|
Last Updated:
Apr 21st, 2005 - 21:10:55
Affiliates
Powells.com
Favorite Links
American Friends Service Committee
Friends Committee on National Legislation
National Catholic Reporter
British Broadcasting Company
The Guardian
Christian Science Monitor
LA Times
SF Gate
Oregonian
The Register Guard
Environmental News Network
Sojourners
Orion
Swans Commentary
Federation of American Scientists
Car Free Times
Indy Media
AlterNet.org
Common Dreams
The Nation
Utne Reader
Eugene Weekly
Willamette Week
Portland Tribune
Bitter Lemons.org
The Travels of our First Webmaster
|
|
|
Voices of the Northwest
Locals and officials alike laughed when news first leaked in January of the plan to pump fresh water from the estuaries of the Gualala and Albion rivers into bags the size of battleships, and tug them down the coast to San Diego. Disbelief jostled with loud guffaws, and jokes how "that'll never float."
 |
| The first settlers, the Kashia Pomo Indians, called the area qhawálaoli. |
No one is laughing any more. Under California's byzantine water laws the two permit applications could well be granted to Alaska Water Exports, part of the multinational corporation World Water SA. If so, in the brave new world of global trade agreements, the precedent could have jaw-dropping implications: potentially streams and rivers from Marin to Oregon could be tapped by World Water and other multinational corporations, against a background of the predicted global water crisis. The North Coast is considered "water wealthy," but locals may have little say in its use. And who's next? Two letters from World Water SA to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the permitting agency, mention Marin County streams for "study and consideration."
The tiny coastal town of Gualala sits on the border of Sonoma and Mendocino counties. Much of Sonoma County is in the Gualala River watershed. The town of Albion is 40 miles farther up the coast, epicenter of the "Albion Nation": back-to-the-landers who're veterans of environmental battles, from forest clearcuts to offshore oil drilling. The economy depends on tourism and logging; it once included commercial fishing, but salmonids have declined enough to qualify as endangered. The Gualala and Albion rivers are among the few still-active coho and steelhead breeding waters, and both rivers are listed as "impaired" by the EPA, sedimented by heavy logging and vineyard cultivation. Local watershed groups and state agencies work on restoration.
Enter Ric Davidge, president of both Alaska Water Exports and World Water SA. An entrepreneur with many years in government and lobbying, Davidge held several high-level positions in the Interior Department under James Watt. He was one time Director of Water for the state of Alaska, and has specialized in global water interests: writing papers, forming companies, acquiring water rights, and consulting internationally.
Davidge says that his bagging scheme for the Gualala and Albion is currently the least environmentally injurious way to capture new water (compared to dams, canals, and desalinization plants). He proposes to lay 2'-wide pipes in trenches dug into the upstream river beds. Water would be pumped to offshore poly-fiber bags, each the size of three football fields: 50,000 cubic meters. Davidge estimates he can fill one bag per day from each river during the rainy season. Because fresh water is lighter than salt water, the filled bags float. Tug boats would tow the giant bags to San Diego.
Sound simple? The controversy has been thunderous.
Local citizens (their early laughing fits having subsided into firm-jawed opposition) have quickly organized. Environmental groups report surging membership. Web sites have sprung up. Petitions are circulating. Local newspapers have editorialized against the proposal. Gualala activists organized a townhall meeting with Davidge in March, standing room only -- few seemed convinced after Davidge's rambling presentation, and instead gave him 101 questions written on 3x5 cards. Boards of supervisors of both Mendocino and Sonoma counties passed unanimous resolutions of opposition. A new coalition, NO-BAG, includes advocacy groups, chambers of commerce, elected officials, and the local Democratic Party. Last spring state assemblywoman Pat Wiggins introduced a bill that would have mandated local control for protected rivers; it never made it out of committee. Undaunted, she introduced ABA 858, requiring study on effects of reduced water flow on salmonid. Everyone is waiting for the SWRCB's 60-day comment period to open in late July. Expect a flood of letters. Albion activist Bill Heil calls this a test case. "We're defending your water as well as ours." Ursula Jones, vice-president of Friends of the Gualala River, agrees. "If it's not our river, it's the next." Jones added that while most residents are "overwhelmingly against it, we still have to fight the idea that 'this is crazy.'"
Community concerns range from the immediate environment to global economics. Reduced water flows, say opponents, will affect salmon recovery efforts and increase the salinity of the estuaries. Construction and maintenance of the pipelines will further degrade the damaged riverbeds. The altered viewshed will turn-off tourism. Operations could affect migrating gray whales who stop in at Gualala lagoon, and whose population also have plummeted in the last few years. Numerous huge water bags could affect coastal shipping lanes. The bags might founder in severe winter storms and cause havoc. And what about drought years? If water is to be harvested, why not to the benefit of residents and local economies? Whose water is it, anyway? (Answer: by state constitution, all California's, not locals'.) Locals would receive nothing in compensation.
Davidge has weathered the critical storm, dismissing it as "theological opposition," that is, "based on beliefs." Speaking from his Anchorage office, Davidge insists there would be "no measurable effects" on the rivers' hydrologic systems. And he is confident that California's complex water law will eventually concede that San Diego's need for water is paramount -- recent court rulings reallocated much of the city's sources. San Diego itself has taken an uncommitted, "wait and see" attitude to the plan. Ursula Jones resists the characterization that opposition is against Southern California. "It's not us versus them. It's not just our river. Water is a common good." Critics contend that although the permits are based on San Diego's need, there is no guarantee that the water would not eventually be traded worldwide under current and forthcoming trade agreements. Davidge denied that, saying "If we were to change the market destination, that would require additional process with the State Water Resources Control Board." He added, "It is not our intention to do that."
Davidge insists he would only operate from November to April, when water levels are high. He claims that because the pipelines would be under the riverbeds, water flows would not be disrupted. Critics counter that subsurface water is still essential to estuary ecology. Attempting to make his proposal more palatable, Davidge recently reduced his application's water harvest to 14,800 acre feet per year (AFY) from both rivers combined, down from the original 30,000 AFY. (One acre foot equals about 327,000 gallons.) Earlier, Davidge slightly relocated the proposed offshore collection platform at Gualala, out of the town's view.
It's possible that the amount of water taken is not the ultimate point. Arguably, Davidge's "foot in the door" is more important. This proposal helps set the stage for a paradigm shift, from water as an essential resource in the public trust, distributed by public agencies, to water as a commodity, exported to the highest bidder and subject to deregulated market speculation, much as electricity has been. Davidge argues that water already is a commodity. The issue is a hot debate in Canada, where a moratorium has been placed on similar bulk water exports, and law suits have been filed by U.S. corporations under NAFTA rules, charging trade restrictions. Currently in negotiation are more and bigger trade agreements, FTAA and GATS, which expand the global free market. Already other countries are clamoring for access to fresh water. Secret European Union trade documents leaked last spring to the Washington Times state that the EU is requesting water sources for their corporations.
Davidge confirms that his operations would come under NAFTA, although SWRCB's spokesperson Liz Kanter believed it would not. If so, State permit restriction may or may not be binding. Says Nancy Price, national co-chair of the watchdog Alliance for Democracy, "Davidge knows precisely the context in which he's operating -- and the public doesn't." Davidge is a member of the World Water Council, an advisory body to the WTO, and he is a savvy player on the government scene. Because these trade agreements are new, consequences are not fully known. But early cases in Canada, Argentina, and Bolivia suggest that the commodification of water is a sticky business. Said Price, "Without an adequate State plan that takes all this into consideration, the public is at a great disadvantage and at great risk." Price points to energy deregulation and corporate market manipulation. "Do we want that to happen with water?"
The permit approval process is likely to continue for some time, with hearings in the near future. Davidge affirmed, "Even if these permits are denied, we will use the information gathered and continue to look at Northern California sources."
I called Marin Water District's principal engineer Dana Roxon to ask if he knew about the water bag proposal and World Water's potential interest in Marin streams. He didn't, but laughed. "There's always some new crazy scheme like that," he chuckled.
Originally published July 31, 2002, Pacific Sun
Copyright (c) 2002 by Mary DeDanan, All Rights Reserved.
© Copyright 2000-2004 by West By Northwest.org
Top of Page
untitled
|
|
|
