Owens Lake Reminders for SNWA Pipeline’s Water Grab from Northern Aquifers

SNWA Pipeline Proponents Who Would Benefit Financially from Water Transfer (19)

Proponents of the SNWA pipeline claim the pipeline from the Snake and Spring Valley to Las Vegas would be needed for the region to “grow economically”, citing opponents of the pipeline scheme are uncaring about the city’s economic survival. However, when examining the future beneficiaries of the pipeline include a myriad of developers in a city already undergoing one of the highest foreclosure rates in the nation, the motive to have this water in place in preparation for an upswing in the housing market becomes apparent. When the SNWA pipeline proponents include the beneficiary Harvey Whittemore as one of the original funders, the location of his development project “Coyote Springs” on U.S. 93 and the NV 168 with plans of 100,000 more homes would leave him a near billionaire should the plans come to fruition. For Mr. Whittemore to retire a billionaire two factors need to occur simultaneously, an eventual recovery of the housing market and the completed construction of the SNWA pipeline that would parallel the U.S. 93 corridor where most of the development is located. As there is insufficient groundwater available at the current site of Coyote Springs to enable such grandiose development schemes, the construction and availability of the pipeline and at least two decades worth of groundwater available prior to aquifer drawdown and ecosystem collapse are needed for Mr. Whittemore to retire as a billionaire before the lawsuits begin. The time frame of two decades is a reasonable guess based upon the reduced rates of aquifer recharge and the rates of discharge and additional withdrawals by the SNWA pipeline.
It is difficult to prove that the SNWA and DWP bureaucrats benefit directly from the water transfers outside of the correlation between their significant salaries and political influence and the election campaign contributions and support from the developer lobbyists. However, in the case of SNWA pipeline proponent and General Manager Pat Mulroy, the chance of being voted out of office is now removed. There are only elections for the Board, and Gen. Mulroy appears to be at the helm of the SNWA for her entire natural existence.
During a public comment to the Nevada State Engineer on Oct. 7th, 2011 held in Carson City and simulcast in Ely, Caliente and Las Vegas, the SNWA pipeline proponents were primarily limited to those directly involved in the housing construction and development industries. Opponents of the SNWA pipeline came from a diverse background and included Native Americans of the Paiute, Goshute and Shoshone nations, ranchers, environmentalists and even Las Vegas city residents who were aware of the hidden costs and did not wish to shoulder the financial or ecological burden this pipeline would place upon their shoulders. Another fallacy of our modern society is that construction and development can continue to expand indefinitely across space and time without placing additional burdens on the regional ecosystem. Land that is undeveloped should not be seen as wasted, this land in its’ natural state provides housing to a myriad of desert species. Perhaps those individuals who depend upon construction jobs for their income should be supported and redirected to rehabilitation of older existing homes of the urban core of Las Vegas instead of enabling further suburban sprawl.

Conclusion – Water Transfers are Ecologically Destructive, Other Alternatives Available (20)

Removal of water from one specific region to benefit development in another region is destructive to the ecosystem of the dewatered region. The similarities between aquifer and lake water removal is that the previous quantity of water that existed there prior to removal and transfer was playing an important role for the ecosystem. In the Owens Lake, River and Valley ecosystem there was significant removal of both lake water and groundwater that resulted in a loss of habitat and food source for millions of migratory birds and many other species. This includes the loss of the brine shrimp base of the regional food pyramid that have evolved to survive the harsh salinity of Owens Lake. These brine shrimp were available for thousands of years for the dining needs of the migratory birds either coming from or going to South and Central America. The removal and transfer of the water in Owens Lake resulted in a long term loss of a critical food source for the migratory birds.
Since the time of the original water transfer from Owens Lake nearly a century ago ecological conditions have not improved and have in many instances gotten worse. The air pollution from blowing dust of the exposed lake surface continues to plague human and non-human residents of the Owens Valley. The migratory birds that once remembered Owens Lake as a critical refueling stop no longer have a reason to remain there and are forced to migrate onwards with lower energy. Over time many migratory birds do not survive the grueling trek as they did not dine on brine shrimp to boost their endurance. This results in an overall decline in the populations of migratory birds who have an important rest stop removed from their mental maps.
The groundwater withdrawals along the Owens Valley in the 1970s soon dewatered the aquifers and then dried up any seeps and springs where groundwater met the surface. As happened with the removal of water from Owens Lake the loss of groundwater along the valley also resulted in a decline of endemic species that once depended upon the seep and spring ecosystem for their survival. We can expect the results of this groundwater withdrawal from Owens Valley of California to be similar if the SNWA builds their pipeline and removes aquifer water from the Snake and Spring Valley region of eastern Nevada. The nearly identical geology and climate of OVL and SSV indicate almost parallel outcomes from the effects of water transfer. The amount of water removed from the SSV aquifer as proposed by the SNWA is far greater than water recharged by current rates of precipitation. The law of groundwater physics indicates that if the rate of discharge exceeds the rate of recharge the inevitable result will be a drop in the elevation level of the aquifer level. Since seeps and springs exist at specific elevation levels where there is an exit point the drop in aquifer levels will prevent water from flowing onto the surface. The endemic species of springs and seeps such as spring snails and descendants of ancient fish from Lake Bonneville will most likely become extirpated and/or extinct from the SSV ecosystem as a result of groundwater removal by the SNWA pipeline.
It is not irrational or extreme to predict a likely outcome of spring and seep loss from excessive withdrawals and transfers as this prediction is based upon countless other instances elsewhere when groundwater withdrawals exceeded the rate of recharge. The Owens Valley is the most geologically similar to the Snake and Spring Valley ecosystem and can be used as a comparison. It is far more illogical and fanatical to suggest as the SNWA does that miracles can occur when the amount of water removed will exceed the amount of water recharged each year and yet somehow the aquifer level will not become significantly lower to where the seeps and springs would no longer emerge at the surface. Insanity can be defined as repeating the same behavior patterns yet expecting different results each time. Removing water from lakes or aquifers at higher rates than they can be recharged and then claiming that their ecosystems can remain intact with far less water available than under normal drought conditions qualifies as insanity. For human society to cease being considered insane there needs to be serious reevaluation of water transfers as being beneficial for the “greater good”. Harming one region by dewatering ecosystems to encourage rapid development in another region with excess water isn’t good for either side in the long term. The supposed beneficiaries of the water transfer are left with smog from the rapid sprawling development that was only possible with the excessive water stolen from the Owens Valley and imported to the SFV. In addition to regular air pollution from sprawl the long term ecological consequences of dewatering Owens Lake will remain a financial obligation for the L.A. ratepayers for decades if the DWP refuses to compromise and allow for realistic restoration of Owens Lake ecosystem. The same problem from leapfrog development could occur in the Las Vegas region as the planned suburban sprawl developments such as Coyote Springs depend upon water stolen from another region of Nevada.
The treatment of Owens Valley by the original proponents of the aqueduct and the current administration of the LADWP is nothing less than geographical bullying. The original proponents of the water transfer and the DWP bureaucrats used their political power and financial clout to force the struggling Owens Valley residents into accepting a deal that was deadly to their continued way of life. Along with losses suffered by human residents from the DWP water transfer the ecosystems of Owens Lake, River and Valley were all severely damaged by the loss of water following the transfer. What is most bizarre is that this geographical bullying of Owens Valley by LADWP bureaucrats has been enabled and allowed to continue by supposedly responsible regulatory agencies like the EPA. One comparison would be if teachers (EPA) encouraged a bigger and stronger child bully (LADWP) to begin robbing a smaller and weaker peer (Owens Valley) of their lunch money in kindergarten and then allowed this behavior to continue until graduation from high school. Would the teacher ignoring the bullying of the weaker child for years be responsible if the weaker child one day snapped and decided to resort to greater violence and retaliate against the larger bully by using a weapon to achieve a closer balance of strength? Have humans not witnessed the tenacity of small bands of guerrilla fighters to continue resisting much larger forces of government armies with far better weapons? The very origin of the U.S. is based upon the concept of resistance against tyranny and was accomplished in reality by ragged revolutionaries battling King George’s British soldiers who came in larger numbers and were much better armed. The key to victory for the U.S. revolution against Britain was the use of guerilla warfare and innovative tactics that involved unexpected attacks and quick retreats into the forests. One could imagine a small group of committed eco-activists performing similar tactics on the hundreds of miles of aqueducts over the years, encouraging the LADWP to reconsider the cost effectiveness of the aqueduct project.
Cultural genocide against indigenous nations such as the Paiute and Goshute has been a part of the formative years of the United States. How unfortunate that the post-Columbus immigrants could not understand the ecological wisdom of the indigenous nations that took only what they needed from their surroundings and managed to live in relative harmony without disrupting aquifers and lakes. Perhaps in the early years we can excuse this behavior to general ignorance of science and ecology, yet today we cannot feign ignorance to the results of our collective actions. If we the people of the modern U.S. continue to displace indigenous nations like the Paiute and the Goshute from their ancestral homes by forced removal of their water sources so that some developers can turn a fast profit, than we are continuing on the path of cultural genocide against the indigenous nations of North America. Forcing indigenous nations away from their ancestral lands and cultures by stealing their water and then encouraging them to live in cities and assimilate with non-indigenous cultures is the very definition of cultural genocide. That is the end result of water removal and transfers, the loss of ecosystems and the indigenous nations that relied upon these habitats for their cultural and physical survival.
Collectively human society needs to reevaluate the wisdom of water removal and transfers as a viable option for sustaining metropolitan regions in the desert. Based upon the political motivations of the proponents of the Owens Valley water transfer and the wealth they netted from their SFV real estate sales based upon stolen water it is clear that there was no net benefit for the general public from this process. The residents of L.A. who had the aqueduct built in their name and supposedly for their benefit were unaware of the deceptions used to obtain the water until much later on. The L.A. ratepayers had already bought and paid for their supposed reward from the aqueduct prior to understanding the long term consequences of water transfers. By the time the L.A. ratepayers did discover the hidden costs of the aqueduct the original proponents who had profited tremendously from their SFV real estate sales that was possible because of extra water stolen from Owens Valley were then ready for a well-funded retirement plan. The original proponents of the Owens Valley water transfer had considerable financial capital available from General Otis and other wealthy business interests so they could purchase land in Owens Valley and SFV. On the other hand the ratepayers of L.A. were dependent upon water and could be easily scared into believing that they must help pay for this proposed aqueduct from the Owens Valley of their city would suddenly dry up and blow away in a dust cloud. It was only several years later that the L.A. ratepayers have learned that the scare tactics of drought were simple deceptions used by the Owens Valley proponents who were interested in making their financial gain from the SFV real estate sales at the expense of the ecosystem and human communities along the Owens Valley. Of course by then it was too late as the aqueduct had been constructed and was now the financial responsibility of the ratepayers. To this day the ecological consequences of water removal and transfer from Owens Lake remain the financial responsibility of the L.A. ratepayers.
Instead of depending on costly and ecologically destructive water transfers, options for self-reliance and rain water harvesting exist for Las Vegas and the L.A. ratepayers also. Having direct roof to underground storage rainwater harvesting systems available for every resident, business and government building would prevent losses of rainwater to runoff. An additional benefit of rainwater harvesting is the prevention of pollution to watersheds from storm runoff picking up non-point source pollutants in the streets. The regular summer monsoon season of the desert southwest causes large amounts of rainwater to fall in a short time frame, often causing flash flooding on roadways. The flash flooding is compounded by hard baked desert caliche soils and human created impermeable surfaces such as sidewalks and pavement. Rooftops of buildings are another form of impermeable surface that contributes to runoff. The equation would be total surface area of pavement in addition to total surface area of rooftops equals the total amount of surface area that contributes to runoff. Rooftop rainwater harvesting combined with underground storage cisterns results in subtracting the rooftop surface area of rainwater amounts contributing to flash flood runoff amounts.
When discussing the potential for job creation, the SNWA proponents of the pipeline neglect to mention these are short term jobs and the retrofitting of Las Vegas buildings with rainwater harvest systems would provide ongoing jobs for the long term future of the region. Unlike the proposed pipeline jobs, the long term careers available from retrofitting buildings with rainwater storage systems would allow ranching jobs to continue in the Snake and Spring Valley and would maintain SSV aquifer dependent ecosystems and indigenous communities indefinitely without disruption. That is the advantage of investing in reliable local storage and conservation options instead of water removal and transfers from regions afar. A third benefit of rainwater harvesting in addition to the extra harvest water storage potential and the prevention of flash flooding is the harnessing of gravitational potential energy from the downwards motion of water. Consider the energy required during evaporation to lift all those gallons of water moving upwards against gravity from sea level into clouds hovering thousands of feet in the air. In physics this is termed potential energy because the eventual motion of this atmospheric water is downwards along with the force of gravity. This potential energy of falling rainwater can be included in rainwater harvesting systems during the travel to filtration devices by installing turbine propellers inside the tubes that are rotated by the water traveling downwards. As the concept with windmills, the water turns the propeller as it travels down the tubes towards the filters and storage cisterns and these turbines are connecting to electric chargers and harnessed for energy. Every year residents of desert cities will experience summer monsoon storms that flood their streets, though with rainwater harvest systems installed on most large buildings and throughout residential neighborhoods people can monitor energy gains from potential energy of rainwater and quantity of water stored while having considerably less overall surface area of runoff flooding into their streets.
Another option for increasing underground water storage locally includes a restorative makeover of the Los Angeles River and the Las Vegas Wash from concrete channels to a complete greenway corridor wide enough to contain floodplain water retention ponds. Under current conditions the concrete channel of the L.A. River rushes the rainwater out to the ocean without capturing any for underground storage. The Las Vegas Wash loses water to transpiration from trees lining the channel on the lower section. The upper section of Las Vegas Wash has the most potential for aquifer storage yet at this location is a concrete channel This yearly loss of potential water for underground storage from both rivers would be saved by simply giving the flood water enough width to spread out across a natural river floodplain channel with permeable gravel soils that allow downwards percolation. When a river floods across the increased width of a permeable floodplain, the storm water infiltrates directly into the ground and is stored in the aquifer below the riverbed. This natural recharge would happen every year during the winter rainy season and the cumulative effect on the local aquifers would allow for additional storage and use during the dry summers. Two additional benefits of river floodplain restoration are prevention of flooding by giving the river water more space to spread out laterally and a net gain in riparian habitat along the restored floodplain.
By using rooftop rainwater harvesting and enhancing underground storage potential of local rivers by widening floodplains, desert cities like L.A. and Las Vegas can increase their yearly water supply without causing ecological destruction and geographical bullying by using outdated water removal and transfer.

References (21):

“The Owens Valley as I Knew It” by Robert Coke Wood published in Bishop, CA

“Cadillac Desert” Reisner, Marc

“Dreams, Dust and Birds: The Trashing of Owens Lake” by Karen Piper
http://places.designobserver.com/feature/dreams-dust-and-birds-the-trashing-of-owens-lake/23328/

Owens Valley Committee (OVC); Darla Heil, Daniel Pritchett, Sally Manning, Ph.D., Ceal Klingler, Mike Prather

Featured article, “Desertification illustrated” by Sally Manning
http://www.ovcweb.org/index.asp

Confederated Tribes of the Goshute Nation Website
http://www.goshutewater.org/

Paiute Bishop Tribe Water Law
http://www.bishoppaiutetribe.com/assets/ordinances/WaterLaw.pdf

Owens Valley
http://lorlie6.hubpages.com/hub/My-Raped-Paradise

Witness Statement from Dr. Paula Cutillo; on 8/4/06 at the Nevada State Engineer Hearings
http://water.nv.gov/hearings/past/spring/exhibits/August_4th/USDI/Exhibits/Exhibit_2504/Report/Cutillo-Witness-Statement.pdf