Join in on our discussion on Water. Just click on "comments" below and share your thoughts.
Comments
What is most important about our water issue is to first understand that our water supply is a resource limited to an annual deposit. In other words, we lived on a yearly fixed income of water and that is variable year-to-year. The notion that we can find new water sources fails to recognize that it is the same water year after year recycled as rain, (solid) snow or vapor. It is the same water from the beginning of time being processed throughout the world in these various forms over and over again.
Further, what is important about annual rainfall is not how much rainwater a given area receives, rather, how much of that rainfall volume actually penetrates the soil and becomes groundwater to feed creeks, streams, rivers, wetlands, outlets and finally emptying into the ocean to await evaporation to become rainfall once again in some other region of the planet.
We unwittingly build our cities to evacuate water as quickly as possible through storm drains and sewer systems. This is like taking a large cash withdrawal from your bank account and throwing into a strong wind. Water is perhaps the most valuable resource, if not the most undervalued, and we can no sooner afford to manage our bank accounts in this fashion, why would we do so with our annual water deposit?
Water likes to move slowly. Carrying nutrients through the soil and watershed, slow water movement sustains all manner of life forms that we humans depend on for life. Trapping water in reservoirs cost more to the environment in damaged ecosystems than it provides benefits for human use - domestic or industrial. Dams are not built to last forever and as they fill up with silt reducing carrying capacity each year, become a very costly and destructive waterfall.
Water likes to be stored in the ground or aquifers. Their, it doesn’t evaporate or fill up with silt and both the rainfall and the storage is gift from nature. Groundwater feeds rivers and their watersheds by slowly releasing water year round enhancing riparian diversity and all flora and fauna that have evolved around that cycle.
Regional carrying capacity is much more wisely developed when based on available year round rechargeable groundwater storage source. Developing our communities to promote ground water infiltration by slowing and spreading the water invites the water to stay and penetrate, not rush out of town at high velocity speeds eroding everything in its path. And, carrying toxic chemicals like herbicides, pesticides, gas, oil, oil-based fertilizers, etc. that are commonly found in storm water starting with rooftops, landscapes, driveways, streets, etc.
Humanity would benefit greatly by revisiting our relationship with water and redesigning our water management systems to consider water efficiency through and groundwater restoration projects.
There is potentially a huge reservoir under the Ukiah Valley. It’s capacity is reduced when the Russian River cuts deeper. Could we put in small dams with fish ladders to raise the water level and increase the storage capacity? An example of using such a reservoir is in Santa Clara Valley where they take water from the Central Valley Project and percolated it into the ground just below Los Gatos.
Richard - Consider that the Russian river undercutting its banks is likely the product of seasonal fast moving waters lacking in natural controls to slow down water velocity and reduce the erosion that you mention. It is interesting to note and understand that glaciers and sharp-toothed beavers constructed North America’s original drainage system including the Russian River. Before European settlement in North America, approximately 400,000 beavers occupied the contiguous forty-eight states. With sculpted mountains and carved out valleys left by the retreating Glaciers of the Last Ice Age 10,000 years ago, water and beaver dams were the two most important ingredients for wetlands and creation of rich valley bottom land. The Glaciers cut it out and the beaver filled it up with life.
Before they were trapped-out for the fur trade, and before wetlands were drained for farming, beaver water-management crews larger than today’s US population built their log-gnawed dams. Slowing and spreading river flows, they allow more water to seep into the ground and feed aquifers. This water eventually finds its way back to the stream slowly during the dry season promoting year round river flow and increasing plant and fish aquatic diversity. This small dam’s slowing process also reduces bank undercutting, river meandering, erosion and creates flood control by reducing the height of potential flood waves.
Most of the great richness of the bottom land in North America is attributed to generations of beaver ponds and development of aquifers. As sediment, branches, and dead leaves build up behind the dam, new dams are constructed up river in a continuous series creating a staircase of sorts. When a pond becomes too shallow due to the buildup of sediment or when natural building materials are depleted, beavers abandon the site. Eventually the dam is breached - draining the water creating meadows and eventually valleys. This is biodiverse wetland creation and how the rich valley soils where created and the groundwater basin preserved over time. That has been disrupted and the effects of this disruption are prevalent today.
To consider your, our unnatural water management systems have created deep and lasting effects on natural water drainage systems. Your comment suggests that we essentially copy the water management practices of the beaver by slowing and spreading the flow of water allowing for aquifers the greatest opportunity to be infiltrated by groundwater. It has been suggested that our future will adopt these practices in order to avoid floods and droughts which are related to destruction of natural processes like those the beaver performed, and river interruptions from large reservoirs and cities and towns being developed to rush rainwater quickly out-of-town through storm drains essentially flushing our water capitol rapidly into the drainage system eroding everything in its path creates the drought/flood relationship.
Richard - Consider that the Russian river undercutting its banks is likely the product of seasonal fast moving waters lacking in natural controls to slow down water velocity and reduce the erosion that you mention. It is interesting to note and understand that glaciers and sharp-toothed beavers constructed North America’s original drainage system including the Russian River. Before European settlement in North America, approximately 400,000 beavers occupied the contiguous forty-eight states. With sculpted mountains and carved out valleys left by the retreating Glaciers of the Last Ice Age 10,000 years ago, water and beaver dams were the two most important ingredients for wetlands and creation of rich valley bottom land. The Glaciers cut it out and the beaver filled it up with life.
Before they were trapped-out for the fur trade, and before wetlands were drained for farming, beaver water-management crews larger than today’s US population built their log-gnawed dams. Slowing and spreading river flows, they allow more water to seep into the ground and feed aquifers. This water eventually finds its way back to the stream slowly during the dry season promoting year round river flow and increasing plant and fish aquatic diversity. This small dam’s slowing process also reduces bank undercutting, river meandering, erosion and creates flood control by reducing the height of potential flood waves.
Most of the great richness of the bottom land in North America is attributed to generations of beaver ponds and development of aquifers. As sediment, branches, and dead leaves build up behind the dam, new dams are constructed up river in a continuous series creating a staircase of sorts. When a pond becomes too shallow due to the buildup of sediment or when natural building materials are depleted, beavers abandon the site. Eventually the dam is breached - draining the water creating meadows and eventually valleys. This is biodiverse wetland creation and how the rich valley soils where created and the groundwater basin preserved over time. That has been disrupted and the effects of this disruption are prevalent today.
To consider your, our unnatural water management systems have created deep and lasting effects on natural water drainage systems. Your comment suggests that we essentially copy the water management practices of the beaver by slowing and spreading the flow of water allowing for aquifers the greatest opportunity to be infiltrated by groundwater. It has been suggested that our future will adopt these practices in order to avoid floods and droughts which are related to destruction of natural processes like those the beaver performed, and river interruptions from large reservoirs and cities and towns being developed to rush rainwater quickly out-of-town through storm drains essentially flushing our water capitol rapidly into the drainage system eroding everything in its path creates the drought/flood relationship.
Supervisor Pinches says the Dos Rios Water Project is just a “large scale pumping project” that “isn’t about growth”, and “isn’t about fisheries.” Rather, it’s about replacing “lost water.” It proposes to pump 3% of winter flows, or 56,000 acre feet (AF) from the Eel River at Dos Rios Bridge. This represents nearly half of Lake Mendocino’s total capacity; a lot of water by any measure.
It would pump 30 plus miles uphill at 880 feet to nearly 2000 feet through a 44 inch diameter pipe delivering to Willits, Redwood Valley, Ukiah, Lake Mendocino and possibly Fort Bragg. The winter pumping is scheduled when most reservoirs are filling with rainwater and stream flows and one wonders if the project would be the genesis of another big reservoir.
A power regeneration plant is planned below Ridgewood Grade to recoup some of the pumping costs. The Mendocino County Water Agency staff has a budget up to $150,000 to conduct a feasibility study within 90 days. The project was originally introduced and deflected a decade ago during a previous Pinches term with an estimated cost then of over 100 million. That figure will rise enormously in today’s market.
The proposal crosses many fault lines literally and figuratively. Yet, more interesting than the revival of this proposal is the pretext that supports its renewal. The pretext is that Mendocino County cannot meet current or future needs without this or similar artificial projects. Actually, the county cannot meet demands with current water management practices. The context ought to be how can Mendocino County better manage the nearly 11 million (AF) of annual rainfall where it falls and is stored underground free-of-charge and avoid astronomical water projects to cover-up excessive consumption habits and management strategies that can be improved upon immensely. That’s what’s missing from the dialogue.
The natural system is supported by our climate, location, diverse habitat and river systems. The underground storage system, drainage system, and floodplains are all part of that naturally free regenerative package that doesn’t require energy investments to function. All we need is good sense and good management practices to draw our water needs cooperatively.
Employing smart and inexpensive land management practices can slow, spread, and penetrate rainwater effectively into aquifers. The same notion applies to city stormwater runoff. This allows rainfall to move slowly first above and then below ground benefiting flora and fauna, perennial stream flows, and saturated aquifers naturally.
It is not difficult to get more from less water consumption through high-efficiency appliances and recycling water for additional reuse. The question is whether our future water management strategies are degenerative or regenerative? The Dos Rios investment is clearly degenerative by virtue of the fact that it begins to degrade and break down the moment it is made. It’s human and environmental costs over time cannot be calculated.
Pinches offered a challenge to anyone who could come up with a better idea. I happen to know someone capable of that challenge. She’s the wisest of all water managers and the quintessential producer of life, Mother Earth. She would encourage our supervisor to really look around for the many fine examples of land management that she has provided for the benefit of all. There is nothing artificial about that process. It is responsible, balanced and cooperative. I think that's a finer way to do business since we are all stewards of our environment whether we claim so or not.
Los Angeles was the population of Ukiah before it developed its first of many aqueducts and its insatiable quest for water. It, like San Francisco, survives on an artificial water support system requiring pumped water from as much as 450 miles away. Many of us don’t live in either LA of SF for a good reason.
It doesn’t really matter whether it’s for growth or something else, when the water becomes available artificially, the slick and well-connected will buy everything from land to county seats and any regulations that obstruct making fortunes will be abolished. The question is how do you want to live?
This is a inquiry to Rachel Oliveri re the article regarding
We're Paying the Price Today for Decades of Relentless Dam Building. Could you send me data links or references for the data you used in your article. I found your article very useful.
There are many alternative options for water development in Mendocino County. A multi-faceted and localized approach is necessary to move forward with low impact water development.
If we consider groundwater infiltration as a general goal, then we have a lot to work with. To take it a step further, we could considered watershed restoration as a means to better groundwater infiltration. Let me explain. During a storm, the time of concentration (time it takes for a drop of water falling on the most distant part of a drainage basin to reach the mouth) is elevated due to dense road networks and development in many watersheds. Paved and dirt roads alike interrupt the natural hydrologic network, speeding up the flow of water in ditches and culverts. That means that the water that falls on the ridgetop reaches the mouth of the river in less time. By restoring hydrologic networks, increasing stream complexity and sinuosity, and adding ponds or swales in the watershed, the residence time of water can be greatly increased. This in turn would result in greater infiltration. In wet years, the storage capacity of the earth might already be full, but in drought years, there should be plenty of room to accept this added water.
Added benefits include flood reduction, habitat development, and reduced turbidity. Turbidity is not only detrimental to salmon, but is the most significant contaminant that water districts have to deal with.
The EPA is starting to require that municipalities treat their stormwater by infiltrating it onsite in bio-swales. There are grants available to do this immediately and larger cities are requiring it up and down the west coast.
Rainwater catchment from roofs is a great option that is always pooh-poohed because of the cost. However, it adds security to community as a whole and allows people to greatly increase their understanding of how much water they use. Monitoring one’s precious rain-water tank will result in more drip irrigation and heavy mulching – gaurenteed.
What is most important about our water issue is to first understand that our water supply is a resource limited to an annual deposit. In other words, we lived on a yearly fixed income of water and that is variable year-to-year. The notion that we can find new water sources fails to recognize that it is the same water year after year recycled as rain, (solid) snow or vapor. It is the same water from the beginning of time being processed throughout the world in these various forms over and over again.
Further, what is important about annual rainfall is not how much rainwater a given area receives, rather, how much of that rainfall volume actually penetrates the soil and becomes groundwater to feed creeks, streams, rivers, wetlands, outlets and finally emptying into the ocean to await evaporation to become rainfall once again in some other region of the planet.
We unwittingly build our cities to evacuate water as quickly as possible through storm drains and sewer systems. This is like taking a large cash withdrawal from your bank account and throwing into a strong wind. Water is perhaps the most valuable resource, if not the most undervalued, and we can no sooner afford to manage our bank accounts in this fashion, why would we do so with our annual water deposit?
Water likes to move slowly. Carrying nutrients through the soil and watershed, slow water movement sustains all manner of life forms that we humans depend on for life. Trapping water in reservoirs cost more to the environment in damaged ecosystems than it provides benefits for human use - domestic or industrial. Dams are not built to last forever and as they fill up with silt reducing carrying capacity each year, become a very costly and destructive waterfall.
Water likes to be stored in the ground or aquifers. Their, it doesn’t evaporate or fill up with silt and both the rainfall and the storage is gift from nature. Groundwater feeds rivers and their watersheds by slowly releasing water year round enhancing riparian diversity and all flora and fauna that have evolved around that cycle.
Regional carrying capacity is much more wisely developed when based on available year round rechargeable groundwater storage source. Developing our communities to promote ground water infiltration by slowing and spreading the water invites the water to stay and penetrate, not rush out of town at high velocity speeds eroding everything in its path. And, carrying toxic chemicals like herbicides, pesticides, gas, oil, oil-based fertilizers, etc. that are commonly found in storm water starting with rooftops, landscapes, driveways, streets, etc.
Humanity would benefit greatly by revisiting our relationship with water and redesigning our water management systems to consider water efficiency through and groundwater restoration projects.
Posted by: Rachel Olivieri | January 07, 2007 at 05:33 PM
There is potentially a huge reservoir under the Ukiah Valley. It’s capacity is reduced when the Russian River cuts deeper. Could we put in small dams with fish ladders to raise the water level and increase the storage capacity? An example of using such a reservoir is in Santa Clara Valley where they take water from the Central Valley Project and percolated it into the ground just below Los Gatos.
Posted by: Richard Winkler | January 08, 2007 at 10:24 AM
Richard - Consider that the Russian river undercutting its banks is likely the product of seasonal fast moving waters lacking in natural controls to slow down water velocity and reduce the erosion that you mention. It is interesting to note and understand that glaciers and sharp-toothed beavers constructed North America’s original drainage system including the Russian River. Before European settlement in North America, approximately 400,000 beavers occupied the contiguous forty-eight states. With sculpted mountains and carved out valleys left by the retreating Glaciers of the Last Ice Age 10,000 years ago, water and beaver dams were the two most important ingredients for wetlands and creation of rich valley bottom land. The Glaciers cut it out and the beaver filled it up with life.
Before they were trapped-out for the fur trade, and before wetlands were drained for farming, beaver water-management crews larger than today’s US population built their log-gnawed dams. Slowing and spreading river flows, they allow more water to seep into the ground and feed aquifers. This water eventually finds its way back to the stream slowly during the dry season promoting year round river flow and increasing plant and fish aquatic diversity. This small dam’s slowing process also reduces bank undercutting, river meandering, erosion and creates flood control by reducing the height of potential flood waves.
Most of the great richness of the bottom land in North America is attributed to generations of beaver ponds and development of aquifers. As sediment, branches, and dead leaves build up behind the dam, new dams are constructed up river in a continuous series creating a staircase of sorts. When a pond becomes too shallow due to the buildup of sediment or when natural building materials are depleted, beavers abandon the site. Eventually the dam is breached - draining the water creating meadows and eventually valleys. This is biodiverse wetland creation and how the rich valley soils where created and the groundwater basin preserved over time. That has been disrupted and the effects of this disruption are prevalent today.
To consider your, our unnatural water management systems have created deep and lasting effects on natural water drainage systems. Your comment suggests that we essentially copy the water management practices of the beaver by slowing and spreading the flow of water allowing for aquifers the greatest opportunity to be infiltrated by groundwater. It has been suggested that our future will adopt these practices in order to avoid floods and droughts which are related to destruction of natural processes like those the beaver performed, and river interruptions from large reservoirs and cities and towns being developed to rush rainwater quickly out-of-town through storm drains essentially flushing our water capitol rapidly into the drainage system eroding everything in its path creates the drought/flood relationship.
Rachel Olivieri
Posted by: Rachel Olivieri | January 28, 2007 at 05:20 PM
Richard - Consider that the Russian river undercutting its banks is likely the product of seasonal fast moving waters lacking in natural controls to slow down water velocity and reduce the erosion that you mention. It is interesting to note and understand that glaciers and sharp-toothed beavers constructed North America’s original drainage system including the Russian River. Before European settlement in North America, approximately 400,000 beavers occupied the contiguous forty-eight states. With sculpted mountains and carved out valleys left by the retreating Glaciers of the Last Ice Age 10,000 years ago, water and beaver dams were the two most important ingredients for wetlands and creation of rich valley bottom land. The Glaciers cut it out and the beaver filled it up with life.
Before they were trapped-out for the fur trade, and before wetlands were drained for farming, beaver water-management crews larger than today’s US population built their log-gnawed dams. Slowing and spreading river flows, they allow more water to seep into the ground and feed aquifers. This water eventually finds its way back to the stream slowly during the dry season promoting year round river flow and increasing plant and fish aquatic diversity. This small dam’s slowing process also reduces bank undercutting, river meandering, erosion and creates flood control by reducing the height of potential flood waves.
Most of the great richness of the bottom land in North America is attributed to generations of beaver ponds and development of aquifers. As sediment, branches, and dead leaves build up behind the dam, new dams are constructed up river in a continuous series creating a staircase of sorts. When a pond becomes too shallow due to the buildup of sediment or when natural building materials are depleted, beavers abandon the site. Eventually the dam is breached - draining the water creating meadows and eventually valleys. This is biodiverse wetland creation and how the rich valley soils where created and the groundwater basin preserved over time. That has been disrupted and the effects of this disruption are prevalent today.
To consider your, our unnatural water management systems have created deep and lasting effects on natural water drainage systems. Your comment suggests that we essentially copy the water management practices of the beaver by slowing and spreading the flow of water allowing for aquifers the greatest opportunity to be infiltrated by groundwater. It has been suggested that our future will adopt these practices in order to avoid floods and droughts which are related to destruction of natural processes like those the beaver performed, and river interruptions from large reservoirs and cities and towns being developed to rush rainwater quickly out-of-town through storm drains essentially flushing our water capitol rapidly into the drainage system eroding everything in its path creates the drought/flood relationship.
Rachel Olivieri
Posted by: Rachel Olivieri | January 28, 2007 at 05:20 PM
Supervisor Pinches says the Dos Rios Water Project is just a “large scale pumping project” that “isn’t about growth”, and “isn’t about fisheries.” Rather, it’s about replacing “lost water.” It proposes to pump 3% of winter flows, or 56,000 acre feet (AF) from the Eel River at Dos Rios Bridge. This represents nearly half of Lake Mendocino’s total capacity; a lot of water by any measure.
It would pump 30 plus miles uphill at 880 feet to nearly 2000 feet through a 44 inch diameter pipe delivering to Willits, Redwood Valley, Ukiah, Lake Mendocino and possibly Fort Bragg. The winter pumping is scheduled when most reservoirs are filling with rainwater and stream flows and one wonders if the project would be the genesis of another big reservoir.
A power regeneration plant is planned below Ridgewood Grade to recoup some of the pumping costs. The Mendocino County Water Agency staff has a budget up to $150,000 to conduct a feasibility study within 90 days. The project was originally introduced and deflected a decade ago during a previous Pinches term with an estimated cost then of over 100 million. That figure will rise enormously in today’s market.
The proposal crosses many fault lines literally and figuratively. Yet, more interesting than the revival of this proposal is the pretext that supports its renewal. The pretext is that Mendocino County cannot meet current or future needs without this or similar artificial projects. Actually, the county cannot meet demands with current water management practices. The context ought to be how can Mendocino County better manage the nearly 11 million (AF) of annual rainfall where it falls and is stored underground free-of-charge and avoid astronomical water projects to cover-up excessive consumption habits and management strategies that can be improved upon immensely. That’s what’s missing from the dialogue.
The natural system is supported by our climate, location, diverse habitat and river systems. The underground storage system, drainage system, and floodplains are all part of that naturally free regenerative package that doesn’t require energy investments to function. All we need is good sense and good management practices to draw our water needs cooperatively.
Employing smart and inexpensive land management practices can slow, spread, and penetrate rainwater effectively into aquifers. The same notion applies to city stormwater runoff. This allows rainfall to move slowly first above and then below ground benefiting flora and fauna, perennial stream flows, and saturated aquifers naturally.
It is not difficult to get more from less water consumption through high-efficiency appliances and recycling water for additional reuse. The question is whether our future water management strategies are degenerative or regenerative? The Dos Rios investment is clearly degenerative by virtue of the fact that it begins to degrade and break down the moment it is made. It’s human and environmental costs over time cannot be calculated.
Pinches offered a challenge to anyone who could come up with a better idea. I happen to know someone capable of that challenge. She’s the wisest of all water managers and the quintessential producer of life, Mother Earth. She would encourage our supervisor to really look around for the many fine examples of land management that she has provided for the benefit of all. There is nothing artificial about that process. It is responsible, balanced and cooperative. I think that's a finer way to do business since we are all stewards of our environment whether we claim so or not.
Los Angeles was the population of Ukiah before it developed its first of many aqueducts and its insatiable quest for water. It, like San Francisco, survives on an artificial water support system requiring pumped water from as much as 450 miles away. Many of us don’t live in either LA of SF for a good reason.
It doesn’t really matter whether it’s for growth or something else, when the water becomes available artificially, the slick and well-connected will buy everything from land to county seats and any regulations that obstruct making fortunes will be abolished. The question is how do you want to live?
Posted by: Rachel Olivieri | June 06, 2007 at 07:40 PM
mi cah understand why mi mus sen a comment to u and i do not understand utr web site i the first place its so lame.
Posted by: madix | March 28, 2008 at 06:43 AM
hello good show
Posted by: madix | March 28, 2008 at 06:43 AM
This is a inquiry to Rachel Oliveri re the article regarding
We're Paying the Price Today for Decades of Relentless Dam Building. Could you send me data links or references for the data you used in your article. I found your article very useful.
Posted by: antony watkins | September 20, 2008 at 04:17 PM
There are many alternative options for water development in Mendocino County. A multi-faceted and localized approach is necessary to move forward with low impact water development.
If we consider groundwater infiltration as a general goal, then we have a lot to work with. To take it a step further, we could considered watershed restoration as a means to better groundwater infiltration. Let me explain. During a storm, the time of concentration (time it takes for a drop of water falling on the most distant part of a drainage basin to reach the mouth) is elevated due to dense road networks and development in many watersheds. Paved and dirt roads alike interrupt the natural hydrologic network, speeding up the flow of water in ditches and culverts. That means that the water that falls on the ridgetop reaches the mouth of the river in less time. By restoring hydrologic networks, increasing stream complexity and sinuosity, and adding ponds or swales in the watershed, the residence time of water can be greatly increased. This in turn would result in greater infiltration. In wet years, the storage capacity of the earth might already be full, but in drought years, there should be plenty of room to accept this added water.
Added benefits include flood reduction, habitat development, and reduced turbidity. Turbidity is not only detrimental to salmon, but is the most significant contaminant that water districts have to deal with.
The EPA is starting to require that municipalities treat their stormwater by infiltrating it onsite in bio-swales. There are grants available to do this immediately and larger cities are requiring it up and down the west coast.
Rainwater catchment from roofs is a great option that is always pooh-poohed because of the cost. However, it adds security to community as a whole and allows people to greatly increase their understanding of how much water they use. Monitoring one’s precious rain-water tank will result in more drip irrigation and heavy mulching – gaurenteed.
Posted by: Anna Birkas | March 16, 2009 at 09:33 PM