The San Joaquin River Project was a plan completed in 2009 made to recreate San Joaquin River, which was dried up after dams were built in 1942. The San Joaquin River restoration is to bring back water flows from the San Joaquin river to the Friant Dam, and to revive the salmon and other fish population. There are two articles debating whether they either agree or disagree with the project. I chose the article, “River Plan Too Fishy For My Taste Buds”. This article came from The Fresno Bee newspaper, which correspondingly means it came from Fresno. The type of people who live in Fresno are farmers, workers who work for other people, democrats, and people who care more about jobs rather than the environment. I agree with this article from The Fresno Bee because I believe Bill McEwen, the author of this article, is the better expert because of his credentials and achievements. I will be using the article “River Restoration Project Offers a Sprinkling of Hope” by Daniel Weintraub to back up my argument. …show more content…
Politicians are trying to make a plan to get the taxpayers, the majority of the voters, happy. Therefore they aren’t thinking about others and how it is going to affect them. For example, one negative impact of the restoration project is on paragraph 8 of “River Restoration Project Offers a Sprinkling of Hope” by Daniel Weintraub states that, “Those farms stand to lose as much as 20 percent of their water as the river is restored.” This demonstrates how the plan is to take away from the farmers. In summation, the limited amount of water will affect crops and make the farmer’s crops harder to grow. This will also consequently lead to higher food
The primary purpose of Friend dam is to help regulate the flow of San Joaquin into available uses of its environmental, wildlife, and farmer’s impacts. The dam controls the flow of water delivery where it needs authorization first before the schedule can release any delivery waters into canals, steam, and wild life habitats. There will be agreements and many protocols to do with it first to avoid unnecessary spilling. There are 5 release schedules which include quantity of water available, time water, flood control requirements, release schedules from storage reservoir above Millerton Lake, and water user requirements. These benefits of flood control, storage management, modification into Madera and Friant-Kern Canals, to stop salty water from abolishing thousands of lands in Sacramento and throughout San Joaquin Delta, as well as deliver masses of water into agricultural lands in 5other counties in the San Joaquin Valley.
After the Roosevelt Dam dammed the Salt River in 1911, the bed that formed in its place has become a garbage-infested hole stretching through a large potion of the valley. In 1966 a group of architecture students at ASU first proposed the idea of the Rio Salado Project to a community-wide audience. It was approved by the legislature in 1980 and extensive planning has been underway since. The project will take 26 miles of the dry river bed, fill it in with purified wastewater, and make it into a 7,000-acre park over the next 2 decades (Rio Salado Development District 1).
The topic the essay is mainly talking about is whether to initiate the San Joaquin River Project. I am with Bill McEwen on his article, “River Plan Too Fishy for my Taste Buds.” I chose this author because I do not think the government should spend more money on the river rights project. The author convinced me that he is more credible and can be trusted by all the experience he has. The article was published in Fresno Bee on March 26,2009 and is surrounded by farms so the people there know what will happen if big businesses were to start a project. McEwen demonstrates how this project will impact the city in a negative way by stating ethos, logos, and pathos.
The positive aspects of ‘Lake’ Powell are few yet noteworthy. Glen Canyon Dam’s hydroelectric power-plant generates one thousand three hundred mega watts of electricity at full operation. That is enough power to supply three hundred fifty thousand homes. Glen Canyon Dam holds twenty seven million acre feet of water, which is equivalent to twice the Colorado River’s annual flow (Living Rivers: What about the hydroelectric loss?). One of the most valuable reasons for the dam to remain active is that “Lake Powell generates four hundred fifty five million dollars per year in tourist revenue, without this cash inflow, gas-and-motel towns . . . would undoubtedly wilt, and surrounding counties and states would lose a substantial tax base” (Farmer 185). These positive aspects are of no surprise considering they are the reason dams are built in the first place.
Policies are often put in place without regards for the effect it will have on other areas, people, or wildlife. Several examples of these unintended consequences are shown in the documentary Salmon: Running the Gauntlet, which explains the effects that human activity, dams, and attempts to repopulate the salmon species have been implemented and failed. With proper evaluation at the onset of a major project, these severe consequences may be avoided.
This Paper will describe and analyze three articles pertaining to the ongoing debate for and against Glen Canyon Dam. Two of these articles were found in the 1999 edition of A Sense of Place, and the third was downloaded off a site on the Internet (http://www.glencanyon.net/club.htm). These articles wi...
In Glen Canyon Dammed: Inventing Lake Powell and the Canyon Country, Jared Farmer agrees with the draining of Lake Powell. Farmer goes on to write, “Consider the river that flows through Grand Canyon: it’s not the real thing. It’s the programmed discharge from Glen Canyon Dam”. (Farmer pg. XIII) In this statement Farmer is saying that he does agree with the dam coming down, although saying that people have their own opinions.
Should 'the public', as Kreiger thinks, have the say in what happens to Niagara, and therefore, decide its fate? I don't think that the public is in an appropriate position to decide the fate of this, or many other, environmental entities. An analogy to our electoral system comes to mind when thinking about this issue. There are many people who voice the opinion that the theory of true democracy is great, but who are really glad we actually live in and operate under a republican system of government, because they don't want everyone to be able to have an equal say. The reason is that 'the public' is often misinformed and fickle.
Farmers and ranchers who own water rights should have their water amount filled earlier in order to facilitate themselves with the proper amount of water. They should not be restricted to a smaller prearranged amount of water each year. Water us...
Texas, with its abundances of natural resources, is facing a new demon, one that doesn’t even seem possible, a shortage of water. Water, without it nothing can survive. Texas is the second largest state for landmass in the nation and ninth for water square miles. Within the borders of Texas are more than 100 lakes, 14 major rivers, and 23 aquifers, so why has water become such an important issue for the state? Politicians and conservationists all agree that without a new working water plan, the state could be facing one of the most damaging environmental disasters they have ever seen. The issues that shape the states positions are population growth, current drought conditions, and who actually owns the water.
Terrell (2015) states that the three inch delta smelt was decided to be in danger of going extinct a little more than twenty years ago. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has claimed that systems used by farmers to retrieve water from the delta have added to the dropping number of delta smelt. Conservationists think it is necessary for people and farmers to take their water from sources other than the delta in order to preserve the characteristics of the delta (Terrell, 2015). Dr. Peter Moyle of UC Davis stated in an interview,“We have 80 fish species in California, like the delta smelt, that are in trouble” (Cited in Terrell, 2015, p.12). Moyle insists that it is more than just the three inch delta smelt that is in danger, it is at least seventy-nine other species that need protecting as well. As interviewed by Siegler (2015), senior water rights farmer, Rudy Mussi knows the importance of the delta and preserving it, not just so he can use its water on his fields, but also to keep it alive for the future. It has been suggested that water be taken out of the delta and moved to farmers in the lower portion of California who have junior water rights (Siegler, 2015). The delta cannot be overused because it is important that the ratio of saltwater to freshwater stays the same in order to preserve the fish population. In 2014 the excess water that came from the delta, the environment in which the fish live, added up to almost two hundred fifty billion gallons of water or enough for over six and a half million people each year (“Water wars”, 2015) While these people cannot easily access this water source, some farmers are able to use limited amounts of water if they farm on the delta, creating an issue between the junior water rights farmers
faced in restoration projects. Are these bills necessary or is there a better solution that politicians are overlooking?
...n, the Louisiana wetlands are an extremely valuable asset to the State of Louisiana and the United States. The continual loss of Louisiana wetlands has the potential to have an immensely negative effect on the economy at a state and national level. Over 2 million people live in the Louisiana coastal parishes (Field et al., 1991). The majority of people living on the Louisiana coast make their living from things that are directly related to the wetlands. The Louisiana wetlands make up the largest wetland community in America and is being lost at a rate greater than the other wetland communities in the country. The suggested strategies that are being taken into consideration could be helpful but it seems that the State of Louisiana is not as concerned as it should be given the future consequences and much like climate change coastal erosion is not being taken serious.
The total costs of the damage that could be done to the drainage systems by say the year, twenty fifty likely exceeds that of the costs of a project like the sea wall if just a three foot rise could cost one point thirty nine billion dollars. Should something like that happens, taxpayers would probably end up paying for some of the costs that come from that damage as well. We’re in a lose-lose situation in terms of money, but we can use that money now to prevent harm from coming to our city instead of using it in the future to repair our
Conflict between residents in northern Nevada and SNWA has risen (Brean, 2015). In 2012 the U.S. Bureau of Land Management announced its support of SNWA wanting to build a pipeline from rural Nevada to Las Vegas, rural Nevada being primarily in the northern portion of the state (Larsen et al., 2015). Residents including farmers who depend on water for their crops argue that redirecting water supplies would harm the environment and wildlife that inhabit northern Nevada (Brean, 2015). There is also an issue of oversubscription, this is due to the Colorado River not only supplying water to Nevada but neighboring states which include “Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico and Utah” (Wockner, 2014). Both Arizona and California are expecting water shortages in the future as they too depend on the Colorado River (Wockner, 2014).