Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Water

Is California on the Brink of Environmental Collapse?

By Rachel Olivieri, AlterNet. Posted September 4, 2008.


California has spared no expense to taxpayers or natural ecosystems to become the most hydrologically altered landmass on the planet.
Advertisement

There is no landmass on Earth quite like California. Here one finds the world's most ancient trees, bristlecone pines, more than 4,700 years old, in the White Mountains; the tallest and largest trees, the coast redwood and giant sequoia, respectively; the highest point in the lower 48 states, Mount Whitney; the lowest and hottest place in the Western Hemisphere, Death Valley; the largest western hemisphere estuary, the Bay Delta; an 800-mile coastline; the most irrigated acres; the most endangered species in the U.S.; the most diverse geology and biodiversity in the U.S.; and the greatest, most ecologically destructive water projects on Earth.

California has spared no expense to either taxpayers or natural ecosystems to attain its status as the most hydrologically altered landmass on the planet. It would surprise few that California was built on gold, greed, extraction, depletion, extinction, dubiously acquired large-landed semi-desert agricultural empires, well-gifted railroad land grants fueling speculative growth, and highly subsidized stolen water -- all comprising a tunnel vision for overextended populations and infinite growth in a world utterly finite.

The incomprehensible vulnerability of California's over-reaching population centers (Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, and San Jose), the projected urban expansion of the Central Valley, and the weight of climate-warming models leaves one haunted by civilization's lack of respect for a river's entitlement to its water and the food systems that it naturally perpetuates.

There's only so much natural wealth covering the 158,302 square miles of California's ten hydrologic regions. When a region overextends its local resources, it must take from another. More than water is diverted; it drains the very wealth of the food chains these waters support in aquatic, terrestrial, and ocean basins.  

With 200 million acre-feet (MAF) of average precipitation spreading over 100 million acres containing 450 known groundwater basins and draining on average 71 MAF of runoff through 20,000 miles of rivers and streams, California has only 1,900 river miles legally protected from dams and diversions. All but one major river remains dam-free, the Smith River on the upper north coast.

About 42 MAF of the state's runoff is captured and diverted through six major systems of reservoirs and aqueducts. This massive infrastructure artificially waters the coastal region from the North Bay to San Diego, and the Sacramento Valley through the San Joaquin Valley into the Tulare Basin, the Mojave Desert, and the southernmost Imperial and Coachella valleys.

Before the Spanish arrived in 1769, there were only twelve large natural lakes in California -- Lake Tahoe, Lower Klamath, Goose, Tule, Honey, Eagle, Clear, Mono, Owens, Kern, Buena Vista, and Tulare Lake. Today the latter four are devoid of aboriginal wildlife and have been dewatered for agriculture. Tulare Lake, a once-thriving ecosystem in the lower San Joaquin Valley, was four times the area of Lake Tahoe. Today, 1,200 non-federal dams and 181 large federal dams with their reservoirs temporarily dominate a contrived oasis that is doomed by sediment, evaporation, the force of time, the laws of nature, and global warming.

These numerous artificial lakes defy the balance between natural surface water stores and underground stores. In nature, 70 percent of the fresh water circulating in the hydrologic cycle is stored underground and a combined total of .017 percent for lakes, rivers, and land-locked seas. Underground storage is free from evaporation, siltation, and storage cost (both economically and environmentally).

Before European contact, underground glacial water stores were estimated at 1.3 billion acre-feet -- the entire California landmass under thirteen feet of water. This now has been overdrafted to 850 MAF. Like oil, the remaining supply will be extinguished in less than a hundred years. One out of four Californians rely totally on groundwater, and nearly three-quarters of a billion acre-feet of that groundwater once lay under the Central Valley. Continual overdrafts in the region have caused the landmass to subside as much as thirty feet, yet the aquifer remains a major water source for agricultural production.

Five million acres of Central Valley wetlands -- nature's food bank, filtration system, and flood control mechanism -- once brimmed with life including half a million Tule elk and sixty million ducks and geese. Reclaimed for agriculture, this area has been reduced to 350,000 artificially managed wetland acres. Nine out of every ten acres of riparian woodlands are gone, along with ten thousand grizzly bears that once roamed the valleys and foothills. The loss of mega and micro flora and fauna is beyond counting.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: water, california

Rachel Olivieri is an independent researcher and writer from Willits, California.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Water! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Excellent Article ...
Posted by: mmckinl on Sep 4, 2008 1:35 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The growth mantra will kill us all over time.

When will we understand that the world is finite and that ecosystems are necessary to sustain life itself?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This puts the overpopulation naysayers on notice.
Posted by: ConnecttheDots on Sep 4, 2008 3:08 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If this article doesn't convert the overpopulation naysayers, nothing short of extinction will.

For the past 40 or 50 years, Californians have wanted to divert water from the Columbia River to California; so far, Oregonians have wisely resisted. Most of us have no great desire to see Oregon become the next California.

Meanwhile, Alaska's governor, Sarah Palin, can't wait to turn her beautiful state into a California clone. If, by some bizarre twist of fate, McCain/Palin ascend to the White House, we can expect the same dire consequences for the rest of the continent.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» BOTH population and policies are problems. Posted by: ProgressiveManiac
» okay seriously? Posted by: Elmowilcox
Waiting for the big earthquake.
Posted by: countingdaisies on Sep 5, 2008 5:49 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The one that breaks the country at the fault line, a newformed island floats out to sea and rids us of some of our problems.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Learn to swim Posted by: Elmowilcox
Ya couldn't pay me enough...
Posted by: papawhale on Sep 6, 2008 7:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
..To live in California and raise my grandkids... Like they pay you $1200.yr to live in Alaska (Bi Oil Bribes).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Energy Flows...
Posted by: nmeyer on Sep 6, 2008 8:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rachel, this article is very good. It seems clear that you understand that public policy needs to focus on energy transfers and flows rather than an economic model based upon contrived value.

Have you ever read "The Prosperous Way Down", by the late H. T. Odum?

I also live in Northern California -- and once spent a magical, fall weekend on the Eel River. This state is amazing... so few of the millions piled on top of each other in our larger urban areas will ever know what has been lost if we continue on our current path.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nice summary
Posted by: Mrs. Robinson on Sep 6, 2008 10:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...just one correction.

The deep trench on the eastern slope of the Sierra, between the Sierran and the Whites, is called the Owens Valley. It's well over 100 miles long, averages about 20 miles wide, and at 10,000' between the valley floor and the two mountain crests, it's the deepest valley in North America -- over three times deeper than the Grand Canyon.

The Great Basin is a much larger entity that takes in the entire high plains area of the intermountain west. It runs east from the Sierra crest, and takes in most of Nevada, southern Idaho, southeastern Oregon, and western Utah. (Google "great basin" for maps showing the outlines.)

This is my home turf you're talking about: I grew up in the Owens Valley, and my mother was the region's first water commissioner back in the 1970s.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ba
Posted by: mnstra on Sep 6, 2008 1:33 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I lived in California for decades before coming to the south. I can relate to your description as can John Houston of Chinatown fame.Hollywood can minimize anything on the screen
Your article unfortunately is an obituary for California.Overpopulation is clearly the problem Even Canada has fewer people for its vast geography. Amazing how they squeeze so many people in to a drought ridden state. Furthermore.many of the arriving population are third world types as well, big families. Do you think they are going to stop having babies to reduce overpopulation? I think Not. Clearly California must adopt a 55mph hwy speed limit now. Rash en water to stop them from watering their god dam driveways and lawns.and so on... Get the republicans out of office and Vote Ralph Nader in.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Look at the newer ideas
Posted by: bryangalt on Sep 7, 2008 3:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I recommend that you all read the proposal on the web site San Joaquin Valley Water Leadership Forum. Their proposal would do far more to help resolve some of these issues than building more dams.

They suggest we start by refilling the Tulare Lake, which once upon a time was the largest lake west of the Mississippi. It would cost 90% less than the current proposals and utilize what nature had already built.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

whatever
Posted by: crand012 on Sep 8, 2008 1:19 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If population control is the answer, why do you still live there. Come up to the freezing midwest and suffer like the rest of us. Its hypocritical to proffer a "solution" that a. will never happen and b. you don't even follow yourself.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: whatever Posted by: Elmowilcox
Environmental Resource Management 101
Posted by: Elmowilcox on Sep 8, 2008 1:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is the stuff I was going to school for, if only I'd finished. It's humbling to read something so smart.

"Once 400 million strong throughout North America, beavers once populated all the tributaries of California's great rivers. Building temporary small dams from nearby willows, alder, poplar, birch, maple and aspen, they trapped nutrients from twigs, leaves, branches, and logs, which mixed with silt behind the dam, creating a clear, cool, deep-water fishery. Bacteria break down the cellulose, which feeds protozoa, which feeds cyclops, daphnia, fresh-water shrimp, mosquitoes, dragonflies, caddis worms, tadpoles, and water spiders. These in turn feed young trout, salmon, and frogs, which feed egrets, ospreys, golden and bald eagles, kingfishers, turkeys and owls.

Downed trees fill with insects and feed woodpeckers and sapsuckers. The increased wet area around the beaver pond absorbs flood waves and slowly infiltrates water into the groundwater table. When the building materials deplete, the beavers move on to another location. The dam, filled high with rich, black organic muck, breaks down, causing the water to change course and meander around. As the area dries it becomes a rich pasture of grasses, feeding herbivores which feed predators. The meadow, recolonized by the seeds of the trees that initiated the process, begins anew. Multiply this lifecycle by 13,000 years and you have the continual development of fertile valley bottomlands and a regenerative model for human developments."

Ahh the eternally complicated cycle of life. Brings a tree hugging tear to my eye. You kill a beaver and you just killed a not-entirely small, self sustaining ecosystem.

Beautifully done ma'am.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Too Much Of Everything
Posted by: Last Chance on Sep 8, 2008 4:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most people are good and free enterprise delivers the products we need, but too much of any good thing turns it bad. So, peacefully reduce the human population through family planning clinics and then there will be plenty of resources for everyone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» It's the big business economy Posted by: Last Chance
» RE: It's the big business economy Posted by: GrantBurkeVT
» RE: It's the big business economy Posted by: Last Chance
» Oh no, not Malthuse again ( ! ) Posted by: Last Chance
When? Never.
Posted by: loxias on Sep 8, 2008 6:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Think it through. Nature naturally seeks balance. Too many hawks? Where'd the mice go.
Too many humans? Where'd their ability to perceive natural threats go?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: When? Never. Posted by: Scott
Oh come on now. Aren't there more unmarried people in CA by now?
Posted by: GrantBurkeVT on Sep 8, 2008 7:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Give it some time. The population will steady out. Besides, why are there more job opportunities in CA and less in the interior Midwest? How about shifting the job growth to states such as Utah, Nevada, eastern Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, the Dakotas, Arizona, and New Mexico?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hunh? Posted by: Last Chance
It's our owning class that's the death of us
Posted by: DaBear on Sep 8, 2008 9:41 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
California has been at the mercy of the owning class 'Merkin occupiers from the git-go. The Spanish may have worked over the indigenous population, but the 'Merkaaners were the real whackos-on-crack, going after both indigenous humans and ecosystems alike. It was the 'Merkaaner owning classes, however that did and still do the most damage to our state. They moved the water around from where it was to where it wasn't and killed large masses of lower class humans to do it. They corrupt nearly every conservation and resource management policy ordinary folks come up with so that they can ensure their full-spectrum dominance in all things Californian. When the plant people tell the owning class, hey you gotta do fire management this way, the owning class says STFU, plant geeks and does whatever the hell the owning class wants anyway, at everyone else's expense of course.

Behind every owning class rich guy there's a crime be it ethical or legal. As Californians figure out how to fix what our owning class pricks ruined, we're going to have to be the ground-breakers again... by firing and restraining (by force if necessary) our owning class lest they fuck up our fixes. First step is breaking the spell they have over their middling serfs... once we wake up that sleepwalking megafauna, we might be able to git-er-done.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ignorance of Ecological Functionality
Posted by: Godzilla1916 on Sep 8, 2008 10:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Miss Olivieri you have stated it so clearly:

"The Peripheral Canal simply adds an ever increasing layer of complexity and energy flows to a system that cannot be saved by the same strategies that produced the problem in the first place."

Our prideful ability to construct our way through problems, while ignorant of the loss of ecological functionality and connectivity (ecology and economy), coupled with uncontrolled population growth has brought us to this point of an unsustainable hydrological system. Regardless of the policy and complex canal construction projects we may implement, this is the defining limitation of our growth; we are unsustainable! This article highlights some of the vast resources and energy we consume just to maintain our current economic, ecological, and social systems far from equilibrium. As you suggest Ms. Olivier, the solutions are the "unthinkable"; restore watersheds, remove dams, CONTROL POPULATION, and restore the ecological functionality of the hydrological systems. Anything short of this will likely weaken our economic and social abilities to adapt to a changing climate and landscape.

Once our economic system adapts a value for ecosytem services, we may then incorporate land and water managment practices that aim to facilitate future process within ecosystems rather than creating desired conditions. By incorporating ecological values within our economy we can then generate a whole new incentive for restoration.

For many parts of western North America, climate models predict less snowfall in the winter and warmer, longer, drier summers. This scenario is expected to result in landscapes that are stressed by drought with increased demands on the ground and surface water systems. Combined with our current untenable water and population structures, we have approached the ecosystem threshold. What the future holds for our forests, agriculture, and hydrolocial systems in the face of these changes is uncertain; however, it is imperitive that we start managing proactively to facilitate resiliant ecosystems. This includes an "unthinkable" approach to restoring the hydrological functionality of California's (and global) watersheds. Otherwise, a business as usual approach leaves us economically weaker and socially unable to adapt in a changing world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DISINTEGRATION OF A WHOLE CONTINENT
Posted by: PacificGatePost on Sep 8, 2008 11:45 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ms. Olivieri,

Well done, thoughtful delineation of the biggest problem facing all of America - the depletion of its most important resource, water.

Given the continuing population explosion, the end game is evidently a battle for water, though before that, other sustenance might disappear completely from our dinner tables.

The U.S. and Canada are allowing the overpopulation of their cities, each for different reasons, but the outcome will be the same.

Immigration is an unpopular topic, and a political hot ball. It is easier to emigrate to North America where its population has created a generally safe environment, than to remain in your own country and work on fixing it. Whether it is the violent and dangerous business climate of Moscow, the choking pollution of Beijing, or the ruthless dictatorships controlling Africa, the planes and boats are heading for North American shores.

N.A. will remain a magnet for much of the 6.5 billion people on the planet, and the whole West coast in particular will be taxed beyond its capacities to sustain the continuing growth.

Canada is referred to elsewhere herein as having a population smaller than California's, spread over an enormous land mass. Most of that landmass is inhabitable. If you want to see a disaster waiting to happen, check out the absurd growth that Vancouver has undergone in the past fifteen years. It is no longer a beautiful city sandwiched between the Pacific and the Rockies. It has become an overpopulated, and unattractive aggregation of badly designed and hastily piled concrete and glass.

Nowhere in North America is there any political will to identify the root cause of the problem, therefore no fix is on the horizon.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Josephine Wadlow-Evans
Posted by: wadlow on Sep 8, 2008 6:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What a brilliant article - and for someone who is living in Sydney, Australia it in fact mirrors what is happening here.

My understanding is that Sydney and Los Angeles would appear to have many identifying features not more so than a Film Industry that is according to the UCLA Los Angeles's second biggest polluter and third on the chain of greenhouse gas emitters. Ditto!

So no matter how much money is thrown to achieve 'environmentally friendly' eco systems it just won't work if the main culprits continue to 'pollute' and put 'money before people and a rapidly dwindling sustainable ecosystem'. Thus this article epitomises Sydney NSW State Government in the death throws of having sent the State into near 'bankruptcy' with water sourced rivers, such as the Murray River being sucked dry and the rest -

More articles like this please.

Josephine Wadlow-Evans
Centennial Park,
NSW 2021
Sydney, Australia.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Inertia and Individuality
Posted by: dayahka on Sep 8, 2008 9:08 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a thoughtful article, but it makes an assumption about the "civilization" that cannot be accepted, namely that we actually can bring this inertial system to a crawl, if not a halt, and actually go in a different direction. If it were that simple, I'm sure god would have already managed to turn us from sin (I'm not making any ontological assumptions of the actual existence of such a being).

There's something about one of our most prized assumptions, a false assumption, of individualism. We lack a sense of the well being of the whole, of the common wealth and health, and this lack will prevent us from stopping this mad "civilization" and turning it into something sustainable. I think many people sense that we are in trouble, but no one can stop the train going over the cliff. We need a massive 2x4 between the eyes to see the error of our ways. I can't see anything being "done" unless there is first a great destruction. Many of us will probably choke on our garbage (look at what we have done to the oceans) and die from our poisons before any action is taken to go in a different direction. (I rather think that it is the sense of the utter futility of expecting people to change that led to the invention of a powerful god who would exact revenge "some day.")

At least talking about it may assuage some of the guilt and fear and anger some of us feel, but the reality is that this species, at least the Homo Americanus Ignoramus subspecies, is doomed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» case in point Posted by: Elmowilcox