Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Water Demands Draining U.S. Rivers: Many Rivers Suffering from Severe Water Shortages
Environmental News Service ^ | 04/10/2003 | J.R. Pegg

Posted on 04/11/2003 10:15:15 AM PDT by cogitator

Water Demands Draining U.S. Rivers

WASHINGTON, DC, April 10, 2003 (ENS) - Many of America's rivers are suffering from severe water shortages, with drought and human water consumption placing some of these waterways in acute peril, warns a new report released today by American Rivers.

The conservation organization's report, "America's Most Endangered Rivers of 2003," details 10 rivers that face immediate and severe danger, but paints a larger picture of a nation tumbling towards a possible water crisis.

"America's seemingly insatiable demand for fresh water is nearing nature's limits," American Rivers President Rebecca Wodder told reporters at today's press conference. "And we have designed much of the human landscape to make the problem worse, not better."

At the center of the concern is a simple fact - the United States uses more water per person than any other country with little regard for waste or cost. The U.S. average of 1,300 gallons per day is some 60 times the average for many developing countries, according to the World Water Council, with some 85 percent used to for irrigation.

CAPTION The Ipswich River is being starved of water by excessive groundwater pumping and human consumption. (Photo courtesy American Rivers) You gotta see this picture!

U.S. irrigation habits, urban sprawl, increased groundwater pumping and loss of wetlands are endangering the nation's rivers and draining its fresh water supply, Wodder explained, and more often than not government policies are making things worse.

Two federal government projects, one to drain 300 square miles of wetlands and another to scour more than 100 miles of river bottom, put Mississippi's Big Sunflower River at the top of this year's list. These U.S. Army Corps of Engineer flood control projects are poised to go forward this year, unless reviews by state officials or the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) judge otherwise.

"Unless the EPA stands up to political armtwisting," Wodder said, "the Corps of Engineers will drain and scrape the life out of the Big Sunflower River to help a small number of farms collect bigger subsidy checks from American taxpayers."

CAPTION Americans love pristine rivers for relaxation and recreation, but the nation's water use choices are putting many rivers in danger. (Photo by Mark Lance courtesy American Rivers)

The effects of federal agricultural policy and subsidies have had a severe impact on the Klamath River, which is the second cited by American Rivers.

The Bush administration's decision to increase irrigation flows to farmers in the upper region of the river contributed to the deaths of some 33,000 salmon last September. This was the worst recorded fish kill in U.S. history.

Balancing the water needs of competing interests in the Klamath River Basin is not easy, said Representative Mike Thompson, a California Democrat. But the Bush administration's policy, by pitting upstream farmers against conservationists and fishers, is an attempt "to shoehorn a political solution to a scientific problem," Thompson said at today's press conference.

"The problem with the Klamath River is a uniquely local problem that is unfortunately exacerbated by this administration's policies," he said.

CAPTION Low water levels contributed to a massive fish kill in the Klamath River last September. (Photo by Northcoast Environmental Center courtesy American Rivers)

Thompson introduced legislation in the House today that would allocate $200 million to landowners and tribes throughout the Klamath Basin who participate in water conservation projects. It is designed to bring together stakeholders from the upper and lower basin, Thompson explained, to "eliminate competing interests and find feasible solutions."

"The communities within the Klamath Basin cannot afford to wait any longer," he said.

Severe water shortages earned the Ipswich River the number three slot on the list, but it is not agricultural policy that is causing the crisis in the Massachusetts river. It is excessive groundwater pumping and municipal water consumption that leave portions of the river dry each summer.

The river often looks more like a dirt road, said Kerry Mackin, executive director of the Ipswich River Watershed Association.

"We count more dead fish than living fish," Mackin said.

The combination of excessive municipal water consumption and groundwater pumping are directly related and threaten water supplies across the nation, warned Robert Glennon, a law professor at the University of Arizona and author of the book "Water Follies: Groundwater Pumping and the Fate of America's Fresh Waters."

CAPTION Low water levels at the Platte River could have a negative impact on migrating waterfowl, including the sandhill crane. (Photo courtesy U.S. National Park Service)

The United States now pumps some 28 trillion gallons of groundwater every year, Glennon explained, with little regard for how this affects the hydrological cycle.

"We are allowing limitless access to a finite resource," he said. "There is a disconnect between the law and science."

Pumping groundwater, Glennon explained, reduces the natural flow of water into the nation's rivers and depletes a resource that took thousands of years to accumulate. But as demand for water increases, local and state entities are increasingly looking below ground for additional supply.

This has created a direct threat to the Platte River, which is on the endangered list, and threatens to undermine an agreement to secure adequate flows in the Platte River and to protect its adjacent wetlands.

The Platte River, which runs through Wyoming, Colorado and Nebraska, is considered by conservationists to be the most important stopover for migratory birds in the nation's heartland.

Excessive diversion and consumption are also responsible for putting the Rio Grande on this year's list, Wodder explained, and water flow issues also led the organization to put Colorado's Gunnison River on its list.

In part because of population growth, the nation's municipal water consumption is the fastest growing sector of U.S. water use, in particular from low density sprawl development.

This is a serious concern for the Mattaponi River, which makes the endangered list because it is threatened by a planned reservoir that would provide water for the sprawling cities of Virginia's Tidewater region.

CAPTION Virginia's Mattaponi River is considered one of the most pristine coastal river systems on the eastern seaboard. (Photo by G. Warren Mountacastle, Jr. courtesy American Rivers)

"Healthy watersheds capture and store water for human and natural needs, but sprawl development creates landscapes that shed water like a raincoat," Wodder said. "Water rushing down storm drains when it rains is water that will not come up from your well when it is sunny."

Wodder also warned that the Bush administration's decision to revise the scope of the Clean Water Act's protection for wetlands could add to the long list of threats to the nation's rivers. Conservationists believe the reinterpretation of the law by the administration effectively removed protection for as much as 20 percent of the wetlands in the lower 48 states.

"Draining, filling or paving over wetlands and small streams sets off a chain reaction that eventually reduces the water available in river for people and wildlife," Wodder explained. "As wetlands are lost, flash floods increase but less rainfall soaks into the ground. As groundwater levels fall, springs dry up and stream flows drop."

U.S. Representative James Oberstar, a Minnesota Democrat, told reporters at the press conference that he supports a legislative effort to reverse the Supreme Court decision that the Bush administration has used to justify its narrow reinterpretation of what constitutes a protected wetland under the Clean Water Act.

"The Supreme Court decision is undermining a 30 year effort to improve America's waterways," Oberstar said. "We have to get back on track to what the Clean Water Act intended."

The other rivers on the list are Colorado's Gunnison River, which is burdened by unnatural water flows, along with the Snake River and Georgia's Tallapoosa River, which are both threatened by impacts from dams, and the Trinity River in Texas, which could be severely affected by planned flood control and floodplain projects.

The water issues that are affecting America's rivers will only get more serious, said Glennon, and will require strong leadership at the local, state and federal levels of government.

"This is a tragedy of the commons," he said. "We need to start to recognize the economic value of water."


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: conservation; enviralists; resources; rivers; water
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-112 next last
To: dljordan
No, the name is deceiving.
Rocky Mount is in eastern North Carolina, nowhere *near* the mountains. (Go figure).

Anyway, I have been to the Joyce Kilmer forest, years ago. It's amazing.

81 posted on 04/11/2003 1:47:54 PM PDT by Constitution Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: IvanT
Why doesn't the U.S. have some of our water from up here in Canada? Why could just share our's with you, problem solved.

Give us some water, and we'll give you all of our socialists. Then the problem would be solved.
82 posted on 04/11/2003 1:48:37 PM PDT by Delphinium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Delphinium
No, please, we already have enough of a problem with them already. You could give us your hand me down Military equipment and maybe one of those spiffy aircraft carriers, that'd be a good deal. Then we can go attack Lebanon, cause they're really beginning to piss me off with their threats against Canada, Israel and the US.
83 posted on 04/11/2003 1:51:54 PM PDT by IvanT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: dljordan
When I lived out in Calgary I made an observation about plant life -- If a certain type of plant does not grow in abundance naturally in an area, there's no way in hell it should be part of the landscape in any development.

The only exception I would make is for areas that can be irrigated naturally with stormwater run-off from adjacent parcels of land with large areas of impervious surfaces (a shopping mall, for example).

84 posted on 04/11/2003 1:53:49 PM PDT by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: IvanT
Maybe we could trade California, and the Northeast of the US to Canada for the western part of Canada?

I didn't hear that Lebanon was threatening Canada, but you know the good ole U.S.A. will come to your aid if they try anything.
85 posted on 04/11/2003 1:58:12 PM PDT by Delphinium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: IvanT
I forgot Seattle, and Portland. You can have them too.
86 posted on 04/11/2003 1:59:40 PM PDT by Delphinium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: blackdog
Depends on your definition of really nice and whether or not you have heard of the Ogalalla Aquifer.
87 posted on 04/11/2003 2:14:20 PM PDT by activationproducts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Delphinium
Could be. I have a friend who works in the water field and has convinced my that water is a real issue. Not the sort of thing one can take the Baghdad Bob approach to by sticking your head in the sand and say "it's all lies."
88 posted on 04/11/2003 2:17:14 PM PDT by activationproducts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: cogitator
The place is usually a tidal mud flat. Good duck hunting in Newbury though. With all of the snow, and as I look out of my window, rain, the bugs should have a good year.
89 posted on 04/11/2003 2:19:11 PM PDT by Little Bill (No Rats, A.N.S.W.E.R (WWP) is a commie front!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: farmfriend
Where in the hell is all the water going from the "melting of ice cap" There should be more free water than ever if you listen to "global warming" crowd.
90 posted on 04/11/2003 4:16:52 PM PDT by tubebender (?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: tubebender
Where in the hell is all the water going from the "melting of ice cap"

Water world?

91 posted on 04/11/2003 4:21:37 PM PDT by farmfriend ( Isaiah 55:10,11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Red Boots
I fear that they won't stop until they've cleared out all the people

Yes of course, I am against the ESA completely. The way to use the market to protect critters is to give a bounty to land owners who provide for the various species the government believes we need to protect. (I am indepted to Mark Edward Vande Pol for this from his book Natural Process.-- Mark posts on this forum as carry_okie)

Plus, lawsuits help the leftist friend, the trial lawyers.

92 posted on 04/11/2003 4:22:26 PM PDT by KC_for_Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: activationproducts
by sticking your head in the sand and say "it's all lies."

I am not sticking my head in the sand. Its this source that usually uses lies, and uses junk science to manipulate the masses. I really don't know much about the populated cities in the east. Maybe there is more to the water problem story, but not from this source.
93 posted on 04/11/2003 5:14:07 PM PDT by Delphinium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: KC_for_Freedom
The west has many agriculture users paying a lower price for water than residents.

Well, considering that the water used for irrigation requires neither the treatment nor the infrastructure that drinking water requires, it should be cheaper. Considerably cheaper.

94 posted on 04/12/2003 9:10:38 AM PDT by meyer (how do I turn this thing off?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie; farmfriend; Jeff Head; marsh2; AuntB; forester
""This is a tragedy of the commons," he said.""

Somebody has been reading your fantastic book "Natural Process," the WRONG WAY!!! (www.NaturalProcess.net)

You oughta weigh-in on this and bore into this scenario of "Rural Cleansing" in a big way, since it's right up your alley!!!

95 posted on 04/12/2003 9:46:31 AM PDT by SierraWasp (Media Advisory: Don't believe anything you hear and only half of what you see!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: meyer
Well, considering that the water used for irrigation requires neither the treatment nor the infrastructure that drinking water requires, it should be cheaper. Considerably cheaper.

I can't let you get away with this one, the costs of water I was discussing are independent of the residential distribution system, which residents pay for usually with property taxes. There is a huge agriculture distribution system too, (pumps, canals, dams,...) These systems support residential use as the residential user adds a treatement plant at the using site. (As I said before, paid for by other funding.) So the water is the same water, but the farms are the heavy users and long ago negotiated water contracts that do not reflect current supply/demand curves.

96 posted on 04/12/2003 12:20:58 PM PDT by KC_for_Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: KC_for_Freedom
I can't let you get away with this one, the costs of water I was discussing are independent of the residential distribution system, which residents pay for usually with property taxes. There is a huge agriculture distribution system too, (pumps, canals, dams,...) These systems support residential use as the residential user adds a treatement plant at the using site. (As I said before, paid for by other funding.) So the water is the same water, but the farms are the heavy users and long ago negotiated water contracts that do not reflect current supply/demand curves.

Sounds like a local issue - where I live now and all my previous homes had a water system run separate from the taxing authority, either by a regional water department, another city's water department, or by a private water company. In all instances, the ratepayers paid for the water distribution system including treatment. I suspect I'm applying the conditions of my locale to issues unique to your area. I've always lived near fresh water, either by the great lakes or near a large river. The water I enjoy right now is spring fed and provided by a co-op - no tax dollars support it.

97 posted on 04/12/2003 1:19:55 PM PDT by meyer (how do I turn this thing off?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: blackdog
Additionally, I would be more terrified about eating at Shoney's.

YOu got that right!!

Actually, there is some truth in all the statements, our underground aquafers are getting depleted - and the surface water is not as clean as it once was. Of course, I am one of those old Texans who remember when you could drink from any pond, creek, or river in the state - well maybe not a river near a metropolitan area - but in the country. Not any more. I can't even drink our city water without a filter.

But I do like your ideas of water conservation - don't know about the outhouse here in town, but I do intend to use grey water this year on my garden - we always did in the country.

But I do agree the government is making a big attempt to take over the water supply - I know they are here in Texas. I have heard (from that reliable source, but can't confirm it) that the state of Texas already has taken control of the underground water. It seems, however, they are going to give the people the opportunity to form a 'water conservation district' before they actually do.

Thirsty people are easier to control and large corporations will give great kickbacks and campaign contributions for water rights. Always follow the money---

98 posted on 04/12/2003 1:37:13 PM PDT by nanny (S)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: meyer
OK, I agree, it probably is local. In Mid and Southern California it is as I described. However, we have some forest property in Northern California where there is a single fee to hook up, then the water is not metered or charged for.

In So. Calif, the agricultural system of canals delivers water to people and they use it without a meter. No problem taking all you want, so you water your lawn by flooding it. Or you water a vast farm by spraying the water into the air. (Where a lot of water evaporates before hitting the ground.) Thanks for the discussion.
99 posted on 04/12/2003 9:48:01 PM PDT by KC_for_Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Old Professer
Back before indoor plumbing and city water supplies everybody had a rain barrel or two -- I guess we aren't allowed to do that anymore.

Rain barrels certainly are allowed. There are good commercial systems available. The main thing that they have to be protected from is mosquito infestation; you don't want your rain barrel to be harboring carriers of West Nile virus or something worse, like malaria or encephalitis.

100 posted on 04/14/2003 8:52:00 AM PDT by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-112 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson