interviews
Water and the American West
by Richard Frank
October 25, 2021
This interview with Richard Frank, professor of environmental practice at the UC Davis School of Law and Director of the California Environmental Law and Policy Center, was conducted and condensed by franknews.
frank | Can you tell me a little bit about the story of water and how it's tied to the West, and to California in particular?
Richard | A friend of mine who's a Court of Appeals Justice here in California wrote an opinion on a water law dispute and started it with the quote, "the history of California is written on its waters." And I think that the point is true of the entire American West.
Water policy and legal issues are inextricably tied to the development of the Western United States; water is the limiting factor in so many ways to settlement, to economic development, to prosperity, and to the environment and environmental preservation.
Can you talk about the difference between groundwater and surface water– and the policies that regulate each?
There are really two types of water when it comes to human consumption. There's surface water: that is the water that is transmitted by lakes, rivers, and streams. Then there is groundwater, and a substantial amount of water that Americans and the American West rely on is groundwater. That is water that is stored in groundwater aquifers, which are naturally occurring groundwater basins. Both groundwater and surface water are critical to the American West and its economy and its culture.
Traditionally a couple of things are important to note, first of all, water is finite. Second, water gets allocated in the Western United States generally at the state level. There's a limited federal role. Primarily, policy decisions about who gets how much water for what purpose are made state by state.
I think allocation is really interesting in that it's more state-level than federal. How was water and the allocation of water in California designed? Is it a public-private combination? What goes on in terms of the infrastructure of water?
Another very good question. The answer is it depends. Most of our water infrastructure is public in nature.
Again, in the American West, the regulation of water rights is generally done at the state level, but the federal government, historically, has a major water footprint in the American West because it has been federal dollars and federal design and management that really controlled much of the major water infrastructure in the American West — you know, Hoover Dam, and the complex system of dams and reservoirs on the Colorado River in California, with the Central Valley Project that was built and managed by the federal government with Shasta Dam on the upper Sacramento River as the centerpiece of that project. But we also have a California State Water Project, the key facility being the Oroville Dam and reservoir on the Southern River that is managed by state water managers. If we were starting over, that kind of parallel system would make no particular engineering or operational sense.
But, we are captive to our history.
And then you have these massive systems of aqueducts and canals that move water from one place to another throughout the American West. They are particularly responsible for moving water from surface water storage facilities to population centers. In the last 50 to 75 years, these population centers have really expanded dramatically, so you need massive infrastructure to deliver water from those storage facilities, the dams, and reservoirs, which generally are located in remote areas to the population centers. So it takes a lot of time and energy to transport the water, from where it is captured and stored to where it is needed for human use.
California has faced continuous drought – what measures is the state taking now to manage water?
Just to frame the issue a little bit — we have, as I mentioned, a growing population in the American Southwest at a time when the amount of available water is shrinking due to drought and due to the impacts of climate change. We have growing human demand for residential and commercial purposes and at the same time, we have a shrinking water supply. That is a huge looming crisis.
And it is beginning to play out in real-time. You see that playing out in real-time. For example, several different states and Mexico rely on Colorado River flows based on an allocation system that was created in the 1920s, which is overly optimistic about the amount of available water. From the 1920s until now, that water supply has decreased, and decreased, and decreased. Now you have interstate agreements, and in the case of Mexico, international agreements that allocate the finite Colorado river water supplies based on faulty, now obsolete, information. It is a real problem.
What measures do you take now, knowing this information?
If you look at the US Drought Monitor, it is obvious the problem is not limited to the Colorado River. We are in a mega-drought, so cutbacks are being imposed by federal and state water agencies to encourage agricultural, urban, and commercial water users to cut their water use and, and stretch finite supplies as much as possible through conservation efforts.
In California, we have the State Water Resources Control Board, the state water regulator in California, and they have issued curtailment orders. Meaning, they have told water rights holders, many of whom have had those water rights for over a hundred years, that, for the first time, the water that they feel they are entitled to, is not available. Local water districts are also issuing water conservation mandates; the San Francisco water department is doing that, in Los Angeles, the metropolitan water district, is urging urban users to curtail their efforts.
And then agriculture. Agricultural users — farmers and ranchers — have had to get water rights in many cases through the federal government, as the federal government is the operator of these water projects. They have contracts with water users, individual farmers, ranchers, or districts, and they are now issuing curtailment orders. They're saying, we know you contracted for X amount of water for this calendar year, but we are telling you because of the drought shortages we don't have that water to supply. Our reservoirs are low at Lake Shasta or at the Oroville Dam.
When you drive from San Francisco to LA on the five, you see a lot of signage from the agricultural farming community about water. There's apparently some frustration about this. What are the other options for them?
About 80% of all human consumed water goes to agriculture. That is by far the biggest component of water use, as opposed to 20% used for urban and commercial, and industrial purposes.
Over the years, ranchers and farmers, and agricultural water districts assumed that the water would always be there — as we all do.
And the farmers and ranchers have, in hindsight, exacerbated the problem by bringing more and more land into production. You see on those drives between San Francisco and Los Angeles, particularly in the San Joaquin Valley, all these orchards are being planted. Orchards are more lucrative crops than row crops — cotton, alfalfa, and rice. But, if you are growing a row crop, you can leave the land fallow in times of drought.
We don't have to plant. If the water stopped there, or if it's too expensive to get, it may make economic sense, but if you have an orchard or a vineyard it's a high value, those are high value crops, you don't have that operational flexibility and they need to be irrigated in wet years and in dry years. Now, you see these orchards, which were only planted a few years ago, are now being uprooted because the farmers realized that they don't have the water necessary to keep those vineyards and orchards alive. For ranchers, the same thing is true with their herds. They don’t have enough water for their livestock.
The water shortage has never been drier than it is right now. Farmers and ranchers are being deprived of water that they traditionally believed was theirs and they're very understandably, very unhappy about it. They see it as a threat to their livelihood and to the livelihood of the folks who work for them. Their anger and frustration are to be expected, but it's nobody's fault.
To say, as some farmers do, that it is mismanagement by state and federal government officials, I think is overly simplistic and misplaced in the face of a mega-drought. Everybody's going to have to sacrifice. Everybody's going to have to be more efficient in how they use water. All sectors are going to need to be more efficient with the water that does exist.
Looking at this percentage breakdown of water use – is it actually important for individual users to change their water habits?
Well, every little bit helps. When you're talking about homeowners, about 70% of urban water use is for outdoor irrigation. So we're talking parks and cemeteries and golf courses and folks' yards. You know, that used to be considered part of that American dream and the California dream — you would have a big lawn in front of your house and behind your house. Truth be told, that has never made much sense in an arid environment. That's where the water savings in urban areas is critical in the way it really involves aesthetics rather than critical human needs, like water for drinking and bathing and sanitation purposes. There is a growing movement away from big lawns, and away from the type of landscaping that you see in the Eastern US — there is no drought in the Eastern United States. As Hurricane Ida and other recent storms have shown, the problem is too much water, or rather than too little in most of the Eastern United States. So it really is a tale of two countries.
We just need to recognize that the American West is an arid region. It has always been an arid region, we can't make the desert bloom with water that doesn't exist. We need to be more efficient in how we allocate those water supplies. And it seems to me in an urban area, the best way to conserve and most effective way is to reduce urban landscaping, which is the major component of urban water use.
You also write about water markets and making them better – for those who don’t know, what is the water market?
Water markets, that is, the voluntary transfer of water between water users, is more robust in some other Western states. Again Arizona and New Mexico come to mind. California somewhat surprisingly is behind the curve. We are in the dark ages compared to other states. Water markets are kind of anecdotal. There is not much of a statewide system. It is done at the local level, through individual transactions without much oversight and without much transparency. And I have concerns about all of those things.
I believe conceptually watermarks are a way to stretch scarce, finite water resources to make water use more efficient. I can, for example, allow farmers or ranchers to sell water to urban uses or commercial usage or factories in times of drought.
Farmers sometimes can make more money by farming water, than they can by farming crops.
There are efficiencies to be gained here.
The problem in my view is really one of transparency. The water markets are not publicly regulated, and some of the people who are engaging in water transactions like it that way, frankly, they want to operate under the radar.
In my opinion, water markets need to be overseen by a public entity rather than private or nonprofit entities. We need oversight and transparency, so that folks like you and myself can follow the markets to see who's selling water to whom, for what purpose, and make sure that those water transfers serve the public interests and not just the private interests.
There have been a number of stories in the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal and the Salt Lake City Tribune about efforts in some parts to privatize water transfer. Hedge fund managers are buying and selling water, as a means of profiting. And it strikes me that when you're talking about an essential public resource — and in California, it is embedded in the law that public water is an inherently public resource, that water is owned by the public and it can be used for private purposes, but it is an inherently public resource — the idea of commoditizing water through the private, opaque markets is very troublesome to me. I think it represents a very dangerous trend and one that needs to be corrected and avoided.
Why is California so behind?
There's no good reason for it. It's largely inexplicable that since the state was created on September 9th, 1860, we've been fighting over water. In the 19th century, it was miners versus farmers ranchers. In the 20th century, with the growth of urban communities, the evolution of California into one of the most populous states with 40 million Californians, it has been a struggle between urban and agricultural uses of water.
In the second half of the 20th century, there was a recognition that some component of water had to be left in streams to protect ecosystems, landscape, and wildlife, including the threatened and endangered wildlife. That suggestion has made agricultural users in California angry. You will see those signs that allude to the idea that food and farming are more important than environmental values. I don't happen to believe that's true. I believe both are critically important to our society. But the advocates for the environment have a proverbial seat at the water table. So that's another demand for water allocation that exists.
Do you maintain optimism?
Yes. I think it's human nature to look on the bright side. I try to do that through research scholarships and teaching. There are models for how we can do this better in the United States. Israel and Saudi Arabia and Singapore are far more efficient with their water policies and efforts. Australia went through a severe megadrought. They came out of it a few years ago, but they used that opportunity to dramatically reform their water allocation systems. That's an additional model. I think most people would agree in hindsight that their previous system was antiquated, and not able to meet the challenges of climate change and the growing water shortage in some parts of the world.
Here in the United States, we can learn from those efforts. There are also some ways to expand the water supply. Desalination for one. Again, Singapore and Saudi Arabia have led the world in terms of removing the salt content from ocean water and increasing water supply that way. In Carlsbad, California, north of San Diego, we have the biggest desalination plant in the United States right now, and that is currently satisfying a significant component of the San Diego metropolitan areas’ water needs. It's more expensive than other water supplies, but the technology is getting more refined, so the cost of desalinated water is coming down at a time when other water supplies, due to shortages and the workings of the free market are going up.
At some point, they're going to meet or get closer. Unlike some of my environmental colleagues, I think desalination is an important part of the equation.
In a proposal that came up in the recall election, one of the candidates was talking about how we just need to build a canal from the Mississippi River to California to take care of all our problems. That ignores political problems associated with that effort, as well as the massive infrastructure costs that would be required to build and maintain a major aqueduct for 2000 miles from the Mississippi to California. That's just not going to happen. Some of those pie in the sky thoughts of how we expand the water supply, I think, are unrealistic.
interviews
Brooklyn, Borderless Art and The Legacy of BAM
by frank
October 5, 2018
Holly Shen is the newly appointed Deputy Director of San Jose Museum of Art, and is a 2018 92Y Catherine Hannah Begrend Women inPower Fellow. This interview was conducted when Holly was the Director and Curator of Visual Arts at BAM.
This interview was conducted and condensed by frank news.
frank: You're a curator at Brooklyn Academy of Music. A place known for its programming, and also for being situated in a place with a complex legacy. Tell me more about that.
Holly: I could talk for hours about this. Where do I even start? BAM started making a name for itself in the late 60s, early 70s, and then in 1983 launched the Next Wave Festival. Actually, up until 2014 we used to run a bus from Manhattan to bring audiences out to the borough because it was considered this thing where you would never go to Brooklyn.
The area around BAM at that time was completely raw, derelict. And really since the early eighties, it's been a slow build of culture. Our former president, Karen Hopkins, pioneered the way and launched a campaign to develop a cultural district in downtown Brooklyn. For a long time, it was called the BAM cultural district. And in 2014 we stopped running the bus because at that point, Brooklyn had arrived as its own destination.
BAM has always had a longstanding relationship with visual artists, too, either through their collaborations with theater artists or choreographers on the main stage, but also in more organic ways. We had a program in the late nineties where we commissioned visual artists to create original works of art in collaboration with other cultural organizations, that would then premier during the season.
We were also the home for presenting original collaborations between iconic artists like Merce Cunningham, John Cage, and Robert Rauschenberg. And we've been trying to carry that legacy through. Our audience is coming here to see new, experimental theater work. They're interested in opera, dance, film, and they're open to new experiences. That was the impetus for a public presence of art. The minute you walk through the door, you see these installations and you're primed for that creative experience.
And in the early years of the program, there was definitely a focus on Brooklyn-based artists because at that time, in the early 2000s, Brooklyn was still not a destination the way it is today.
When I started in 2013, I wanted to expand that focus to mirror the art that we bring in in all of our spaces. International contemporary artists, artists that are dealing with themes that are relevant to Brooklyn as a borough, and as a community, but not necessarily based here. I've really tried to broaden it, and also strengthen the interdisciplinary approach.
Can you tell me more about how BAM addresses access and inclusion within the museum?
Holly: That's something that we’ve been focusing a lot on in the last 2-3 years. We have begun a new initiative – starting internally first which we refer to as DEI - Diversity Equity and Inclusion, and that inclusion part is directly related to access.
This idea of making sure that all of the exhibition spaces that we program are open to the public because to see a show you have to purchase a ticket. We wanted to make the art accessible. The gallery that's adjacent to the lobby is open whenever the building's open, and it's interesting to see the types of people that come through the door.
We have a robust, amazing education program, there's school age children that are coming through as well to see matinees or afternoon performances, or pieces that are modified for education context. I also try to keep that in mind in terms of the shows that I program.
Are there programs at BAM that are drawn directly from the diversity of Downtown Brooklyn?
Holly: We have a program called Dance Africa, which is the longest running public program at BAM. We just finished our 41st year. It's the nation's largest festival of African dance, and it's a celebration of the African diaspora.
Each year we select a country to focus on within the African diaspora, and we bring a dance company from that country over, premier the work, and then they work with Bed-Stuy Restoration a nonprofit based in Brooklyn. that does a lot of arts education. The visiting company works with high school students to develop a main stage dance.
To pivot a bit, how do you think younger generations interfacing with art online is changing the way that they interface with it in public?
Holly: I think my perspective on social media and the way that the digital experience is changing how people interact with and understand art. I try to focus on the positives of it. Generally you can look at it as a way that more and more people are being introduced to art. The big positive is that it’s a way to get them interested and curious..
It gets more challenging for people that are more squarely in the contemporary art space because, yeah, you do feel this dilution of content. The fact that when you're looking at your Instagram feed, you're seeing all of the openings and all of the shows, and it also creates that fear of missing out moment. There's so much to do and see in New York, and when you're flipping through your social media feed, it can be overwhelming. Content overload.
Do you see museums and public art institutions as a service? How would you categorize museums?
Holly: It's interesting because the old, traditional model of a museum was sort of this space to care for a collection. And I think the word curate, cura, also comes from that word to care for. And I think the contemporary interpretation of that is how do you care for concepts or ideas that are relevant to a public?
I definitely think that there is accountability. That's another theme that we think a lot about here at BAM. How do you hold institutions accountable? BAM is part of what's called the cultural institutions group in New York. It's an elite group of cultural nonprofits that includes Bronx Zoo, Brooklyn Botanical Gardens, the Met Museum; it was a program to preserve the cultural institutions and keep them public.
The idea of institutional accountability is important when you're thinking about access too. I mean, if you're talking about a private museum like The Whitney, I think one could try to make the argument that because it's a private institution, there's a different set of standards. But when your reputation and influence is at that level, you are still accountable. It’s a fascinating idea to think about.
Audience development is another concept that's new in the last 10 or 20 years. The idea that you don't just have this static collection, and whoever's interested in it comes to see it, but you really have this responsibility to develop and cultivate an audience. And to do that, you have to think a little bit more strategically about the types of experiences that you're offering.
Even adding a position of curator of performance art is something that is new in the last 20 or 30 years. There's a big ground shift underway with the way that people think about museums and public cultural institutions more broadly.
Do you think at museums there's room or tolerance anymore for curating without a social mission attached?
Holly: You mean like very scholarly work? Yeah. I do. I think that a lot of the more elite university museums, where you're really focusing on scholarship, or academic work, more historic. If we're talking about contemporary art, you're really talking about 1960 onward. Things that fall more squarely into modern art, yes, I still think that there's a place for that and in certain contexts it's definitely appropriate.
You've touched a lot on creating art for the community, and I come here really cognizant of the fact that New York is so museum rich and art rich. Does New York, does Brooklyn, does BAM, do these rich cultural centers have an obligation and a service and a responsibility to America as a whole?
Holly: I do think that there's a huge responsibility, and there are several initiatives at some museums underway to take things off sight. San Jose Museum of Art is a great example. They are working on a whole initiative called the borderless museum. They're in Silicon Valley. They're the center of the tech world, and they're really focusing on creating programs that can be applicable or accessible to audiences beyond your brick and mortar space.
Another great example of that is 92Y’sBelfer Center for Social Impact. They work on programs that act like a movement in that it can be picked up and scaled globally; the idea of a meme, and then it can be implemented on a national, or even on a global level.
I grew up in Cleveland, Ohio, and even from a young age, my parents always took me to the Cleveland Museum of Art, which has an amazing collection. They have one of the best medieval collections in the country, and I credit my interest in art to being exposed at a very young age.
Nobody thinks of Cleveland as a thriving metropolis, but they do have the bones. Cultural organizations are there, and now they have a contemporary art museum as well.
When you're in New York, it's easy to think that everything is focused on this region, or that the programs that we're developing are only for this constituent group, but more and more, especially with the rise of digital platforms, I think that's shifting, and people are feeling energized or excited about the idea of developing programs that can really be scaled up on a national level and don't require a direct connection to a physical space.
That's so great.
Holly: One other thing that I've been interested in in the last two years is the idea of art and social justice. How art can be a transformative platform for that.
A great example is Hank Wills Thomas's For Freedoms. They're launching this 50 state campaign to commission artists to create works that are unabashedly political in nature, which is something I think for a long time artists shied away from, or was very naval gazing kind of work, and now it's being embraced as sort of like, "No, art is really this conduit for understanding, for exploration of themes, of issues that affect all Americans."
And the idea is that they want billboards in all 50 states. I think that also goes back to your question of are we only focused on the urban centers? And, no, I think artists are interested in perpetuating their message or their art in a really broad, public context, and not necessarily just in these urban centers. Because as we've seen, the rest of America matters. It really does. We have to bring that education and access to everyone.
Yeah. Art and activism is very much alive and well as it turns out.
Absolutely. Absolutely. Yeah. Thanks so much Holly.