To help people better understand the health of the Upper Rio Grande Basin, a first-ever "report card" gave the overall river basin a "C" for its moderate condition, and warned improvements are needed.
A group of ecosystem scientists and local conservation advocates said the moderate rating comes with a warning there is not enough water to sustain all users' needs and maintain a healthy river ecosystem.
Paul Tashjian, director of freshwater conservation at Audubon Southwest, said actions are necessary to ensure people and wildlife have continued water access.
"We're water-challenged, and I think that what I liked about the report card, is that it really looked at all the water users alongside of each other and valued all of them together," Tashjian remarked. "Not just the living river, but also the importance of our farming communities, the importance of our compact."
He added New Mexico's Upper Rio Grande had the highest score, while the Lower Rio Grande got the lowest score at 41% or "C minus." The report card is meant to provide a backbone for developing meaningful resiliency strategies.
Casey Brown, professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, who helped develop the report card model, said it showed limited water availability is due to climate change, interstate management issues, infrastructure, and increased demand from a growing population.
"Here's how much water we have. How are we going to allocate that water among its very competing uses?" Brown asked. "What our model does is help make it clear what those different allocations mean, in terms of trade-offs for the different water users."
Enrique Prunes, manager of the Rio Grande for the World Wildlife Fund, which also participated in creating the report card, said the Upper Rio Grande, flowing from its headwaters in Colorado, through New Mexico and ending in Texas, has supported people and wildlife for thousands of years.
"There are many communities that depend on the water that this river provides," Prunes outlined. "Agriculture -- 85% of the water that is used in the Rio Grande goes to agriculture -- but of course, for biodiversity, for ecosystems, that component of the environment is very important."
get more stories like this via email
A new report found four dams in the Columbia River Basin are big emitters of methane.
Research from the organization Tell The Dam Truth showed the four lower Snake River dams in eastern Washington emit the equivalent of 1.8 million metric tons of carbon dioxide each year.
Robin Everett, deputy western region field director for the Sierra Club, said it undercuts some of the claims the dams are helping provide the region with clean energy.
"It's really clear from this report that we have to take this a lot more seriously that there are some real impacts as far as emissions go from these dams," Everett asserted.
The reports showed the dams produce the equivalent emissions of burning 2 billion pounds of coal annually. Defenders of the dams counted they are important for barging and irrigation for the area's agricultural lands.
But Everett pointed out the dams have another effect on the region: they block the dwindling population of salmon and steelhead from traveling upstream on the Snake River. She noted it not only hurts fish populations but the tribes relying on them.
"We have an obligation for them to be able to fish and if there are no fish to fish, we have broken the treaties," Everett contended
Chinook salmon are also an important source of food for orca on the West Coast. Everett added protecting salmon is important for tribes and the region as a whole.
"Our moral obligation to the salmon and the orca that depend on them are met as well," Everett concluded.
Disclosure: The Sierra Club contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Energy Policy, Environment, and Environmental Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
A proposed pumped-storage hydroelectric facility for Cuffs Run near the Susquehanna River in York County has been challenged by the Chesapeake Bay Foundation.
The foundation filed a motion to intervene in the proceedings with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which is considering granting a preliminary permit to build a 1.8-mile-long dam for the project.
Harry Campbell, science policy and advocacy director for the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, said they are working to stop the project in order to protect the unique Cuffs Run area and its ecological benefits for future generations.
"If approved, this project would destroy it about 580 acres of prime farmland, fields and forests, some of which have not been disturbed in about 100 years," Campbell pointed out. "Those farms, fields and forests exist harmoniously with and in support of a plethora of plant and animal life."
The foundation is circulating an online petition and encouraged Pennsylvanians to provide comments before Sunday.
The stream is home to naturally reproducing brook trout. Advocates worry the $2.5 billion project would also be harmful to the Susquehanna River. Campbell noted about 40 families would be displaced.
"For those who call Cuffs Run home, it's more than just a place to live. It's their heritage and they want it to be part of their legacy," Campbell asserted. "This project just simply is the wrong idea in the wrong place. In order to honor that heritage and that legacy, we need to preserve this area."
Campbell emphasized the Cuffs Run project is about 993 acres of land draining into a 2.5-mile unnamed tributary. He added in terms of stream habitat, the rocks, pebbles and woody material have been identified as among the best in the region for supporting critters living in the water.
Disclosure: The Chesapeake Bay Foundation contributes to our fund for reporting on Energy Policy, Rural/Farming, Sustainable Agriculture, and Water. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
Tennesseans want more say in how the Tennessee Valley Authority plans for their future electricity needs and a bill now in Congress could give the public more influence.
The "TVA Increase Rate of Participation Act," would require a more open decision-making process for the utility.
Brianna Knisley, director of public power campaigns for Appalachian Voices, said the TVA is currently developing its new Integrated Resource Plan to meet future energy demands. The bill would require more public participation in the plan's proceedings.
"Right now the stakeholders who get to provide input early on in the IRP process are all hand-selected by TVA," Knisley pointed out. "You can't choose to be in that IRP working group. And those are the only folks who get substantial input in the architecture of the IRP, as it's being designed."
The utility serves more than 10 million people across six states. The TVA said it is reviewing the legislation. A draft of the plan will be published at a later date. The TVA said it already has a "robust stakeholder engagement plan."
After the plan is released, Knisley noted public input happens during what's known as the scoping phase of the National Environmental Policy Act. Open houses are set up, where the TVA answers questions from the public. Knisley encouraged Tennesseans to raise any of their concerns during the public and virtual hearings.
"I think additional public input into our region's long-term energy plan is only going to strengthen outcomes," Knisley contended. "And make that long-term energy plan better meet the needs of the Tennessee Valley, as a whole."
She added it is important for Tennesseans to work with Congress on the best way to improve public input in the TVA decision-making process.
Disclosure: Appalachian Voices contributes to our fund for reporting on Energy Policy, Environment, Environmental Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email