"Instead, the river is dammed at the US-Mexico border, and on the other side the river channel is empty. Locals are now battling to bring it back to life. There are few more striking examples of what has come to be known as 'environmental injustice' – the inequitable access to clean land, air and water, and disproportionate exposure to hazards and climate disasters. Water in particular has emerged as a flash point as global heating renders vast swaths of the planet ever drier.... [T]he 1944 treaty did not allocate Mexico any water for the river itself.... In the US, the Colorado serves over 35 million people, including several native tribes, seven national wildlife refuges, 11 national parks, and, supports $26m tourism and recreational industries, as well as farming.... At the Morelos dam, located between Los Algodones, Baja California and Yuma, Arizona, the river is diverted to a complex system of irrigation canals which nourish fields of cotton, wheat, alfalfa, asparagus, watermelons and date palms in the vast surrounding desert valley.... Following the dry riverbed south towards the Gulf of California evokes an eerie sadness...."
From "The lost river/Mexicans fight for mighty waterway taken by the US" (The Guardian).
I'm interested in this concept of the water's inherent destiny — that it "is supposed to flow onwards to the Sea of Cortez." No one is fighting for that result.
२१ ऑक्टोबर, २०१९
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
७० टिप्पण्या:
Someone should file suit on behalf of the river. If they've not already done so.
The Guardian is trying to imply that Mexico gets no water from the Colorado. The Mexican states of Sonora and Baja California both do.
“In the US, the Colorado serves over 35 million people,”
Jeez, talk about what Nature never intended. The populating of the American Southwest is an environmental freak show. But that ship has sailed until Nature administers a harsh corrective. The Guardian article is pointless in it’s irrelevance. Any enviro-Leftist who wants to be taken seriously will studiously avoid this particular inconvenient truth.
i thought, it was SUPPOSED to flow into the Salton Sea?
I'm interested in this concept of the water's inherent destiny — that it "is supposed to flow onwards to the Sea of Cortez."
It does.
When it rains downstream of the dam.
The treaty with Mexico does not grant any rights to this water. Further, all of the water comes from rain that falls onto the United States. So why would the US forgo the use of this water?
Is "global heating" is a novel locution? I don't think I've ever seen it before. Are they trying to re-brand global warming as a concept?
35 million people served versus a few environmental grievance junkies in Mexico? Yeah, I don't imagine that the Hoover dam is going to be dismantled any time soon.
Every time Minneapolis gets a heavy rain that washes sewage into the Mississippi River I'm reminded that it sucks to live downstream.
Trump should let the river flow again. It would be a great gesture.
In that particular patch of God's country whiskey is for drinking, water is for fighting.
How about that. We must have a World Government after all because of this Global Warming. The one that is now cooling the atmosphere faster and faster, thereby sending stronger Jet Streams dips of cold air south and blocking east-west air circulation for a week or two which the Propaganda Media calls a localized heat wave.
Mexicans fight for mighty waterway created in the US.
"Today the Guardian is launching a year-long series, Our Unequal Earth, to investigate environmental inequalities and discrimination in the US and beyond. It will also reveal how the climate crisis is making things worse for activists and scientists on the ground."
Did they miss any buzzwords?
We are all animists now.
I'm interested in this concept of the water's inherent destiny — that it "is supposed to flow onwards to the Sea of Cortez." No one is fighting for that result.
Because by that logic of the rivers should always go to their original destination, San Francisco, San Fernando Valley and almost all of Los Angeles to San Diego would cease to exist. Those areas are literally stealing the water from distant locations and from sources where the original courses were NOT to their cities.
Check out the Owens Valley Water Wars and how the Los Angeles Aqueduct decimated that valley and destroyed it utterly.
So its not been "flowing to the Sea of Cortez" since 1944, or 75 years. But NOW Mexico cares. Really, did someone just notice? I'm sure nature has adjusted in the last 75 years, and will be completely out of balance if we start "Re-flowing" the water.
I’ve thought for years, because I read an article or two about this, that there is an agreement and we weren’t holding up our end.
Of course, Mexico is showing some hypocrisy here; the Mexicans had agreed decades ago to allow water to flow into the Rio Grande below Falcon Dam from tributaries on their side of the border, but that isn't happening, and hasn't happened for about five years. All depends on whose ox is being gored, I suppose.
“Seven US states”? Geography is hard.
Can't remember who said it: "Clever of the Americans to grab the part of California with the big cities, extensive infrastructure, and industry in it."
(Of course, that was many years ago before Cali became a monopolitical state.)
"Following the dry riverbed south towards the Gulf of California evokes an eerie sadness...."
Not in me. I would call it more expected indifference.
So Mexico does not have access to clean land, clean water, and clean air? I don't believe it.
“All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again.” Ecclesiastes 1:7
Just be thankful the Colorado does not flow South to North.
Would not be very nice to see the raw sewage that mexico dumps into its own rivers rolling through the Grand Canyon.
https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/San-Diego-State-of-Emergency-Raw-Sewage-Imperial-Beach-Tijuana-559947201.html
Hey, too bad mexico, that water originated in the United States, it's ours. We should start charging them for any left over water that flows over the border. If there is environmental inequality, it's because I live in Michigan, and would prefer the tropics in the winter. Someone MUST be taxed to send me to the Caribbean in the winter. Thanks.
The real problem, is there is one, is that the border is too far north, and the US should also include what is now both Baja Californias and the NW part of Sonora.
"US fights [not] for land taken by Mexico"
The Sea is still named after Cortez?
Changing that should be the priority.
“Seven US states”? Geography is hard.
They probably copied that from Wikipedia but left out the part about "watershed" vs actual river.
It's long past time to re-name the Sea of Cortez. Did the Aztecs have any gods or kings whose name can be spelled correctly by amateurs?
Colorado River watershed or route includes Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Arizona, Nevada, California ----that's six states. Guardian's "7 states" is part of Obama's 57 states.
Water law and the different theories of who owns it, or has rights to it-depending upon being adjacent to the river or putting some part of the river to first use is a fascinating body of law in and of itself. Doubt that the writer in the Guardian has a clue as to the theories.
And the commenter above is correct--in the West, whiskey is for drinking and water is for fighting. And the guy at the downstream end of the river is frequently just out of luck and H2O.
It will also reveal how the climate crisis is making things worse for activists and scientists on the ground."
Oh, it’s bad all right. They’ve lied or their numbers lie so much, people don’t believe them. Their prestige and pocketbooks hardest hit.
Go to Google maps. Search Colorado River Texas. Follow it as it twists and turns through Austin then takes more turns than your small intestine and finally winds up at the Gulf of Mexico at Matagorda near Corpus Christi.
A little to far east for the Sea of Cortez.
Can you still call it the Sea of Cortez? I would have thought he'd have been un-personed by now.
I anxiously await the environmental activists who live in SoCals' response to this...
Water in particular has emerged as a flash point as global heating renders vast swaths of the planet ever drier....
No need to go further.
Everyone who decries greed in someone is greedy themselves. The desire to have more is in every person; it is only righteous when I want it but evil if you do.
Traverses seven states? No. But the watershead covers seven states. So sloppy, if not just ignorant, reporting/editing all around.
This is their own fault. Spanish/Mexican law says the first one to use the water for irrigation gets to keep doing it even if it reduces the flow downstream. That was incorporated into U.S. law after the Mexican war because the Mexican's didn't want their compatriots who now lived across the border to lose any existing property rights. Water rights under English law work differently and those are the rules we live under in Wisconsin and most of the Eastern United States
Skeptical Voter. You forgot Wyoming.
Wasn't it Roosevelt that said every drop of water from the Colorado that reaches Mexico is a waste?
I also don't understand how de-salinization isn't a thing.
So, they want this fresh water to be wasted by flowing into the ocean.
Typical leftist idiocy.
How about we send clean water across the border to Mexico when Mexico stops sending sewage water across the border to the United States?
Colorado River watershed or route includes Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Arizona, Nevada, California ----that's six states.
And Wyoming (Green River). That's seven states.
this article isn't "investigative journalism." it's outright advocacy and propaganda and it should be honest about what it is and isn't.
Mexico has much more important things to worry about.
Like the collapse of the Mexican government.
You may have read the news just a few days back: the Mexican military captured not one but two of El Chapo’s sons in the heart of Culiacán, the Sinaloan capital. One son freed himself—which is to say his entourage and retainers at hand overpowered and killed the soldiers at hand—and then, in a decisive riposte, seized the entire city center of Culiacán to compel the liberation of his brother.
The forces that emerged were in the literal sense awesome and awful. Heavy weaponry that would be familiar on any Iraqi, Syrian, or Yemeni battlefield was brought to bear. More and worse: custom-built armored vehicles, designed and built to make a Sahel-warfare technical look like an amateur’s weekend kit job, were rolled out for their combat debut. Most critically, all this hardware was manned by men with qualities the Mexican Army largely lacks: training, tactical proficiency, and motivation.
Then the coup de grace: as the Chapo sons’ forces engaged in direct combat with their own national military, kill squads went into action across Culiacán, slaughtering the families of soldiers engaged in the streets.
Narco state developing.
So far it is simple enough to navigate around the Guardian's CLIMATE EMERGENCY! articles-- all of 'em seem to be awash with yellow or yellow-bordered. I never read the 'sponsored' pieces (like this Colorado River one), either.
And the new sort of page, where half the article is text and then the other is images and graphics one must make one's way through before reaching the next paragraph of text, is very, very obnoxious. The NYT has taken to doing this also. These are designed for people who do not read easily, I reckon.
What a misleading article. The Guardian literally went out of its way to leave the impression that Mexico gets no water from from border dam. This isn't true. What is true is that the water is diverted, in Mexico, to agricultural interests and water supply almost 100%, not to the riverbed.
This is why I just disdain journalism these days- it has devolved to almost 100% propaganda. When I read an article, I have to fact check every single assertion myself. It is the same thing as if I had to perform and assess my own damned colonoscopy.
I also don't understand how de-salinization isn't a thing.
Current technology is energy intensive.
"gahrie said...
How about we send clean water across the border to Mexico when Mexico stops sending sewage water across the border to the United States?"
Or worse, Mexicans.
The natural law here would seem to be that, absent something negotiated to the contrary, upstream users get first dibs on the water flow. If you want to use resources that originate in another country then you must negotiate for them, or do without. Or (successfully) invade, I suppose. Whereas the upstream user can just, well, use the resource (or not)as it wishes.
And what is the Guardian's argument to the contrary? Why, exactly, is it "supposed to flow onwards to the Sea of Cortez"? Because God (and Guardian) said so?
Hm. I figured the seven states included the two Mexican states of Sonora and Baja California. I suppose the watershed explanation is more likely.
Reading the article made me ponder this peculiar situation in which most of a vast watershed lies within one nation, but the river's mouth within another. That put me in mind of Manifest Destiny and the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which are not mentioned in the article. I recall that many of the arguments made in favor of the Mexican-American War were agricultural and racist, borne out of a desire to cultivate dormant lands and to outbreed / exterminate / bless the mixed race of perfidious Mexicans.
Cesar Chavez grew up on the family farm near Yuma. The loss of their land shaped his life. How is his vision of human flourishing similar to / different from the Guardian's outlook?
Border Incident, a beautiful film noir directed by Anthony Mann and starring Ricardo Montalban, takes place along the All-American Canal. It starts out in documentary style but pretty quickly becomes a typically murky noir. It's about the smuggling of migrant workers. It has a memorable night-for-night scene with a guy being run down by mechanized farm equipment.
Eventually, all things merge into one, and a river runs through it. The river was cut by the world's great flood and runs over rocks from the basement of time. On some of the rocks are timeless raindrops. Under the rocks are the words, and some of the words are theirs.
I am haunted by waters.
Norman Maclean, A River Runs Through it
When I lived in Colorado, I learned about the old saying that "In the West, whiskey is for sipping and water is for fighting over." The agreements for water usage are so strict that when I lived there, it was illegal to have a rainwater catchment system on your property. Several years, we were in drought. We were put on water use restrictions that were pretty severe. That didn't stop the downstream states from demanding we provide them with water we ourselves didn't have. I offered to organize a meeting at the Continental Divide where everyone would piss into a stream so we could help provide water to the downstream states. It didn't happen, but it should have.
The Colorado River is created by rain and snow that fall on the United States. I'm sorry it all gets used up before it gets to Mexico, but it seems to me that we have a better claim on the water than they do.
Nuclear powered desalinization is a non starter, I guess. Imagine fusion powered desalinization! But if we can’t run it on wind turbines or solar cells, it’s a no go.
Why stop with natural flows?
As the Narco Statelets develop their hegemony in Mexico's north, the U.S. may need a secure zone across the border, say 50 miles deep.
Thanks for the explication of English and Spanish water law, Who Knew.
While fresh water supply is an imperative, desalination is not a mission critical application. Wind turbines and photovoltaic farms would be well suited to generate the electricity necessary for the process. Go Green on the beachfront or some other unoccupied space.
Cadillac Desert gives a great over view of water in the West
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PR2BSGQt2DU
Annie C. @ 10:33: You’re looking at the wrong Colorado River.
“It’s not fair, the gabachos should leave some water for us.”
Apparently, The Guardian thinks hateful xenophobic language is OK—as long as it’s directed at Americans.
Michael K observes: Narco state developing.
The drug cartels have long had the upper hand in Mexico. When they prove they have superior firepower to the military, as they did in this case, it's sad. Not that we don't have branches of the cartels in nearly every state in the US.
Desalination would seem to be a perfect application for wind and solar because when the sun sets and the wind drops, simply stop making more fresh water for the time being, until they resume.
Via Insty: Global warming campaigners have done an effective job at convincing the media and much of the world that polar bears are dying out.
It’s not true.
In fact, thanks to a hunting ban, polar bears are a major conservation success story. Their population ballooned from around 5,000 in the 1960s to (depending on whose estimate) from 22,000 to over 30,000 today. Today the North is loaded with fat, happy, fecund bears (sorry seals)....
The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.
Ronald Reagan
Mexicans have to move to LA to get their water.
Then it's Northern California's turn to be resentful.
You can see the agricultural irrigation in Mexico by looking at Google Maps. That was discussed in the Gaurdian article. The nearby Salton Sea is 236 feet below sea level, so if the U.S. and Mexico dug a trench to the Gulf of California, that could take in some of the rising sea levels. And think of the new ocean front property that could be created.
How hard would it be to bring the Salton Sea up to sea level? I think the current sea front property is derelict.
I do apologize, I'm too tired tonight to read the whole thread to see if someone has said this already: I took a course in college that included discussion of water rights in the West, and either that or my groundwater class pointed out that water rights to the Colorado were determined on the basis of 110% flow at flood stage. Which means 0 water downstream of the dam. There was more about the treaty with Mexico but I don't recall it... nor do I recall WHY Western water rights are as they are (which makes this comment wholly useless), but I do recall that they're different from water rights in non-dryland areas in very significant ways.
Heck, I live in Houston now. Water is a problem here, but not on account of its scarcity!
"...supports $26m tourism and recreational industries..."
That seems small. I suspect a mistake there.
The Salton Sea has been shrinking, due to lack of sufficient rainwater input. There's a big controversy down there now over whether it should be “saved” by allowing more water (in an already parched area) to flow into it.
What would be the odds that if that dam was breached Mexico would allow the water to reach the Sea of Cortez? My guess is that they'd do the same thing with it we are.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा