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
39 Years on the Frontline
by Arturo Massol Deyá
February 10, 2019
This interview with Arturo Massol Deyá, professor of microbiology and ecology at the University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez, and member of the board of directors of Casa Pueblo, was conducted and condensed by frank news.
How would you define Energy Democracy?
Se trata de romper la estructura donde unos pocos deciden y explotan a una población cautiva de un modelo de dependencia energética. Democracia energética es ampliar la participación de la gente y de los sectores productivos para que tomen control de su destino. Hay que trascender de ser consumidores al rol de productores y actores principales en un modelo energético que diversifique las fuentes de generación para ser responsable con los espacios comunes, con el ambiente y donde la distribución de la riqueza en la generación de energía beneficie a la mayoría y no solo a unos pocos.
It’s about breaking the structure in which a few decide and exploit a population held captive by a model of energy dependence. Energy democracy is an expansion of the participation by people and productive sectors, enabling them to take control of their destiny. We must transcend from being consumers to becoming producers and main actors in an energy model that diversifies the sources of generation in order to be responsible with our common spaces, with the environment, and where the distribution of wealth in the generation of energy benefits the majority and not just a few.
Is Energy Democracy inherently political?
Absolutamente. Se trata de trastocar una política de monopolios que tienen el poder económico y controlan el poder político por uno donde el poder social cobra mayor importancia.
Can you describe the work you’re currently doing in Puerto Rico?
Casa Pueblo es un proyecto de autogestión comunitaria con 39 años en la defensa y conservación de recursos naturales, culturales y humanos en la municipalidad de Adjuntas, la zona montañosa y eje cafetalero de la Isla. Manejamos dos bosques del Estado, Bosque del Pueblo y Bosque La Olimpia, tenemos fuertes programas de educación incluyendo el Bosque Escuela, la Escuela de Música, un mariposario, cine solar, centro cultural, proyectos de ecoturismo y la primera radio comunitaria Radio Casa Pueblo.
Desde el 1999 operamos con energía solar y tras el paso del Huracán María activamos una respuesta de ayuda humanitaria para el cambio. Incluyó temas de las comunicaciones, apoyo con medicinas y clínicas de salud, alimentos, filtros de agua, acompañamiento cultural con grupos de teatro, pero donde ha destacado la atención del tema energético. Casa Pueblo fue y es un oasis energético para la comunidad. Distribuimos sobre 14,000 lámparas solares para iluminar las noches de familias y mejorar la calidad de vida en medio de la crisis. Mientras hacíamos esto, educamos sobre la utilización de energía solar. Luego energizamos 10 hogares con necesidad médicas especiales como para operar una máquina de diálisis peritoneal o máquinas de terapia respiratoria con pequeñas neveras para el almacenaje de medicamentos como antibióticos e insulina. Luego se energizaron colmados en zonas remotas pensando en el acceso a alimentos además de instalar 55 neveras solares para familias en los campos con necesidades.
En adición a estas intervenciones, Casa Pueblo junto al apoyo de muchos sectores locales y en la diáspora, fundaciones y organizaciones, hemos podido romper la dependencia energética de dos ferreterías, la barbería, una pizzería, el centro agrícola, sobre 40 hogares operan ya como Casa Pueblo, o sea, independientes energéticamente con el sol. Hasta el hogar de envejecientes y el parque de bomberos son energéticamente autosuficientes. El Bosque Escuela tiene un nuevo salón de energía renovable, la torre de transmisión de Radio Casa Pueblo es libre energéticamente y el cine es ahora el Cine Solar. Cambiando el pasaje energético de Adjuntas con generación energética en el punto del consumo para atender necesidades básicas mientras atendemos la emergencia y construimos resiliencia. Hacer esto atiende también la necesidad de intervenciones de activación económica para atender la pobreza que domina la región.
Casa Pueblo is a community self-management project which has spent 39 years in the defense and conservation of natural, cultural and human resources in the municipality of Adjuntas, the mountainous and coffee producing zone of the Island. We manage two state forests, Bosque del Pueblo and Bosque La Olimpia. We have strong education programs including the Bosque Escuela (Forest School), the School of Music, a butterfly farm, solar cinema, cultural center, ecotourism projects and the first community-run radio, Radio Casa Pueblo.
Since 1999 we operate on solar energy, and after Hurricane Maria, we activated a response of humanitarian aid for change. It included communications, support with medicines and health clinics, food, water filters, and cultural programs with theater groups, but with attention focused throughout on the energy issue. Casa Pueblo was and is an energy oasis for the community. We distributed over 14,000 solar lamps to illuminate the night for families and improve quality of life in the midst of the crisis. While doing this, we educated people about the use of solar energy. Then we energized 10 homes for people with special medical needs. This allowed them to operate peritoneal dialysis machines or respiratory therapy machines, with small refrigerators for the storage of medications such as antibiotics and insulin. Then we powered “colmados” (minimarkets) in remote areas - thinking of access to food. We also installed 55 solar refrigerators for rural families.
In addition to these interventions, Casa Pueblo together with the support of many foundations and organizations, both local and in the diaspora, has been able to break the energy dependence of two hardware stores, the local barbershop, a pizzeria, and the agricultural center. Over 40 homes already operate like Casa Pueblo, that is, with solar powered energy independence. Even the senior center and the fire station are energetically self-sufficient. The Bosque Escuela has a new renewable energy room, the broadcast tower of Radio Casa Pueblo is energy independent, and the cinema is now the Solar Cinema. We are changing the energy landscape of Adjuntas with energy generation at the point of consumption to meet basic needs, while we attend to the emergency and build resilience. Doing this also addresses the need for economic activation interventions to address the poverty that dominates the region.
What sort of technology are you dependent on?
Hemos redefinido las fuentes alternas de energía. Para nosotros la fuente de energía primaria es el sol mientras el modelo obsoleto de quemar combustibles fósiles en centrales termoeléctricas se ha convertido en la fuente alterna que debe desaparecer. Además aprovechamos la fuerza del agua en el Bosque Escuela y trabajamos con la Universidad de Michigan un modelo híbrido de usar por el día energía fotovoltaica y biomasa en las noches para reducir la presión de almacenar energía en baterías.
We have redefined alternative sources of energy. For us the primary source of energy is the sun while the obsolete model of burning fossil fuels in thermoelectric plants has become the alternative source that must disappear. We also take advantage of the strength of the water in the Forest School and we’re working with the University of Michigan to develop a hybrid model that uses photovoltaic (solar) energy during the day and biomass at night to reduce the pressure on energy storage.
How have citizens responded to your efforts?
Antes del Huracán María la gente nos consideraba como un grupo de avanzada, pero raro en el tema de energía. Tras el huracán la búsqueda de servicios y ayudas de parte de la comunidad cambió totalmente. Ya no somos minoría, ahora somos un referente de progreso y seguridad energética.
Before Hurricane Maria people thought of us as a progressive environmental group, but saw us as a little weird on the energy issue. After the hurricane, the search for services and assistance from the community changed completely.
Is resilience built into each energy project?
Existen elementos de resiliencia en cada proyecto que hacemos. Pero resiliencia es un concepto mucho más amplio. Hacemos lo que podemos. Son pasos de avance, pero necesitamos mirar más allá hacia una escala de paisaje más amplia.
There is an element of resilience in every project we do. But resilience is a broad concept. We do what we can, but it’s not all that is needed to build resiliency. We need to look beyond local to a broader landscape level.
How has the government or any municipalities responded to the work?
Somos una organización de autogestión comunitaria. No trabajamos con políticos y por nuestras posiciones de cambio en muchas ocasiones el gobierno elige vernos como adversarios. Nosotros confrontamos las imposiciones de arriba hacia abajo e impulsamos la insurrección energética. Es decir, invertimos el proceso de gobierno con un proceso desde la base hacia arriba para impulsar la transformación de nuestra condición de dependencia.
We are a community-based organization, we don’t work with politicians and in many instances the government sees us as adversaries. We are challenging the top-bottom impositions and calling for an energy insurrection, a bottom-up process to transform our condition of dependency.
Do you have plans to scale with the help of government?
Con la gente y otros sectores de la sociedad sí, con el gobierno como tal, Casa Pueblo no. No recibimos fondos del gobierno local ni federal. Puerto Rico es una colonia de los Estados Unidos y por lo tanto, no tenemos un sistema de gobierno democrático y mucho menos ahora con una Junta de Control Fiscal Federal imponiendo políticas en la Isla.
With the people and other sectors of our society, yes. As Casa Pueblo with the government, no. We don’t work with government funds, neither local nor Federal. Puerto Rico is a US colony and therefore, we do not have a democratic government system, much less now with the Federal Fiscal Board dictating policy in the island.
What policy is central to your work?
Estrategias que faciliten que la gente pueda tomar control de sus necesidades energéticas con énfasis en grupos vulnerables y marginados que no tienen los recursos para alcanzar seguridad energética. En lugar del gobierno priorizar en la búsqueda de inversiones externas, deberían ver a la gente primero como una fuente de inversión interna y al alcance para construir un presente energético alterno y no simplemente vender o hipotecar nuestro futuro.
Strategies that will enable people to take control of their energy needs, with special attention on vulnerable and marginalized groups that lack the resources to achieve energy security. Instead of the government seeking outside investments as a priority, they should see the people first as a potential source for community alliance and investment -at the local level- in order to build an alternative energy present instead of mortgaging our future.
Can you explain the march you’re working on in April?
El 21 de abril celebraremos la Marcha del Sol para afirmar la ruta que queremos: un modelo de autosuficiencia energética con fuentes limpias y renovables. Los reclamos incluyen #50conSOL, o sea, que 50% de la demanda energética del país para el 2027 (10mo aniversario del Huracán María) sea con el aprovechamiento del combustible más accesible en el trópico, el SOL en el mismo lugar del consumo (los techos de hogares, de las escuelas y edificios públicos, etc). En el Día de Pascuas y víspera del Día del Planeta Tierra, la Marcha del Sol será un llamado a la responsabilidad planetaria, a reducir nuestra huella ecológica, un llamado a la Resurrección del Planeta con la Insurrección Energética.
On April 21st, we will celebrate the Marcha del Sol (March of the Sun) to affirm the route we want: a model of energy self-sufficiency with clean and renewable sources. The demands include # 50conSOL, that is, that 50% of the country's energy demand be met by the most accessible fuel in the tropics, the SUN, at the point of consumption (the roofs of homes, schools and public buildings, etc.) by 2027 (10th anniversary of Hurricane Maria). On Easter Day and the eve of Earth Day, the March of the Sun will be a call to global responsibility, to reduce our ecological footprint; a call to the Resurrection of the Planet with the Energy Insurrection.