Water issues brought to the forefront

[RosieTR]

I've been thinking a lot about water recently. One story that recently came to light after the flood was that in order to save the one remaining water line to the city, engineers and city officials had to move a river (http://bcove.me/nolj4uho) in just a few days. The time lapse is pretty incredible. OTOH, a different river whose banks burned last summer and was in danger of going dry instead ran black (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vU6neu_Ck9s), but this year was scoured clean by the flood. That one went from being in the worst shape in the region to being in the best, possibly even more pristine than any time in recent history. Other rivers and creeks are generally contaminated and full of sediment, and will take time to restore. It's been an interesting two years where water has been concerned, and while I was fairly aware of water before I think I'm even more cognizant of its precariousness. Some say it's going to be THE issue of this century when all is said and done, and now I'm tending to wonder if they're correct. Parts of the west where water has always been a big deal are going to increasingly face problems with competing interests: cities, especially suburbia; agriculture; recreation and now energy since fracking uses quite a lot of water as well. I'm not sure how it will all shake out, but I will be certainly paying more attention!

[Tussiemussies]

Yes I have been paying attention to the fracking issue. Don't know how all of the water problems will work out but I hope we leave decent water for future generations...

[bae]

Well, the handy thing is that water falls from the sky all on its own. So if you don't base your civilization on pumping water out of aquifers faster than the recharge rate, and you don't foul the places it accumulates, no worries.

If you screw up though, well.....

[Rogar]

Well, the handy thing is that water falls from the sky all on its own. So if you don't base your civilization on pumping water out of aquifers faster than the recharge rate, and you don't foul the places it accumulates, no worries.

If you screw up though, well.....

Not to forget agricultural runoff, which is a huge issue. I think each region or part of the world faces it's own set of unique issues with either water quality or availibility.

"In the 2000 National Water Quality Inventory, states reported that agricultural nonpoint source (NPS) pollution was the leading source of water quality impacts on surveyed rivers and lakes, the second largest source of impairments to wetlands, and a major contributor to contamination of surveyed estuaries and ground water."
​http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/agriculture.cfm

[Gardenarian]

I worry about this a lot, living on the California coast - all of our water is imported from the Sierra (almost 200 miles.) If something were to go wrong, this would be a dead zone.

What ground water there is, is at danger now from fracking.
Horrors.

[ApatheticNoMore]

I've heard predictions that many places will be near dead zones in terms of human habitation in a few decades, I could very well see it (reason 10 million and 1 not to buy property here - as if one needed reasons). Central valley agriculture in California depends also on aquifiers that are being depleted. On the coast though ... desalinization? Of course the ocean is pretty polluted ... and what happens to the extra salt anyway? What's the status of the fracking approval in California, did it pass?

[Gardenarian]

Yes, it passed, but with a lot of controls. Technically, fracking is "under environmental review" in California, though it is happening in some areas.

[bae]

I've heard predictions that many places will be near dead zones in terms of human habitation in a few decades, I could very well see it...

Well, if you are living in a place reliant on importing water or depleting fossil aquifers, or agricultural practices that produce a yearly loss of topsoil and require fossil-fuel energy inputs, and using fossil fuels to run your vehicles and power generation, I'm thinking long-term you are looking at some serious trouble.

Good luck out there!

http://www.worldofstock.com/slides/TAC4663.jpg

[puglogic]

That's much of the western United States. Which puts us in a pretty dicey place indeed.

I feel terrible for New Mexico, whose governor is (also) fracking-friendly as ours is. A state where some farmers are now selling water -- after drawing it from the aquifer -- to sell to natural gas drillers in order to pay their bills and keep their farms. It's crazy where we've gotten ourselves. http://kunm.org/post/new-mexico-s-fracking-legacy And even here in CO: http://www.salon.com/2013/09/25/colorado_flooded_with_fracking_fluid_partner/

[Gregg]

Well, the handy thing is that water falls from the sky all on its own.

When we renovated our house in the CO mountains I included a plan for a rainwater catchment system that could hold excess water to be used as needed for landscaping and a greenbelt for fire protection. The officials at the building department were very nonchalant when telling me that was illegal. Not discouraged and not frowned upon for any sensible reason such as a threat to public safety. Illegal. It seems the downstream owners of the water rights in the Colorado River watershed claimed all the rain that fell on my roof as their own. That is only the tip of the iceberg in the world of fresh water ownership. The proverbial iceberg that is. Most of the real ones are owned by a Swiss conglomerate.

[bae]

It seems the downstream owners of the water rights in the Colorado River watershed claimed all the rain that fell on my roof as their own. That is only the tip of the iceberg in the world of fresh water ownership.

When someone starts to claim that they own the water that falls out of the sky onto my head, he might as well claim he owns the air that I breath. The long-term answer there I suspect involves heads, pikes, and walls.

I live in a place where (oddly for the Pacific NW) water is scarce. The county government actively encourages water catchment systems. They had been happily issuing building permits for years, when they were informed that a water right was required to be issued by the state government for these systems. My state claims ownership of every drop of water. Catch-22 though - there was only one individual at the state offices who could issue the necessary permits, and his position had been unfilled for many, many years, so it was *impossible* to get a water right, even if you wanted to.

The county decided it wasn't their job to enforce state water laws, and so simply continued issuing permits anyways.

Regular water rights applications for more traditional use were also problematic - wait times on applications were on the order of *30 years*. The water system I run just last year was finally issued water rights from some applications that were ~32 years old. That wasn't because of any complexity, it is just because it took that long for them to get around to our applications. When we were granted our rights, if we didn't like the results, we were allowed to resubmit if we wanted, and they'd get right to it - as soon as it came up to the top of the pile again, in another 30+ years...

Quite recently, they changed the organization of the water rights issuing agency in the state, and there's now a pay-to-play option when applying for water rights - if you send in your application with a *huge* extra fee, they bump you to the top of the pile. The fee is large enough that if you are not a huge deep pockets water-bottling company, forget about it.

[Florence]

"The county decided it wasn't their job to enforce state water laws, and so simply continued issuing permits anyways"

God bless 'em!!

[puglogic]

The officials at the building department were very nonchalant when telling me that was illegal. Not discouraged and not frowned upon for any sensible reason such as a threat to public safety. Illegal.


Indeed it is illegal, for most of us here in Colorado. Not that I think it's been enforced much for small-scale catchment, but for large-scale, yes, people have gotten the smackdown. I don't own the rain that falls on my house. But I do catch it all the same, with swales, underground redirection/french drains, and discreet rain barrels. I saved thousands of gallons of water this summer just by being an evil lawbreaker.

[Gregg]

When someone starts to claim that they own the water that falls out of the sky onto my head, he might as well claim he owns the air that I breath. The long-term answer there I suspect involves heads, pikes, and walls.


Agreed. Takes me back to PG&E attempting to claim all the sunshine that fell over their distribution territory. But for a single judge they would've gotten away with it.

One thing worth noting regarding our little hamlet in CO; the 'downstream' extended for well over 1,000 miles and included several million folks who claimed a stake in any rainwater my roof redirected. In the end we ended up with a system very much like pug's, sans the barrels. That would have been blatant. An underground storage tank is more discreet.

[ApatheticNoMore]

I've heard letting the water run to the sea reduces ocean acidification, no small problem. Of course as long as human civilization exists in a place (and quite regardless of whether it should exist in that place - as I see it: that bird has flown, that bridge crossed, at least now) it will need water and if the choice is rainwater or imported water (which also would flow to the sea if it could - the colorado seldom does anymore) then ... But water is part of a much larger system, not so easily owned.