a tri-state task force? Maybe it'll work this time. All three states must develop a solution.
• She seems to hold Atlanta almost totally faultless (see fourth paragraph). Perhaps if the Atlanta metro area's leaders had faced the reality that the local water resources could not support such poorly-planned growth today's situation would not be so grave.
• She's right about the importance of metro Atlanta to the region's economy. and there has been some scapegoating.
• Ain't hindsight wonderful! But let's learn from the past.

Still think a watermaster or special master would be a good thing.

"We don't give a damn how you done it up North" -- popular bumper sticker in the southern USA

The 'Green Guide' to California's $12B Gamble

Emily Green has assembled a great guide to the $12B legislative package that the California legislature is considering. The deadline is this Friday.

Enjoy!

“I love California, I practically grew up in Phoenix." -- former Vice President Dan Quayle

“California is where you can't run any farther without getting wet." -- Neil Morgan

Water as a Weapon of Mass Destruction

The recent news from the Korean Peninsula reminded me of how water might be used as a weapon of mass destruction. In case you missed it, South Korea demanded an explanation for high flows on the transboundary Imjin River that swept away six South Koreans. The North Koreans, who have a dam on the river, explained that excessively high inflows forced them to release  a large amount of water from the reservoir behind the dam.

Not everyone in South Korea is buying the explanation - at least not yet:

Members of South Korea's ruling Grand National Party have demanded an apology, describing the incident as "an unpardonable criminal act".

However, Seoul said on Monday that it did not view the latest incident as deliberately provocative.

Here is a map of the area from the BBC article:

I'm not claiming the North Koreans did this intentionally, but there has been at least one previous instance where:

North Korean dams have previously released water without prior announcement, damaging agriculture south of the border but Sunday's incident was the first to claim lives.

There are a number of dams in North Korea on transboundary rivers. North Korea needs them for hydroelectric power, but if it chose to, it could issue large releases that would cause great damage in South Korea. One Asian hydrologist told me that if it wanted to, North Korea could "float Seoul out to sea." So water could be used as a WMD.

I know a Bangladeshi who claims that India often releases large flows down the Ganges without consulting Bangladesh. He's not claiming any malice on India's part, but obviously, if this is true, India is unloading water it doesn't want flooding its country and "providing" it to Bangladesh, which can't do anything with it except watch it float some of its land out to sea.

We can easily imagine how the withholding or poisoning of water could be an act of war, but so could a water release be considered such an act.

There are any number of cases around the world where catastrophic releases of water could be used as a WMD. Your neighbor has a large dam upstream of you, and the next thing you know... Another thing to worry about!

"At this point we still wouldn't quite call it a water assault." -- Won Tae-jae, South Korean defense ministry spokesman

Cookin' the Books on the San Joaquin: The More Things Change...

Peter Gleick's blog post of a few days ago reminded me of my high-school French: "Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose." That phrase is often translated as "The more things change, the more they remain the same."

In Peter's case, "things" mean "benefit-cost (B/C) ratios" for a water project, in this case a U.S. Bureau of Reclamation water project, theTemperance Flat Dam and reservoir on the San Joaquin River.  Call me Paul E. Yanna, but I thought we'd progressed beyond the point where Federal water projects presented bogus B/C numbers. People had caught on to that scam, as occasionally practiced not only by the BuRec but also the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

But I was wrong.

The BuRec calculated a B/C of 1.06 for the aforementioned project. Sounds good, right? Benefits > costs, right? But Gleick calls the BuRec out on just a (sarcasm alert) few 'minor' points:

The new reservoir will destroy riverine spawning habitat for American shad and striped bass, it will destroy nearly half of the trout habitat in the study area, and it may completely extirpate the shad population (among other ecological impacts they acknowledge but don't quantify). What value does the BoR assign in their benefit/cost to these ecosystem losses? Zero.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/gleick/detail?blogid=104&entry_id=46970#ixzz0QNr4a7Vd

1) Zero value assigned to the destruction of the habitats of several fish species

2) Zero value assigned to the loss of recreational use by rafters and kayakers

3) Zero value assigned to the loss of sacred Native American sites

He's got some other good examples (e.g., inflated benefits) in his post.

Gleick makes the excellent point that, even after inflating benefits and neglecting costs, the best the BuRec could come up with was a B/C of 1.06. Hardly a real winner.

What's next? A "cash register" dam?

"If you dam a river it stagnates. Running water is beautiful water. So be a channel." -- English proverb

V.B. Price Commentary: Future Water Trouble for Western River Cities

I should file this (facetiously) under Tell me something I don't know. 

V.B. Price is a long-time observer of New Mexico politics, environmental issues, human rights, etc. He is what you might call an 'institution'.

A few days ago he published this commentary in the New Mexico Independent.  It paints a rather dismal picture for those areas reliant on the Colorado River. And I thought I was pessimistic about my former home for many years!

Here are the first few paragraphs: 

When your neighbors are in trouble, chances are you’re in trouble too.

Look around southwest and mountain west America. Everywhere you’ll find major cities from Los Angeles to Denver, and Las Vegas to Phoenix worried sick about their water supply – as well they should be.

If the Colorado river continues to dry up and western drought becomes a perpetual hazard as current predictions have it, Las Vegas, Nevada will be facing a Katrina-like catastrophe, only this time it won’t be about flooding, but about running dry. Some 90 percent of Las Vegas’s water comes from the diminishing Colorado River. Phoenix, Tucson, Denver and Los Angeles are in different boats, but their ponds are shrinking too.

And New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming — the “upper basin” states in the Colorado [River] Compact of 1922— have “junior” water rights to California, Arizona, and Nevada, the states that comprise the “lower basin.” And that means in a crisis, upper basin states won’t get their water until lower basin states have theirs.

But when push comes to shove in really tough times, California gets its water first, trumping all other states.

The remainder of his Price's commentary is just as provocative, although I agree with commenter 'Steve  Davis' about the CR Compact. [Note: Stephen B. Davis, Jr. represented New Mexico on the Colorado River Commission, which negotiated the Colorado River Compact -see John Fleck's post.]

And Ray Walker, he of the 'Source' fame , is also there as a commenter, peddling his 1 million acre-feet that he claims will keep Lake Mead full.

I think I need to close this with my favorite New Mexico quote, by the author of Ben-Hur.

"Every calculation, based on experience elsewhere, fails in New Mexico." -- former Territorial Gov. Lew Wallace, 1878.

Mexico City's Looming Water Disaster

Stephanie Moore sent me this link to a story by Dudley Althaus that recently appeared in the Houston Chronicle. Althaus documents the dire water situation in Mexico City and its outlying areas, home to about 22 million people.

To those of us in hydrogeology, Mexico City has long been known as the 'poster child' (along with parts of the Central Valley of California) for land subsidence. Much of Mexico City is built upon a lake bed; lacustrine (lake) sediments are notoriously fine-grained (small particle size - clay) and susceptible to consolidation when groundwater is pumped. This causes the land surface to subside. Parts of Mexico City have subsided as much as 30 feet (9 meters). 

The photo of the cathedral isn't really a good example of land subsidence due to pumping. For one thing, they have not been pumping large quantities of groundwater for centuries. My guess is that the leaning cathedral is due to differential compaction/consolidation caused by soil properties and/or drainage issues. In other words, it's more a soil mechanics problem than a groundwater pumping one.

Back to Althaus' story.

Taps already are running dry for weeks at a time in large sections of the metroplex, especially in poorer neighborhoods. Officials warn that without extraordinary deluges in the coming weeks, extreme scarcity will stalk the area once the dry season begins in late October.

“We are on a collision course,” said Lorenzo Rosenzweig, director of a Mexico City foundation that finances water studies and other environmental programs. “The whole way we manage this watershed has to be rethought.”

The sierra-encircled basin that holds the Mexican capital was a vast lake bed when the Spaniards took it from the Aztecs nearly 500 years ago. Planners have been draining it ever since to make way for humans, treating the area's water more as a nuisance than a necessity.

That worked pretty well for a very long time. It doesn't any more.

“We've reached the end of a model,” said Arkansas-born Elena Burns, a naturalized Mexican citizen who helped coordinate a recent proposal to re-engineer Mexico City's watershed. “It's not sustainable.”

Decades of explosive population growth and poor planning have badly stressed the aquifers that supply three-quarters of the area's water. Three times as much water is sucked from the basin's aquifers as trickles back into them.

Tunnels today flush most rainfall and sewage runoff to the lowlands northeast of the city and on to the Gulf of Mexico, depriving the groundwater of replenishment. The water flowing daily out of the basin nearly equals the amount pumped into it from aquifers and the distant Cutzamala and Lerma reservoir systems, Burns said.

I did not realize that much of the basin's runoff was exported from the basin. No wonder land subsidence is so prevalent. And sewage runoff, if properly treated, would be a good source of recharge. Burns might want to consult the Orange County Water District. 

In 1995, a National Research Council committee and its Mexican counterparts did a joint study, Mexico City's Water Supply: Improving the Outlook for Sustainability.

A description:

This book addresses the technical, health, regulatory, and social aspects of ground water withdrawals, water use, and water quality in the metropolitan area of Mexico City, and makes recommendations to improve the balance of water supply, water demand, and water conservation. The study came about through a nongovernmental partnership between the U.S. National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council and the Mexican Academies of Science and Engineering. The book will contain a Spanish-language translation of the complete English text.

Might be worth perusing.

One solution...

“There are just too many of us in this city. The earth can't handle so many of us.” -- diner owner Rafaela Camacho, quoted in the story

Abby Brown in India: Impressions of Water in Bangalore

Abby Brown of the Water for the Ages blog,, whom I featured a few days ago, is in India now, in Bengaluru (aka Bangalore), the Silicon Valley of India.

She has posted her first item, Impressions of H20 in Bangalore.

The first few paragraphs: 

Thursday was my first day in Bengaluru (aka Bangalore). Before arriving, it was impossible for me to comprehend the size of the city. Bangalore is huge with a population of around 6.5 million people. This is the largest city that I have ever visited, and there are people, buildings, and vehicles everywhere. Quickly, I am learning to adapt to life (and water) here.

While walking around town, I saw water tankers with pipes going into businesses and buildings. A man from a local restaurant explained to me that the city only provides water on alternate days. On days when the city does not provide water, residents and business owners often buy their own water from private companies. Soon, I will write a detailed post about this complex issue.

Here are some pictures from her flickr site.

"Don't bargain for fish that are still in the water." -- Indian proverb

Review: James G. Workman's 'Heart of Dryness'

Introduction

Almost 30 years ago the enchanting film, The Gods Must Be Crazy, introduced many of us to the Bushmen of the Kalahari in southern Africa. The unlikely star of the film, N!xau, playing the Bushman Xi, encounters technology in the form of a Coke bottle tossed out of a plane. But the bottle soon foments discord among Xi’s compatriots, so he embarks on a mission to throw the evil bottle off the Earth.

 

Now, in 2009, James G. Workman introduces us to the Kalahari Bushmen again through his book, Heart of Dryness: How the Last Bushmen Can Help Us Endure the Coming Age of Permanent Drought. This time around, the tale is not amusing, but downright dismal. Workman describes in excruciating detail the campaign waged by Botswana against its Bushmen

in an effort to drive them from their land onto reservations. It’s not the Bushmen’s water they are after, but their land – De Beers, the diamond conglomerate, wants to mine the area.

[Shill alert: I met James at the 5WWF in Istanbul and found him smart and most enjoyable. His publisher sent me a free copy of his book.]

From the book’s WWW site:

This nonfiction narrative set in the Kalahari dramatizes the timeless struggle over water, the fulcrum of political power. Facing drought, scarcity and climate change the besieged indigenous Bushmen use voluntary survival strategies while Botswana’s government enforces regulatory rule. Their rivalry foreshadows our world, where two in three thirsty humans will soon endure shortages, resource conflict, a $900 billion market, and a global fight for water as a human right.

The WWW site has a number of features, such as an interview with the author, Q&A, etc.

Strong Points

I found the book compelling; Workman is a talented writer and the saga of oppression left me numb. Anyone who can describe the autopsy of someone I didn’t know in such a fashion so as to leave me tear-streaked can certainly write.

He did a superb job of distilling the voluminous material he must have had into a 247-page book, without leaving the impression that the reader was missing something.

 

I really enjoyed Workman's tendency to add various tidbits throughout the text: history, culture, anthropology, linguistics, etc. Some might find this device distracting, but I found that it added to my understanding and appreciation. He also is very thorough; those of you who lust for notes and a detailed bibliography will not be disappointed.

 

Much of the book focuses on Qoxorloo Duxee, the noble matriarch of a band of Bushmen who resists the government’s efforts to force them onto reservations by terminating their access to water and hunting and engaging in the kind of all-around harassment that governments do so adroitly. She struggles to find food and water, using her knowledge of the environment. All the while, she maintains her dignity and purpose.  She truly is heroic. Workman describes her in such a way that we come to know her. And, as you will see, the first three words of the book's title have a strong connection to Qoxorloo. 

 

Water does play a significant role in the story. To force the Bushmen to abandon their homeland, the government cuts off their water. Later, in their suit against the government, the Bushmen claim they have a human right to water. In finding for the Bushmen, the three-judge court does not rule in favor of that right.

 

Workman exposes Botswana, often cited as a model of African democracy and development, as a brutal oppressor. The country is left with a well-deserved ostrich-sized egg on its face, and I’m being very kind. Workman notes that Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe copied some of the techniques used by President Festus Mogae in his oppression of the Bushmen. What an endorsement! Workman is now banned from Botswana, a badge of honor he no doubt wears proudly. 

 

Weak Points

The book occasionally lapses into hyperbole. Some exapmples follow.

 

I took issue with the term “coming age of permanent drought” in the book’s title. Are we to infer a worldwide permanent drought is imminent?  Workman does cite evidence for drought in the following regions: the USA Southwest, Mexico, southern Europe, the Middle East, and sub-Saharan Africa. But the title suggests that the entire world is entering a condition of permanent drought. I do not know of any evidence to suggest such a catastrophic event on a global scale. Some places will dessicate, some will not, and some may even become wetter. My own region of the USA Pacific Northwest will probably remain as wet as it is now, although the character of the precipitation will change (less winter snow, more winter rain).

The word “permanent” is also an extreme descriptor; I’ve been a student of earth science long enough to realize that there are very few permanent things on the face of the Earth. I don't see any evidence that we'll have 'permanent' droughts. Long? Yes.

Workman also believes that government/private water utilities have done a poor job in the USA. On page 245 he states: “Most of these command-and-control structures are now teetering on the brink of physical failure or institutional collapse.” No citation is provided for this provocative statement. If his statement is true, one of the main reasons is that these utilities charge too little for water supply or wastewater treatment services. That is not their fault, but ours, because we do not value water and want it as cheaply as possible. In some cases, utilities cannot charge more for water supply and waste treatment because oversight agencies (i.e., public utility commissions) won’t allow them to do so.

I would also argue his premise that utilities impose “involuntary and uncompetitive rates and quality” on us. By “uncompetitive” does Workman mean that rates are too high? If a water provider is a government-run utility, there are a number of hurdles that must be navigated before rates can be raised.  Some utilities have citizens’ commissions to advise them. In my limited experience, rates are too competitive (see above paragraph) – we need to pay more.

 

So What Should We Do?

Can the insights of the Bushmen help us with our water problems?

Workman notes that the Bushmen have no indigenous word for rival; they have survived in one of the Earth’s harshest, driest environments by cooperating. But as Workman himself notes, there have been instances outside their reserve where Bushmen have not cooperated over water.  So he does not harbor any romantic notions that the Bushmen are inherently ‘better’ than the rest of us when it comes to cooperation over water. Put them outside their element, and they can bicker and fuss just like the rest of us do.

Workman speculates that if the Bushmen were living in our society, they would likely establish political units based upon surface watershed or aquifer boundaries; I suspect Workman’s right.  In the late 1800s John Wesley Powell suggested that the West be politically organized around surface watersheds. Had we followed his advice we might be in better shape than we are now. This same advice has been proffered in nation-building exercises (e.g., Bosnia and Herzegovina) but not universally adopted.   

He suggests that, like Qoxorloo’s band, we reclaim our water rights and responsibilities, and barter among ourselves.  We would each be allocated a certain amount of water, say 100 gallons per person per day, which we could use completely, save and trade excess capacity, etc. “Water trading” is already occurring in the USA, although not quite in the same manner, because all of us don’t have an individual right to water.

Although Workman’s idea is worth considering, I would simply suggest we pay more for water supply and wastewater treatment services, and ensure that there are lifeline rates for those who cannot afford to pay.

One caveat: in attempting to transfer the Bushmen’s practices to our world, keep in mind the scalability issue: what works in a small, relatively homogeneous group may not work as well in a large, heterogeneous society.

WaterWired’s Take

The book is less about water and more about land. The Bushmen don’t have water, they have land, and “there’s diamonds in them thar hills.” The book acknowledges this aspect, but it struck me as far more significant than the water aspect. As far as I’m concerned this does not lessen the impact of the book.

 

Do I recommend the book? Yes. It’s a spellbinding tale, and it may have implications for us all.

 

I'll be reading this again soon for some more insight. I look forward to more from James G. Workman.

One last item: will the Bushmen "help us endure the coming age of permanent drought"? I don't see how. We know what we should be doing; we just don't have the political will to do it. Even the Bushmen can't help us with that.

“We don’t govern water. Water governs us.” – James G. Workman