Water Education Foundation

Bobbing in poison soup: Two men set sail to call attention to the 100 million tons of plastic flotsam fouling the world’s oceans

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 30, 2008 at 8:15 am

From the Los Angeles Times, this article from the opinion pages:

On the first of June, two men and a rabbit set sail from the port of Long Beach, bound for Hawaii, on a raft made of junk. Their cabin is the cockpit of a Cessna 310, white with a blue racing stripe, salvaged from the desert. It floats on a system of handmade pontoons — 15,000 plastic bottles held together with recycled nets — propelled by currents and wind. If it sounds dangerous and makeshift, that’s the point. The pilots of Junk, as the vessel is called, want to get your attention.

They are Dr. Marcus Eriksen, director of research and education at the Algalita Marine Research Foundation in Long Beach, and Joel Paschal, a former employee of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (The rabbit was abandoned early on — to a safe home, not the depths — after proving a less than seaworthy companion.) Their cause is alerting the world to the fouling of our oceans by plastic debris, and Junk is the poster child ( www.junkraft.com).

Plastic flotsam — 100 million tons of it — already litters the oceans of the world. Another 60 billion tons of plastics will be produced this year alone. A particularly dense accumulation of debris can be found in a holding pattern 1,000 miles off the California coast, in an area known as the central North Pacific gyre, the calm core of a convergence of four major ocean currents rotating clockwise under a large high-pressure zone. What gets in there can be trapped for decades.

The buildup of plastics in the gyre is estimated to span 5 million square miles. That’s the equivalent of the area of the United States — all 50 states — plus India. Some of the debris at the surface floats, some is “neutrally buoyant,” suspended just below the waves, and some hovers even deeper. Some is apparent and recognizable — water bottles, balloons, degraded buoys — but over time, these objects break down into smaller and smaller plastic pieces until they become particulate, invisible to the naked eye. (And small enough to be ingested by fish and filter feeders, as the larger pieces are by birds and turtles.) Also, the central gyre is so vast that even a devastating quantity of visible debris will appear relatively diffuse. There’s no observable “plastic island,” no obvious “garbage patch.”

It is important to note that the source of this plastic garbage and debris are not ocean going vessels, but rather, 80% of it comes from land, such as the trash & debris washed down the Los Angeles River after a rainstorm. Read the rest of this article from the Los Angeles Times by clicking here.

June 30, 2008 · Filed Under Pacific Ocean Garbage Dump

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment 

Water plan to protect Delta: State Water Resources Board proposes self makeover

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 30, 2008 at 7:19 am

Hoping to streamline their work and improve enforcement, the State Water Resources board has proposed it’s own reorganization plan, which has two parts: legislation to overhaul its structure and duties, and a strategic plan to regulate San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. More details from the Sacramento Bee:

The proposal for legislation comes in the form of a “water quality improvement initiative” that could become a rider on a forthcoming state budget bill. It builds on a water quality bill by Senate Majority Leader Don Perata, SB 1176, that is now stalled.

The proposal would reduce the size of the regional boards from nine to seven members to minimize chronic vacancies. Each chairman would become a full-time, paid position to improve accountability and expertise.

It would streamline the now-cumbersome process to adopt water pollution limits by bringing California’s system into accord with federal procedures.

To improve enforcement, the boards would be freed of issuing written notices before penalizing polluters, and a requirement to hold a public hearing before referring such cases to the attorney general would be abolished. City attorneys and district attorneys in large cities would gain the power to seek civil penalties against polluters if requested by the water board. Only the attorney general has this power now.

The second prong of the overhaul package is the “Bay-Delta strategic work plan.” It proposes an aggressive regulatory agenda to improve water quality and habitat in the largest estuary on the west coast of the Americas. The plan is scheduled to be presented to the state board Tuesday in Sacramento and could be adopted as soon as July 16.

It proposes an ambitious schedule to review existing water rights within and upstream of the Delta to ensure diverters are following the law. This includes the complex diversion rules governing the State Water Project and the federal Central Valley Project, which deliver Delta water to 25 million Californians. The plan would evaluate the need for more fish screens on these diversions and whether in-stream flows are adequate to provide quality fish habitat.

The board also would develop a strategy to achieve the governor’s call for a 20 percent reduction in per capita water consumption by 2020. This could impose new mandates on local water agencies. The plan would take up to five years to carry out.

Both proposals can be viewed on the water board’s Web site, www.swrcb.ca.gov.

Read more from the Sacramento Bee by clicking here.

June 30, 2008 · Filed Under Water Quality, Water Rights

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment 

Long Beach at sea over breakwater removal plan: Some fear flooding if the barrier is removed, but others say waves would attract visitors to the city

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 30, 2008 at 7:08 am

From the Los Angeles Times:

Long Beach has been preening its oceanfront image for more than a decade by pouring money and support into a wealth of new projects on its shores: a $117-million aquarium, gleaming Miami Beach-style condominium towers, a waterfront shopping center with sea-themed eateries, such as Gladstone’s and Bubba Gump Shrimp Co. What’s missing amid all this sea fever, some say, is a Southern California style seashore.

One of the world’s largest breakwaters stands between Long Beach and the Pacific Ocean, reducing mighty waves to mere lake-like lapping along the city’s beaches. Without surf to cleanse them, those beaches were recently graded among the dirtiest in the state.

Surfers, environmentalists and some residents believe that restoring the surf would improve coastal water quality and draw visitors to the shoreline. They want officials to consider altering or removing the 2.2-mile eastern portion of the 8.4-mile San Pedro Bay breakwater — the portion that sits offshore from the city’s downtown, Bluff Park, Belmont Shore and Naples. Known as the Long Beach Breakwater, that piece helped protect the U.S. Pacific Fleet when it was stationed in the city. After the Navy and its ships left in the mid-1990s, some began to wonder if the breakwater had become obsolete.

This month, the Long Beach City Council voted 6 to 2 to hire Moffatt & Nichol Engineers to conduct a $100,000 preliminary study of the federally owned breakwater, to be funded equally by the city and the California Coastal Conservancy.

Some local officials say that the key cause of the dirty beaches is not the breakwater but the Los Angeles River, which drains 51 miles’ worth of trash, urban runoff and sewage into Long Beach Harbor. They said cleaning up the river, not just improving water circulation in the bay, would be a better solution.

The city’s surf-free beaches are among the least popular in the region. Even families within walking distance drive their children to cleaner beaches in nearby Seal Beach and Huntington Beach. “If you take the hottest day of the year and you go down to the ocean side of the beach, it’s empty,” said Councilman Patrick O’Donnell, who sponsored the June 18 motion to conduct the study.

Read more from the Los Angeles Times by clicking here.

June 30, 2008 · Filed Under Other Oceans & Beaches Stories

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment 

Editorial: Little fish, big bad idea: Smelt hatcheries would just be a waste

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 30, 2008 at 7:03 am

From the Sacramento Bee, this editorial that questions the wisdom of building smelt hatcheries:

Florez, who represents the farm region of Kern County, wants the state to build up to three hatcheries for Delta smelt, including one by 2010. Costs are unknown, but taxpayers would pick up the tab for construction. Water users would pay the ongoing costs of propagating smelt – getting mitigation credit for continuing to kill fish in the pumps.

This idea is nutty. Even if these hatcheries helped water users dodge a bullet in court, they’d do nothing for other troubled Delta species – including longfin smelt and shad.

It also probably would do little to help the Delta smelt. “Trying to keep Delta smelt going by raising them in hatcheries and releasing them is like trying to raise sheep in a drought-seared pasture surrounded by a forest full of wolves,” wrote Peter Moyle, one of the state’s leading fish biologists, in an analysis of the bill.

Despite such warnings, the Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee approved Florez’s legislation Tuesday and now Senate Bill 994 is headed to the appropriations committee. It shouldn’t go further than that. During a budget meltdown, lawmakers shouldn’t be wasting their time and our money on smelt factories. Fishy business, indeed.

Read the full text of this editorial from the Sacramento Bee by clicking here.

June 30, 2008 · Filed Under Delta smelt

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment 

Water export idea for Manitoba should be considered: Advocate says politicians refusing to even discuss huge money-making proposal

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 30, 2008 at 6:51 am

From the Edmonton Journal, a commentary written by a research associate from Canada’s Frontier Centre for Public Policy, who notes that the government has passed resolutions barring fresh water exports, but he feels the matter should at least be discussed amongst Manitoban’s themselves. He points out:

If the future of Manitoba were the fuel indicator on a dashboard, it would be blinking and buzzing. We depend on the generosity of other provinces for more than one-third of our provincial budget. Over the last decade, this has amounted to more than $20 billion. And yet, where are we?

During the same period, the number of people living below the poverty line has increased, crime has increased, our health care has deteriorated and our universities are crumbling like oatmeal cookies.

An objective outsider might say: “Have you tried anything else? Have you questioned the notion that fresh water is priceless?”

Given the cost of desalinated water, this writer sees a system, much like our State Water Project, that could transport water out of the Canadian province to the U.S., and he gives specific details on how such a system could be built. It could be very profitable for Manitoba, according to his calculations:

On the revenue side, based on the Tampa costs [charging the same amount as Tampa is paying for water from their desalination facility], we could realize $3.3 billion per year (6.6 cents times five billion cubic metres). Profit, if all costs were deducted, would be $1.334 billion. However, if the United States carried the cost of the project, as is usually the case for such strategic infrastructure, the profit would be an impressive $2.49 billion every year.

It would be enough to easily wipe out Manitoba’s equalization handout which was $2.06 billion in the most recent budget. On a bigger scale, this new wealth would be sufficient to wipe out more than two-thirds of all federal transfers to Manitoba, which come in at a whopping $3.61 billion this year.

Our best outcome might be to sell the water contract to a pension fund. The Canada Pension Fund is very active in this area, having acquired the London water utility in 2006. At an estimated capitalization rate of five per cent, the contract could be worth at least $26.6 billion in the first scenario to $49.8 billion in the second.

What could be better than a pipeline financed by the United States, owned by the Canada Pension Plan and an unending source of revenue that would be a bold, giant step towards ending Manitoba’s hanger-on status in the federation?

At least, we should be allowed to think about it.

Read the full text of this article from the Edmonton Journal by clicking here.

June 30, 2008 · Filed Under Grandiose water plans

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment 

The Delta’s strangest yard sale

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 30, 2008 at 6:37 am

From Stockton’s Record:

Herman Miller, the storied old man who lived on his floating laboratory, teaching bacteria to eat toxic sludge until famously evicted by the feds, called Friday. Though this paper gives Miller an ink truck of coverage, we’d never met. Nevertheless, the peppery old river rat asked me to publicize his yard sale.

“You can’t believe it,” Miller said of his items. “Everything I’ve collected over 40 years. Very large boat hardware. Stuff nobody wants but me.”

Miller directed me to the site of an old creosote plant on the south bank of the Deep Water Channel, a place of Dickensian industrial grit. Near that spot a year ago, Miller tied up his barge, the Merit, grew anaerobic bacteria in vacuum tanks and encouraged the little beasties to eat pollution, his scheme to get rich.

I found him in a weedy waterfront field. He is 83, spry, diminutive, white-bearded. He was also begrimed after hauling all his stuff out of storage and arraying it in the field. “I was just counting anchors,” Miller greeted me. “I think I have six anchors. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.”

Also lots of laboratory equipment. “Everybody thinks I’m an old bastard who lives on the river,” Miller said. “I’m a UOP graduate, an engineer and a scientist.”

It was a lousy day, hot, muggy, the air filled with infernal smoke from distant fires. A perfect day to visit a Superfund site. That’s what the feds declared the creosote-soaked property; why they evicted Miller, after a long-drawn-out battle; why he’s selling off his cumulus.

“They told me, well, move your stuff,” Miller recounted, leading me around. “So I’m trying to sell anything for anything I can get for it.”

Of Miller’s belongings, half have an Ace Hardware usefulness, and half are too obscure to fly off the shelves - unless there’s a mad scientist convention in town.

Read the rest of this story from Stockton’s Record by clicking here.

June 30, 2008 · Filed Under Weird & Wacky Water News

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment 

‘Owens Valley is the model of what to expect’: As Las Vegas policymakers eye the water beneath Nevada, a scientific debate erupts over the possible effects

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 29, 2008 at 8:05 am

From the Las Vegas Sun:

The raw glory of the Mojave and Great Basin deserts is difficult to imagine from the paved fantasyland of Las Vegas. As the road wends north of the city, past sun-soaked bluffs into Pahranagat Valley, there is what looks like a river but are in fact four spring-fed lakes running for some 40 miles.

Audubon himself would weep at the birdlife working this watering spot on the Pacific flyway. Bald eagles ride the breezes. Herons skid across the water. Proceed across huge desert valleys and the land rises. Yucca gives way to pine, the hot desert to cold, Paiute territory to Shoshone. This is the land of nut gatherers.

Three hours into the drive north from the Las Vegas offices of the Southern Nevada Water Authority, there is no missing the entry to Spring Valley. Farms begin to dot the valley floor, alfalfa fields meld with bright green carpets of greasewood and rabbitbrush. By the time Wheeler Peak appears, the conifers rival those of the Sierra. In Spring Valley, one type of cedar is thought unique on Earth. There are bats, owls, woodpeckers, rabbits, elk, mountain lions.

Yet throughout the Great Basin Desert, the fecundity persists on the slimmest of margins.

It survives because, after spring thaw, not all of the mountain snowmelt is immediately absorbed by the desert. Rather, springs, creeks and ponds form, all held above ground by pressure from more water below. This water below is the Great Basin aquifer, a vast pool dating back to the ice age.

There could be no more enticing prospect for a desert city like Las Vegas than these millions of sleeping gallons. But if the aquifer is pumped too hard, the system of springs, streams and lakes supporting life above ground could disappear.

At issue, then, was could, and should Las Vegas attempt to get this water.

Las Vegas went about filing for water rights all over the state of Nevada, finally deciding on six key Nevada valleys.

Las Vegas managed to insert itself into this equation because under Nevada water law, only some of the Great Basin’s traditional water users are legally entitled to it. Towns are, farms are, mines are, but under increasingly antiquated definitions developed in the first half of the last century to do with “beneficial use,” most of the native flora isn’t.

Following this logic, water used by plants such as the cold desert’s signature shrub, greasewood, may be legally diverted hundreds of miles away to Las Vegas.

But by the time Las Vegas was going for greasewood’s share of Spring Valley’s water in 2006, the law of “beneficial use” was at loggerheads with a host of other modern laws protecting the environment.

Greasewood belongs to a class of plants called “phreatophytes,” named because their long roots are capable of reaching deep underground to access the water table. As Bredehoeft sees it, if Las Vegas sinks its wells and the roots of the phreatophytes continue to chase the descending water table, that means Las Vegas won’t be taking the water from the greasewood but from storage in the aquifer.

“Taking water out of storage,” he says, “is mining.” Mining ground water is illegal in Nevada. Mine enough of it and the water table can drop for hundreds of miles around. Springs stop flowing, streams disappear, plants and animals dependent on them die.

So the logic goes: Target the phreatophytes whose water you intend to take, and don’t allow them to compete for water. Pump hard. Kill them fast. Then let the system return to equilibrium so what water comes in from snowmelt equals what is taken out by Las Vegas pumps, and the water table doesn’t fall inexorably.

But this weeds-for-water logic becomes a problem when greasewood serves an important function above and beyond offering forage to deer and cattle.

Phreatophytes prevent dust storms.

Spring Valley sits at the foot of Mt. Wheeler. In 1986, then-Congressman Harry Reid led Wheeler’s transformation into Great Basin National Park, in no small part because of Spring Valley’s pristine air. Without a high water table saturating the valley floor and the long roots of phreatophytes anchoring the soil, Spring Valley could become the kind of dust bowl created by Los Angeles after William Mulholland began pumping Owens Lake in 1913.

An interesting story with a look into the tactics and thinking behind the Las Vegas pipeline plan. Read the full text of this story from the Las Vegas Sun by clicking here.

June 29, 2008 · Filed Under Las Vegas

1 Comment 

Our ocean back yard: Ocean currents carry our waste

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 29, 2008 at 7:37 am

From the San Jose Mercury News:

Ocean currents carry many things, including those which we choose to toss away. One result is a vast expanse of garbage, caught in gentle waters inside the rotations of ocean currents west of our shores.

The Great Pacific Garbage Patch is in the North Pacific Gyre, one of several zones worldwide surrounded by swirling waters driven by weather and the earth’s rotation. Between North America and Japan, the gyre is a 10 million square mile oval where most boaters — some call it the doldrums — won’t go. It’s believed to be a relatively barren area where high-pressure air keeps the slow, deep waters still, with fewer of the bigger fish that need prey more easily found in active waters.

The Great Pacific Garbage Patch has two parts. The eastern one is north of Hawaii, from 500 nautical miles west of California extending eastward, covering an area twice the size of Texas. The western portion is northwest of Hawaii stretching towards Japan. A thin 6,000-mile current called the Subtropical Convergence Zone — also rich in waste — connects the two. The plastic floating there has decades to last — estimates are that up to 80 percent comes from land. An animation from Greenpeace demonstrating movement of flotsam through the patch over time can be viewed at http://oceans.greenpeace.org/en/the-expedition/news/trashing-our-oceans/ocean_pollution_animation.

There may be 100 million tons of materials in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, according to Algalita Marine Research Foundation founder Capt. Charles Moore. Sailing home to California from a yacht race in Hawaii in 1997, he veered off course through the gyre, finding himself in a large expanse of debris. “I was in the middle of the ocean, and there was nowhere I could go to avoid the plastic,” he says.

Read the rest of this article from the San Jose Mercury News by clicking here.

You can make a difference this week by helping with pollution prevention and cleanup efforts. Click here to visit the Clean Beaches Coalition and schedule your involvement. To find out more about the Algalita Marine Research Foundation, click here.

June 29, 2008 · Filed Under Pacific Ocean Garbage Dump

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment 

Approval of urgent Delta projects long overdue, says editorial

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 29, 2008 at 7:06 am

From the Contra Costa County Times, this editorial:

In November of 2006, California voters had the foresight to approve Propositions 84 and 1E, which authorized $9.5 billion in bond money for water projects. Prop. 84 was a $5.4 billion measure for water infrastructure projects, while Prop. 1E approved $4.1 for new and upgraded levees, and other flood protection projects.

The Contra Costa Water District identified several short-, medium- and long-term projects to protect the Delta from earthquake damage and flooding. Many of the short-term projects won widespread support from local, regional and statewide interests, including water districts, environmentalists and water users.

Despite voter approval of the money, broad support by virtually all interested parties and the urgency of the projects, no Prop. 84 funds were allocated.

As a result, four much-needed projects were delayed. They include:

  • Stockpiling rock to be used to quickly block salt water from inundating fresh water in the Delta in case of an earthquake.
  • Strengthening weak levees to prevent Katrina-like flooding, which is a very real threat with heavy rainfall.
  • Screens at Clifton Forebay to allow for adequate pumping of fresh water without harming fish.
  • Other projects to improve conditions for Delta smelt and water quality.

There is no good reason why these projects were not under way in 2007.

Legislation was introduced last year to fund Prop 84 projects, but was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger, who did not want to approve any measure that didn’t include funding for reservoirs.

We appreciate the governor’s support of new water storage facilities. We have long advocated for new water storage because California needs them if it is to retain its huge agricultural industry.

However, building reservoirs is a long-term vision. Funding Prop. 84 is a critical short-term necessity. The governor should not have killed funding that could be used right now to meet urgent Delta needs in order to try to get approval for building reservoirs a decade or more from now.

Read more from this editorial from the Contra Costa County Times by clicking here.

June 29, 2008 · Filed Under Other Delta Issues

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment 

Can you own the rain that falls on your roof? Not in Colorado, where you can be fined $500 a day for harvesting rainwater

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 29, 2008 at 6:58 am

From the Denver Post:

Kris Holstrom lives with her husband and two children in a solar-powered home in rural San Miguel County. Committed to promoting sustainability, she grows organic produce year-round, most of which is sold to local restaurants and farmers markets.

On a mesa at 9,000 feet elevation, however, water other than precipitation is hard to come by. So Kris did what thousands of farmers before her have done: She applied for a water right. Except instead of seeking to divert water from a stream, she sought to collect rain that fell upon the roof of her house and greenhouse. To her surprise, the state engineer opposed her application, arguing that other water users already had locked up the right to use the rain. The Colorado Water Court agreed, and Kris was denied the right to store a few barrels of rainwater. If she persisted with rain harvesting, she would be subject to fines of up to $500 per day.

How could this happen?

Like other western states, Colorado water law follows the prior appropriation doctrine, of which the core principle is “first in time, first in right.” The first person to put water to beneficial use and comply with other legal requirements obtains a water right superior to all later claims to that water.

The right to appropriate enshrined in Colorado’s Constitution has been so scrupulously honored that nearly all of the rivers and streams in Colorado are overappropriated, which means there is often not enough water to satisfy all the claims to it. When this happens, senior water-right holders can “call the river” and cut off the flow to those who filed for water rights later, so-called “juniors.”

Overappropriated rivers are not unique to Colorado. Most of the watercourses in the West are fully or overappropriated. Yet other western states allow or even encourage rainwater harvesting.

The obstacle for aspiring rainwater harvesters in Colorado is not the state constitution. It speaks only of the right to divert the “unappropriated waters of any natural stream.” The problem arises because Colorado’s Supreme Court has given an expansive interpretation to the term “natural stream” and coupled that with a presumption that all diffused waters ultimately will migrate to groundwater or surface streams. And because most streams are overappropriated, collecting rainwater is seen as diverting the water of those who already hold rights to it.

Believe it or not, in Colorado, roofs are considered tributaries. Click here to read the rest of this article from the Denver Post.

June 29, 2008 · Filed Under Southwest Water Issues

1 Comment 

Curbing Utah’s wasteful water use would erase need for dams

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 29, 2008 at 6:46 am

From the Salt Lake Tribune:

While scientists are predicting drastic changes for the water supply in the Colorado River basin, the Wasatch Range can realistically hope for better as our climate warms. If we use our scarce water resources wisely, we should have plenty of water for the rest of this century. Surprised? We’ve known this all along but our habits are hard to break.

With a growing population, we must use common sense and tap the ingenuity of the Beehive State and its industrious worker bees. In supplying a growing population with water, Utah’s water managers have historically applied a one-size-fits-all approach. Limited primarily to an engineering background, they see the solution to water needs as structural, which often proves to be expensive and static. The overwhelming mindset has been that new dams and diversions are the only way to assure our water future. While Utah gives lip service to water conservation as an alternative, it is clear where our priorities lie.

For example, the Utah Division of Water Resources spent nearly $8 million in 2007 to further the Lake Powell Pipeline and Bear River Water Development projects, but it spent a measly $250,000 on water conservation. The numbers speak for themselves.

The argument is one we here in California have heard plenty. By implementing conservation, water can be saved and dams not built. While Californians have made great strides on conservation already, apparently Utah has not, so the argument is particularly relevant, in light of these numbers:

Utah residents use far more water than is necessary or appropriate. Of the 60-70 percent of our water directed toward our lawns and gardens, approximately 50 percent is wasted. Furthermore, our per-capita use is significantly greater than that of other desert cities.

Read more from the Salt Lake Tribune by clicking here.

June 29, 2008 · Filed Under Conservation, Southwest Water Issues

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment 

Don’t spoil salvia: Cut back on food and water to get the most out of native sage

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 29, 2008 at 6:34 am

From the San Diego Union-Tribune:

“Know what you’re dealing with if you want to be successful growing native salvias,” said David Fross, owner of Native Sons Nursery.

This sage advice comes from a renowned native plant horticulturist who collects, propagates and sells plants through his wholesale nursery, located in Arroyo Grande. His specialty is water-thrifty plants for Mediterranean-style climates like that of San Diego.

Given Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s declaration of drought conditions earlier this month, gardeners here and throughout the state are increasingly in the hunt for water-wise plants. Native California sages are certain to be on everyone’s drought-tolerant list. The key to growing them is knowing how to care for them in gardens, a far different environment from their native habitats. Most gardeners spoil them with kindness, with too much water, too often. This defeats the point of their water thriftiness and also ruins their looks.

“Salvias native to California have evolved in this Mediterranean climate of hot, dry summers,” Fross said. “They have adapted to become semi-dormant in summer. They drop their inner leaves and look woody. Too many people plant salvias and then treat them as ordinary garden plants and water them to death.”

There are 19 salvia species native to California, and an ever increasing number of selections and cultivars with this heritage in their botanical genetic makeup.

Read more from the San Diego Union Tribune by clicking here.

High Country Gardens has many different varieties of salvia to choose from, including a pre-planned xeric (very low water use) garden. They also carry multitudes of other low water use plants as well. Click here to visit the High Country Gardens website.

June 29, 2008 · Filed Under Drought Tolerant Landscaping

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment 

Reopening marks new chapter in Malibu Pier’s history book

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 29, 2008 at 6:25 am

From the Los Angeles Times:

After years of false starts and construction delays, the fabled Malibu Pier — or at least part of it — will reopen today.

Built in 1905, the structure has been the scene of TV and movie filming (”The Rockford Files,” “Gidget,” “Beach Blanket Bingo”) and celebrity sportfishing. It was used as a World War II lookout post. Later, Alice’s Restaurant (inspired by the Arlo Guthrie song) served its famous B-52 cocktail to droves of visitors. But a series of severe winter storms so damaged the pier that it was closed to the public in 1995. In recent years, it has seen limited use by fishermen and other visitors who craved some full-scale amenities to go with the million-dollar view.

Today, a gala fundraiser will mark the official unveiling of a bar and restaurant at the Pacific Coast Highway entrance to the refurbished structure.

Visitors venturing onto the weathered boards will see two wood-sided white buildings with royal blue trim. One is the Beachcomber Cafe (formerly Alice’s), a bar and restaurant featuring seafood and a mid-1940s atmosphere. Across from that is the Malibu Pier Club, which for several weeks has been serving cocktails and lighter fare from a small indoor bar and an outdoor deck.

A TV over the bar shows a loop of home movies shot at the pier during its heyday years ago. Photos of bathing beauties and buff beachgoers from decades past line the walls.

At the seaward end of the pier, construction delays have forced the Ruby Restaurant Group of Newport Beach to push back the opening of a burger joint, now expected to open in August. A bait-and-tackle shop, coastal boat tours and a surf museum are also planned. Two sportfishing boats already operate from the pier.

Read more on this story from the Los Angeles Times by clicking here.

June 29, 2008 · Filed Under Other Oceans & Beaches Stories

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment 

The myth of water: Making the Negev Desert bloom once seemed like a good idea, but it’s killing the Dead Sea

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 29, 2008 at 6:21 am

From Newsweek:

Few notions are more deeply rooted in Zionism’s founding mythology than the exhortation to “make the desert bloom.” The earliest Zionist pioneers arrived in Palestine with a strong faith in science and technology, shaped by the Jewish enlightenment that began in the late 18th century. They also brought an earthy sense of self-reliance that made growing their own food—even in the bleak Negev Desert—a high priority. Amid the ashes of the Holocaust, that determination only deepened. “For those who make the desert bloom there is room for hundreds, thousands, and even millions,” Israel’s first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, wrote in 1954, when he moved to the Negev himself. As Israeli society grew increasingly devout in the 1970s, the prophet Isaiah provided further inspiration: “The wilderness and the parched land shall be glad; and the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose.”

At first glance, today the parched land indeed looks glad. The arid coastal plain sprouts with fields of watermelons, tomatoes and sunflowers, and Israel has earned a reputation for creative use of sparse water supplies. In the late 1950s and early 1960s, Israelis pioneered the use of “drip irrigation”—which delivers water directly to a plant’s roots. More recently, Israeli experiments with desalination and water recycling have drawn attention around the world. The Yale/ Columbia Environmental Performance Index ranks Israel 49th overall and best among desert nations, in part for managing the stress irrigation puts on water supplies. Still, some scientists worry about the environmental cost of building an economy in the desert. Israel consumes 1.8 billion cubic meters of water each year; 15 years from now, it will need an additional 1.5 billion cubic meters to meet demand rising due to population and economic growth, according to Israeli water experts. About half of Israel’s clean water is used for agriculture, yet farming accounts for only 2 percent of Israel’s GNP. Considering those numbers, some environmentalists are beginning to question whether agricultural growth in a desert climate like Israel’s is really sustainable. The question, says David Brooks, a Canadian water expert and environmentalist, “is not whether water is used efficiently in Israeli agriculture, but whether agriculture is an efficient way to use water in Israel.”

Read the full text of this story from Newsweek by clicking here.

June 29, 2008 · Filed Under International Water Issues

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment 

Turn off Canada’s tap? Activists say yes but others say Canada could share for a price

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 29, 2008 at 6:17 am

From the London Free Press:

In the middle of the Arizona desert, where a merciless heat zaps away all moisture, a group of entrepreneurs plan to build a water park oasis that will make it the largest water adventure park in the world.

The specs are ambitious: Called Waveyard, the 45-hectare water park is expected to be completed by 2010 and will have the largest man-made, recirculating white water river in the world, a scuba lagoon, snorkelling, kayaking, and surf-sized, four-metre waves. The park is expected to use 380 million litres of groundwater a year, water they say won’t come from the neighbouring potable water system.

Meanwhile, the U.S. announced last year that 36 states face water shortages in the next four years.

It’s this kind of immoderate squandering in the U.S. that makes them the largest per capita users of water in the world, water advocates say. And it’s why Canada should close the door should the U.S. come knocking for our water, they add.

“It’s not sustainable,” says Maude Barlow, an internationally known water advocate and author of Blue Covenant. “I will share anything with anyone, but I won’t destroy the Canadian ecology so people can have golf courses and swimming pools.”

The spectre of bulk water exports to the U.S. has been a historically emotional issue for Canadians, who guard it jealously as a national heritage. But, as discussed earlier in this series, there is a myth of water abundance in Canada. We receive the same amount of the world’s renewable water supply (rain and snow) as the U.S. — 6.5% of the global share. We don’t have a large surplus to spare, experts say.

But not everyone agrees.

Chris Wood, B.C.-based author of Dry Spring, describes this attitude as anti-American, anti-business and bigoted. “We wouldn’t accept that kind of (attitude) of any other ethnic group,” he said in an interview. “These people are our best customers, closest neighbour, and we share the watersheds. It’s completely poisonous.” Water, like the fugitive nature of air and carbon, isn’t ours to horde since it’s always “passing through” on its way to somewhere else, Wood says.

Read the rest of this story from the London Free Press by clicking here.

June 29, 2008 · Filed Under International Water Issues

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment 

Western levees need action, says editorial

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 28, 2008 at 7:48 am

From the Capital Ag Press, this editorial:

The massive flooding in the Midwest has shown the incredible extremes of nature, the vulnerability of manmade water structures, and the staggering impact of uncontrollable water on people physically, financially and emotionally.

When Senate hearings this spring talked about the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation water infrastructure, there were grim assessments of the problems that exist with federally built levees, canals and dams in the country. According to Associated Press, BuRec has 7,911 miles of canals in 17 Western states, most of them managed and operated by local irrigation and water districts.

The American Society of Civil Engineers has estimated $1.6 trillion is needed to rebuild the country’s water infrastructure, a lot of which was built more than 50 years ago.

There have been several examples in the West and elsewhere of the weaknesses in canals, levels and other water storage structures.

In eastern Idaho, the Teton Dam failed in 1976; it collapsed as it was being filled for the first time, sending 300,000 acre feet of water forward and causing massive damage. The Seminary Hill Reservoir near Centralia, Wash., failed in 1991, triggering 3.5 million gallons of water to rush out in three minutes.

In California’s Bay-Delta, Liberty Island, Prospect Island and Little Holland Tract have been examined on who needs to be responsible for the levees there. Prospect Island had levee breaks in 2006 and 2007 and the breach repaired. In 1998, Liberty Island had its levees fail but they were not repaired. Little Holland Tract had floods in the 1990s. In 1997, more than 30 levees gave way in the Central Valley of California, flooding 300 square miles and evacuating 120,000 homes.

While money has been appropriated in some states, the editorial questions whether enough is being spent and if it is happening fast enough, and makes this final point:

University of Maryland’s Clark School of Engineering last year warned in a report that flooding in California’s Central Valley is “the next big disaster waiting to happen” and the flood control system there is incapable of dealing with severe floods. The Sacramento area alone could face more than $25 billion of damage.

After witnessing what has been happening in the Midwest, Western states can wait no longer. Better water plans, funds for them, and construction progress must be done now.

Read the full text of this article from the Capital Ag Press by clicking here.

June 28, 2008 · Filed Under Levees

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment 

Delta is worth saving, says editorial

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 28, 2008 at 7:39 am

From the Contra Costa County Times, this editorial:

The Delta is one of the great resources in California from an environmental beauty to a key source of the state’s water supply. But the region is struggling and the Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force is exploring how the state can ensure the future health of the Delta while providing a reliable long-term water supply.

Yes, we’re talking about quite a tightrope to walk, but this is definitely an area that needs to be explored now, a daring long-term plan put in place and implemented soon before Mother Nature and a population explosion collide in the Golden State. We detailed some short-term steps that are needed in Sunday’s Times, but this group should be giving us some longer-term answers.

The initial plan from the task force takes a steady equitable course as the environment and the Delta’s water supply are given equal treatment. The task force addressed a sort of rebuilding of the Delta in three key areas — improving the ecosystem, build a canal or pipeline to move drinking and irrigation water around the Delta, and strengthen the region’s levees.

None of this will be cheap. The task force estimated the cost between $12 billion and $24 billion over the next 10 to 15 years alone and costs could run as high as $80 billion. Based on previous state estimates of construction projects we think $80 billion could be a conservative figure. But we have to start somewhere.

Read the full text of this editorial from the Contra Costa County Times by clicking here.

June 28, 2008 · Filed Under Other Delta Issues, Water Legislation

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment 

Wanger rules Red Bluff diversion dam gates to remain closed - for now

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 28, 2008 at 7:36 am

From the Fresno Bee:

A federal judge on Friday rejected an emergency request by environmentalists to immediately open the gates of a key dam on the Sacramento River, a move they said was needed to allow endangered Chinook salmon to reach their spawning grounds.

The decision by U.S. District Judge Oliver W. Wanger sent a wave of relief through nervous Sacramento Valley farmers and growers who depend on water diverted at the dam to feed their crops. “We dodged a bullet,” said Jeff Sutton, general manager of the Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority.

Wanger, however, also said he was leaning toward ordering the gates of the Red Bluff Diversion Dam to open Sept. 2, about two weeks earlier than normal. He said he wants to hear more testimony on that matter and didn’t issue any final ruling.

Though peak time for irrigating is July and August, if September is a hot month, opening the gates two weeks early could have an adverse effect on the same growers who feared the gates would be ordered open now, said Ken LaGrande, the canal authority’s chairman.

But Natural Resources Defense Council attorney Kate Poole, who is participating in the hearing, said the gates remaining closed now hurt Chinook salmon heading upstream to their spawning grounds. In August and September, the gates need to be open to assist young salmon heading back downstream to the ocean. Poole has said the species are in peril and need help to survive the state’s drought conditions.

The ruling came as part of the Wanger court proceedings regarding the effect of water diversions on the Chinook salmon. Read more on this story from the Fresno Bee by clicking here. (Note: you may need to scroll down to read the story.)

June 28, 2008 · Filed Under Judge Wanger salmon ruling, Salmon

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment 

Inland water agencies take water conservation steps

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 28, 2008 at 7:29 am

From the San Bernardino Sun:

The Boy Scouts have a motto, “Be prepared.” As the providers of water service to an Inland Valley population that is nearing 500,000, we share this philosophy.

The Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD) and the cities of Ontario and Upland, as well as other producers in the Chino Groundwater Basin, claim this as our own motto based on how we operate our business. The concept of being prepared does not only extend to emergency situations, but we also use it as the measuring stick when accommodating growth and the changing characteristics of our region from agricultural based to a more urban setting. Today, while agencies throughout the region are developing projects that address an impending drought, our commitment remains the same: to ensure a reliable water supply for the region.

Last year was the driest year on record. Even with recent rains at the end of May, there has not been nearly enough precipitation to pull us through this dry period. Agencies throughout this region are working together and crafting plans to disseminate and educate businesses and homeowners alike regarding the need to use the region’s water resources as efficiently as possible.

Today, we are not only facing the impacts of an impending drought, but we are also confronted with the likelihood of imported water supply reductions from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta as the result of a recent court decision addressing the decrease of an endangered fish species in the Delta. Nearly 30 percent of the water supply Chino Basin water agencies receive is from imported water coming from Northern California. Agencies - such as CVWD - receive as much as 50 percent of their water from Northern California. Any reductions in this supply would have a significant impact on the region.

This may not paint a positive picture of the region’s water supply future; however, as a result of smart choices agencies throughout the Inland Valley have made to manage water supplies more effectively we have been able to keep pace with growth while making efforts to conserve when possible. Although we know that future water supply reductions may be inevitable, our region is much further along because of the efforts of water agencies within the Chino Basin have made to implement innovative water supply management programs that have helped “drought-proof” the region.

Read the full text of this story from the San Bernardino Sun by clicking here.

June 28, 2008 · Filed Under Other Water Agencies, Water Supply

1 Comment 

PCL Insider: Assembly Committee passes bad delta smelt bill

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 28, 2008 at 7:26 am

From IndyBay.org:

Bad news for the delta - Assembly committee passes SB 994, GUTTING PROTECTIONS FOR DELTA SMELT

Despite strong opposition from the environmental community and concern from fish biologists, SB 994 (Florez, Ashburn, Steinberg) received enough votes to pass out of the Assembly Committee on Water, Parks, and Wildlife this morning and is now headed to the Assembly Committee on Appropriations.

SB 994 attempts to sidestep environmental protections for the threatened Delta Smelt, which have been in severe decline for the past eight years. If passed, the bill would create a loophole allowing water diverters to comply with endangered species protection laws without providing habitat restoration, water quality improvements, and necessary freshwater flows within the ailing Delta as required by those same laws. Instead, SB 994 would tie the hands of the Department of Fish and Game by requiring the department to issue necessary environmental permits as long as water diverters simply pay into a fund for a massive Delta Smelt hatchery.

The committee analysis includes a stinging criticism of the bill’s approach by fish biologist Dr. Peter Moyle, the foremost expert on Delta Smelt. “Trying to keep Delta Smelt going by raising them in hatcheries and releasing them is like trying to raise sheep in a drought-seared pasture surrounded by a forest full of hungry wolves,” explains Moyle.

When pressed this morning in committee about the lack of evidence that a Delta Smelt hatchery would actually help restore the species, Senator Florez responded that the bill’s intent was simply to establish an “interim” and “experimental” hatchery. Yet the bill has no sunset clause or time limitation, and it allows diverters to base compliance with environmental laws on the experimental hatchery.

Read the full text of this story from IndyBay.org by clicking here.

June 28, 2008 · Filed Under Delta smelt

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment 

Next Page →