The futures of tourism, wildlife and ranching in Mono County are now at the mercy of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power - according to environmental groups - now that a court has upheld the agency's authority to cut irrigation water.

For about 100 years, the agency has leased its land and provided water for ranchers to graze cattle in Long Valley and Little Round Valley. But Wendy Schneider, executive director of the nonprofit Friends of the Inyo, said the damage from allowing less water to irrigate these valleys would be widespread.

"We are talking about taking away the scenic value and the recreational value, of a large portion of the county," said Schneider. "Also, this area is really important for the survival of the bi-state sage grouse population."

Schneider also said she worries about the survival of trout and the potential for increased dust storms and fire danger.

The DWP did not immediately respond to a request for comment - but has argued in court that it has the right to modify its leases and that the historic drought has forced its hand, since its primary mission is to serve millions of families in the Southland.

The current watering season will continue through September. The DWP hasn't said how much it plans to cut water deliveries to the alpine meadows near Mammoth Lakes.

Stacey Simon, legal counsel for Mono County, said the court did provide a backstop to prevent the city from cutting off the water entirely.

"The court is saying, 'Look, we can't direct this public agency as to how to exercise its discretion,'" said Simon. "'But we do say that, if it goes so far as to dry out these lands completely, that's a new project, environmental review is required.'"

The DWP first notified leaseholders about its intention to cut back on water in 2018. A trial court initially sided with Mono County and the Sierra Club, but the appeals court partially reversed that decision on Thursday.

According to Simon, if the agency turns off the flow altogether, stakeholders would consider litigation under the California Environmental Quality Act.

The Biden Administration is investing $105 million in water conservation and efficiency projects meant to shore up drought resilience, including more than $5.5 million for projects in Larimer, Montezuma, Montrose and Otero counties.

Zachary Hoylman, assistant state climatologist, said protecting water resources now and in the future will be critical for the nation's farmers and ranchers.

"Conservation is a really important piece of building resiliency," Hoylman explained. "Especially in an era of increasing variability in the climate system and longer term changes to the climate system."

The projects will optimize water deliveries to agricultural users, mitigate the risks of ditch failures by installing pipes, and install smart water meters. Shovel-ready projects in 11 states including Colorado are projected to save more than 111,000 acre-feet of water annually. One acre-foot is equal to more than 325,000 gallons of water, enough to cover a football field with one foot of water.

Hoylman pointed out there are many benefits to improving water transport efficiencies but it is also important to consider broader impacts. If you transport water by pipe instead of by ditch, it may be more efficient but it could also be taking water away from wetlands and waterfowl habitat.

"We can't only think about the human, socio-economic system," Hoylman argued. "There is really important feedback between the way that we divert water and the implications for ecology and ecosystems as a whole."

The investment taps funding allocated in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law passed in 2021. The Bureau of Reclamation is investing a total of $8.3 billion over five years for water infrastructure projects, including rural water, water storage, conservation and conveyance, nature-based solutions, dam safety, water purification and reuse, and desalination.


get more stories like this via email

Researchers in the Meadows Center for Water and the Environment at Texas State University are studying ways to determine levels of fecal contamination on Texas beaches. Exposure to fecal matter can cause nausea, diarrhea, ear infections, and rashes. A 2022 study showed 55 beaches across the state were potentially unsafe for swimming on at least one testing day a year.

Luke Metzger, executive director with Environment Texas, said researchers will develop a pilot project that will monitor bacteria levels.

"Their grant is to help use Artificial Intelligence to create a early warning system to help the public know when the beach that they want to swim in, whether it's safe to do so or not," he said.

The Meadows Center received a $500,000 grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The six-month pilot program will start September first, the study will take place on recreational beaches in Harris, Matagorda and Nueces counties.

During the summer, Texas beaches are tested weekly for fecal contamination. Signs are posted on the beach if bacteria are found. The information is also posted at Texasbeachwatch.com. There are several ways beaches become contaminated.

"Rainfall can also lead to sewage overflows where our sewers get overwhelmed by the flood waters and then poop will flow out of it into our waterways. Factory farms of big feed lots of cattle can generate a huge amount of manure which in turn can get into our waterways," Metzger explained.

Houston and Corpus Christi are under federal consent decrees for having too many sewage overflows. Tyler, Houston and Corpus Christi have been ordered by the federal government to upgrade their wastewater infrastructure system.


get more stories like this via email

Aurora residents and environmental groups said they will continue to oppose fracking near the Aurora Reservoir, thousands of homes and 13 schools after regulators approved a plan for more than 150 new well sites at Lowry Ranch last week.

Lauren Swain, coordinator for the group Physicians for Social Responsibility-Colorado, said while the exact scope of the risks to the reservoir remain a technical question, operators have not demonstrated how their operations will do no harm.

"You do not want to have the use of large amounts of fracking fluid and the handling of large amounts of liquid waste near a resource for 400,000 people's drinking water," Swain asserted.

The ranch sits next to a Superfund site containing decades of landfill waste, including 138 million gallons of hazardous toxins. Rep. Jason Crow, D-Colo., has asked the Environmental Protection Agency to weigh in on the risks to the reservoir and aquifers posed by fracking. Civitas Resources, which has a long track record of environmental violations, has since agreed not to drill wells directly under the landfill.

Colorado is in severe violation of national clean-air standards and critics argue new drilling will increase ground-level ozone pollution, even if operators use electric equipment. Swain pointed out the plan will also increase health risks for disproportionately impacted communities of color on the north side of the drilling area.

"There is already another Comprehensive Area Plan that's been approved in November of 2022 for about the same number of wells," Swain noted. "They'll have 300 wells near them, instead of 150."

Wildlife advocates are also concerned about the effect on priority State Wildlife Action Plan species such as the northern leopard frog, burrowing owl and swift fox. Oil and gas drilling releases benzene, methane and other toxic air pollutants. Swain pointed to studies showing living near oil and gas operations is associated with increased incidence of asthma attacks, cancer, heart and lung disease and premature death.

"Oil and gas production is responsible for a deadly series of hazardous air pollutants," Swain emphasized. "People should live nowhere near oil and gas production that releases these elements into the air."


get more stories like this via email