Current Article

There are plenty of symptoms, but the real problem lies here

The Tale of diminishing freshwaterWhich side are you on? Native species and habitat restoration is a worthy cause, but will you deem it so when you’re raking the gravel where your lawn used to be?

Singlebarbed readers thrive on fear and pestilence, but this issue is so large it’s likely to have all of us switching allegiances. It’s a “plea bargain” scenario, where all the crooks rebuff the cops until one cracks, then it’s every man for himself.

Will you insist on un-dammed streams and wild trout habitat when your house loses half its value, or will you cave and let them add more dams and reservoirs to preserve the lifestyle you have?

I think you’ll cave, you’re going to fold so fast even you’ll be surprised.

It’s one thing to bemoan the loss of pristine habitat, but when it’s your swimming pool they’re talking about, the Salmon can fend for themselves.

It’s a juggernaut issue, and it’s headed your way.

Across America, the picture is critically clear — the nation’s freshwater supplies can no longer quench its thirst.

The government projects that at least 36 states will face water shortages within five years because of a combination of rising temperatures, drought, population growth, urban sprawl, waste and excess.

That’s means you - a 72% chance the state you live in will be adding dams, reservoirs, and a lot of underground pipe, in the next 5 years. If those years are “dry” years, you’ll be doing it sooner.

That’s not the end of it, water rights and the property that owns them will be going parabolic in value, which will cause fishermen additional grief as many small ranches and farms that hold water rights will be gobbled up by corporations that smell massive water profits.

It’ll yield additional fences and “No Trespass” signs, much litigation, and the rise of “Donny Beaver” angling associations. Thirty-Six out of fifty suggests none of us are immune, including Mr. Beaver.

Desalinization is still somewhat in it’s infancy, and will likely have the same issues that nuclear plants have, where do you dump the salt? Many desalinization processes remove salt from seawater, while the water is quickly used the salt has to be disposed of in some manner, and in high concentration its as toxic to the living as nuclear waste.

Desalinization technology will mature and be a boon to states with ready access to the ocean, but with deficit spending still the rage, coastal states will likely use this as a source of revenue, selling excess capacity to inland states that lack access.

That means the price of water goes up. It also means some high dollar beach real estate will be tapped for plant construction, as thousands of plants will be needed per state, a lot of beach will lose its scenic appeal.

Intakes to those plants will be posted with “No Fishing” restrictions, as nothing fouls pumping gear more than nets, crab traps, and fishing line.

The price tag for ensuring a reliable water supply could be staggering. Experts estimate that just upgrading pipes to handle new supplies could cost the nation $300 billion over 30 years.

“Unfortunately, there’s just not going to be any more cheap water,” said Randy Brown, Pompano Beach’s utilities director.

This rabbit-hole just gets deeper and deeper, and even casual research reveals the potential for much disruption for all fishermen, both fresh and salt.

Of specific interest is how the “eminent domain” laws will be wielded by communities short on drinking water. Water rights and real estate close by could easily be pre-empted for the community good. Small truck farms whose only “crime” is proximity to a city, are the likely targets. 

The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that local governments may force property owners to sell out and make way for private economic development when officials decide it would benefit the public, even if the property is not blighted and the new project’s success is not guaranteed.

Water conservation efforts will mean many more impoundments, canals, and underground pipes. Many will be covered to prevent evaporation, but wastewater reclamation will be considered “low hanging fruit.”

Florida’s environmental chief, Michael Sole, is seeking legislative action to get municipalities to reuse the wastewater.

“As these communities grow, instead of developing new water with new treatment systems, why not better manage the commodity they already have and produce an environmental benefit at the same time?” Sole said.

That’s the silver lining, plenty of Brownline fishing for warm water species. They may object to you wading in drinking water, but nobody will mind when you’re hip deep in crap.

I think we’re hip deep in crap already, and I’m just the fellow that remembered to bring tackle.

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

7 Comment(s)

  1. San Mateo Joe | Oct 30, 2007 | Reply

    You should have posted this tomorrow. Frightening stuff.

  2. overmywaders | Oct 30, 2007 | Reply


  3. KBarton10 | Oct 30, 2007 | Reply

    You are rapidly becoming my hero.

    I think we’re all about to pay, golf will be among the first casualties, I’m sure.

  4. Don | Nov 1, 2007 | Reply

    I would not cave! I don’t have much style to preserve anyway…

    Great post Reed!

  5. davem | Nov 3, 2007 | Reply


  6. overmywaders | Nov 3, 2007 | Reply

    Dave,

    You make some great points. However, I think we as a nation can forgo certain luxuries in order to conserve water. Thus my jab at golf and green lawns. (Xeriscaping is, IMO, attractive and much more practical in most areas than lawns.)

    Further reductions could certainly be made in agricultural use of water. We don’t “need” some of the expensive fruits and vegetables grown in what was desert or semi-arid land in CA. Use that land for appropriate un-irrigated agriculture and entire river systems would be re-watered.

    We will need to rethink our agricultural applications. I agree about ethanol, however ethanol could be made from grasses and plant waste rather than human-consumable corn.

    I once worked on a hog farm in Manitoba. The farmer harvested vast acreages of flax, wheat, and other cereal grains only to feed it to hybrid hogs. For each pound of Canadian bacon, you could have fed a small village in Africa for a week. [I know that the complexities of world trade make the above statement sound naive, but it is illustrative of the waste, not practical economics.]

    There are many ways for us to conserve, but we don’t, as a nation, have the will. To acquire that we first need to “hit the wall.”, I suppose.

  7. KBarton10 | Nov 3, 2007 | Reply

    Dave,

    Your response is not at all crabby, I would characterize it as lucid, well thought out and educational.

    This is likely to be one of the biggest issues we face in the next couple of decades, as it pits many competing interests against each other, with the fishery an afterthought.

    Conservation is an easy first step, with subsequent efforts possibly bound up in litigation for many years.

    I appreciate the commentary greatly, feel free to be “crabby” anytime, as all of us benefit.

Post a Comment

  • Google's Goodies

  • Site Stuff