Dutch rewilding river project

‘This is what a river should look like’: Dutch rewilding project turns back the clock 500 years by Phoebe Weston of The Guardian reveals an interesting co-investment in making rivers run wild again. The reasons – man-influenced and worsened flooding and chemical run-off from farms are harmful to all concerned.

Here are few salient paragraphs, but I encourage you to read the article below.

“Frans Schepers, managing director of Rewilding Europe, who was leading the largest river-restoration project in Europe, believes radical river restoration projects should be taken more seriously. ‘People are not used to looking at green infrastructure in the way they look at other “hard” infrastructure like roads, railways and waterways. But this [type of project] is also for the common good,’ he says...

Crisis point in the Netherlands arrived decades ago after a series of destructive floods in the 80s and 90s. Dead pigs were found stuck in trees as livestock that couldn’t be moved away fast enough drowned in high waters. Thriving fishing communities had died out and rivers had become a threat to people. Momentum to radically overhaul them started building. The planning phase for the Border Meuse began in 1990, with work starting in 2007 and due to finish in 2027.

‘Rivers should be biodiversity hotspots but all over the world they are being damaged by human activity and slurry and pesticides runoff from farms. A key part of Border Meuse has been separating nature and agriculture by buying out farms along two river catchments and returning them to a natural state. Some farmers opposed being moved, but most were struggling to farm because of the flooding and were generously compensated. Farmers have moved away from hundreds of kilometres of Dutch rivers where flood protection and ecological restoration are priorities,’ says Schepers.

The €550m project is being paid for mainly by companies wanting to extract sand and gravel from the riverbed, which has helped widen the river and lower riverbanks and so expand the floodplain. Because of the involvement of industry, Border Meuse was the only large river restoration project that wasn’t withdrawn during the 2008 financial crash. Today, it attracts two million visitors a year, bringing in about €1bn of revenue to the Meuse region.

Here in the US, past efforts to straighten rivers have been destructive to the environment, especially around the Mississippi River basin and we have been losing land at a rapid rate. The solution was to help nature get back to what it was and stop trying to influence it so much. In Steven Solomon’s book “Water” he notes the Egyptians tried to control the Nile for centuries, but nature would bite them in the fanny to show who was boss with extra silt deposits that ruined crops and the water.

Solomon’s book is even more relevant today with our global and US water crisis, which has been made even worse by climate change. Competing interests in river and other waters have led to more evaporation and pose grave concerns to people via hydration and food irrigation. If we do not address these now (and we are already late), the livelihoods of many people will be altered.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/sep/20/dutch-rewilding-project-turns-back-the-clock-500-years-aoe

Water crisis out west solicits water restrictions, but need more

Per an article presented on CBS News called “US West hit with water cuts but rebuffs call for deeper ones,” the federal government stepped in when seven states out west could not come to an agreement, as their water sources dwindle to less than 1/2, closer to 1/3 of their previous supply. The article can be linked to below, but here are a few key paragraphs:

“For the second year in a row, Arizona and Nevada will face cuts in the amount of water they can draw from the Colorado River as the West endures more drought, federal officials announced Tuesday.

The cuts planned for next year will force states to make critical decisions about where to reduce consumption and whether to prioritize growing cities or agricultural areas. Mexico will also face cuts.

But those reductions represent just a fraction of the potential pain to come for the 40 million Americans in seven states that rely on the river. Because the states failed to respond to a federal ultimatum to figure out how to cut their water use by at least 15%, they could face even deeper cuts that the government has said are needed to prevent reservoirs from falling so low they cannot be pumped.

‘The states collectively have not identified and adopted specific actions of sufficient magnitude that would stabilize the system,’ Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Camille Touton said.

Together, the missed deadline and cuts place officials responsible for providing water to growing cities and farms under renewed pressure to plan for a hotter, drier future and a growing population.

Touton has said the additional 15% reduction is necessary to ensure that water deliveries and hydroelectric power are not disrupted. She was noncommittal on Tuesday about whether she planned to impose those cuts unilaterally if the states cannot reach agreement.”

The world has been facing a global water crisis for some time now. A couple of years ago, Cape Town, South Africa had a countdown to no water, which they staved off. And, Saudi Arabia, an oil rich country, is water poor, so the regime said Muslims could pray with sand instead of water. In the US, we are seeing pockets of water shortage with the western part of the country seeing the worst trouble. The shortage is exacerbated as seven states have competed for and cannot come to an agreement on how to reduce water supply.

In short, these states better get their act together. Climate change has only made the water crisis worse. Duke Energy wrote a report that projected on top of normal water loss when creating power due to steam dissipation that is not reconverted to water after the power is generated and evaporation from water reservoirs, they would lose an additional 11% of water due to climate change. This is an additional reason we need to move aggressively to sources of energy that do not require fresh water such as wind, tidal and photovoltaic solar energy. *

And, our industries, government and water users must alter our practices before it is too late. This relates to the type of plants that are used which need to be endemic to an area, to fewer golf courses, to less lawn watering, to less fracking for natural gas which uses an abundance of water, to less usage by people. People must do the part, but in a survey this week, many felt they could not make a difference. That is selfish and short-sighted. They better make a difference or they will need to have water shipped in or move.

In Miriam Horn’s book “Rancher, Farmer, Fisherman,” she notes a farmer said we need to grow crops that grow naturally to an area. They require far less water that way. The farm to table restaurants are nice in principle, but in certain places growing water intensive crops is less utile. These are the kinds of things we need to think about.

It really comes down to the following; water, air and food. We must nurture and protect these resources. And, when a fossil fuel company raises a stink, remind them of what Steven Solomon said in his book “Water: The Epic Struggle for Wealth, Power, and Civilization.” He coined the phrase “water is the new oil.” I first heard this phrase uttered by the CEO of Duke Energy at the time, before I read Solomon’s must read book. Now, why would a CEO say that?

*There are some solar installations that heat water to steam to turn turbines and generate power, but most solar installations use photovoltaic solar panels that harness the sun’s energy.

https://www.cbsnews.com/colorado/news/us-west-colorado-river-water-cuts-drought/