Translate

Tuesday, April 23, 2013

THE RIO GRANDE

.
.
.
The Rio Grande and the aquifer lying beneath the
San Augustin Plains are connected.  There's more about
that further below, but first we'd like to start with
some history.
The Mission de Nuestra Senora de Guadalupe
 in Juarez, Chihuahua, Mexico,
 (above - the little mission on the left)
and the settlers who clustered around it,
comprised the first European settlement on the river,
and in the region, founded in 1659.
 It was then known as
"Paso del Norte" - Pass of the North,
and early on became a trading center
and economic hub of the region.
Oh, and the subject of songs too.
 .
 .
.
From
  GREAT RIVER -
The Rio Grande in North American History
Winner of the Pulitzer Prize in History (1954)
by Paul Horgan
.
"In its length of nearly two thousand miles and its
 cultural evidence encompassing ten centuries and more,
 the Great River remains the unifying vein of history not only
 of the life adjacent to its banks, but also of the greater
Southwest.  There, if often far afield, the political, social,
 and geographical significance of the river can be traced
through the times of five sovereignties - those of the Indian,
Spain, Mexico, Texas, and the United States.
.
In manners of living, a long, slow sequence unfolded for
 the early river peoples.  Prehistoric intuitions among them
 gradually gave way to knacks and simple ingenuities -
primitive technologies to do with water, fire, agriculture,
 shelter, travel, weaponry.  For centuries all these were
 developed without that sense of shock that accelerated rates of
 discovery produce.  But with the waves of activity and means
of control of the natural world that rose with the industrial
 revolution and the migratory imperatives of the nineteenth
 century, man's impact on the environment brought swift and
 radical change within a single human lifetime."
.
.
"Into the Rio Grande country, ranging through the area
of what became three immense modern states and touching
the great length of the river's immediate course, came
railroads, electricity, exploitation of mineral resources,
colonization, urbanization at key points, and - not to be
undervalued - the popular discovery of the natural aesthetic
of generally benign climate over a landscape of most
desirable beauty."
.
.
.
.
"In modern days, therefore, population not only changed in
 character, it grew in a few generations to a size that threatened
to create a dangerous imbalance between what was available
to sustain life and what was demanded by headlong social
increase.  The problem was not exclusive to the Southwest,
it plagued the nation and, indeed, with Latin America included,
it invaded the hemisphere.
.
But it was in the Southwest that technological change
became most rapidly visible.  The desert country, having
sustained sufficiently the modest requirements of the Indians,
the Spaniard, and the Mexican, now had to meet the
 environmental levies of the United States genius for industry.
Added to these were a foreshortened vision of the good life,
which the American citizen and his suppliers made commonly
necessary without much common foresight for the future
effects of the technological society on such matters as pollution
of air, earth, and water, and - most significant for the
Southwest - dangerous depletion of the very sources
of water itself."
.
.
.
.
.
.
"The Rio Grande, long an adequate though never a
voluminous river except in flood tide, has been attended
in modern times by concerned management in its government
conservancy districts; but in many places the river has become
only a trickle, and in others entirely dry, to be replenished
only by flood from otherwise dry or meager local tributaries
and by diminishing groundwater, this always in the face of
increasing needs of its resources in both the United States
and Mexico."
.
.
.
.
.





.
Drought Fuels Water War Between
Texas and New Mexico

by Sandra Postel - Jaunuary 18, 2013

As climate change alters rainfall patterns and river flows, tensions are bound to rise between states and countries that share rivers that cross their borders.
In the Rio Grande Basin of the American Southwest, that future inevitability has arrived.
Last week Texas, suffering through a devastating drought, filed a lawsuit with the U.S. Supreme Court alleging that New Mexico is failing to live up to its water delivery commitments under the 1938 Rio Grande Compact.
The Rio Grande rises in the San Juan Mountains of Colorado and flows 1,900 miles before entering the Gulf of Mexico.
Texas charges that New Mexico’s pumping of groundwater in the region below Elephant Butte Dam to the New Mexico-Texas border is reducing Rio Grande flows into Texas, thereby depriving the state’s farms and cities of water they are legally entitled to under the Compact.
Texas v. New Mexico is likely to be but one of a string of disputes that erupt as drought causes water supplies to dwindle and water-sharing pacts devised in wetter and less-populated times can no longer hold the peace.
Texas doesn’t specify how much water it believes New Mexico is illegally withholding, but indicates it is sufficient to irrigate thousands of acres of farmland. The city of El Paso also relies on Rio Grande water for half of its supply.
New Mexico officials have consistently maintained that the state is sending to Texas all the Rio Grande water to which it is legally entitled. The state attorney general said in a recent statement that Texas is “trying to rustle New Mexico’s water and using a lawsuit to extort an agreement that would only benefit Texas while destroying water resources for hundreds of thousands of New Mexicans.”
Fighting words, to be sure.
If the Supreme Court justices decide to take up the case, they would do well to first sign up for hydrology 101.
One of the great water myths is that rivers and underground aquifers are separate and distinct sources of water. In reality, rivers and groundwater are often intimately connected.
.
.
Groundwater provides the “base” flow that keeps many rivers running during dry times. For their part, rivers and irrigation canals leak water into the subsurface, recharging the aquifers below.
In dry years, when surface supplies run low, farmers often turn to underground water to replace or supplement their irrigation supply. That’s what New Mexico farmers downstream of Elephant Butte have done during years of drought and low river flows.
In the Mesilla Basin, for example, groundwater is the primary source of irrigation water for about 5,000 acres, but is a supplemental source of supply for more than 70,000 acres. So in dry times, groundwater withdrawals ratchet up.
According to an article on the impacts of groundwater pumping in the Rio Grande Basin published in this month’s Ecosphere, a journal of the Ecological Society of America, during the 2004 drought, when federal officials curtailed releases from Elephant Butte Dam, pumping from the Messila Aquifer rose to twice the long-term average.
The drought of recent years has elicited a similar response from farmers, and groundwater pumping in the Rio Grande Valley has increased markedly. But how much this pumping has affected flows into Texas is in question.
The current bi-state conflict began in 2007 when Texas farmers complained that New Mexico was extracting too much groundwater. To avoid an escalating legal fight, the federal Bureau of Reclamation, which operates Elephant Butte, worked out an agreement with two irrigation districts in Texas and New Mexico to give Texas more river water to make up for New Mexico’s groundwater use. 
.
.
.
That agreement didn’t sit well with New Mexico officials, however, and three years later the state filed suit against the Bureau, charging that the deal gave away too much of New Mexico’s Rio Grande allotment to Texas and would cause $183 million in damages to the state’s agricultural economy.
Texas shot back with the lawsuit filed last week.
Meanwhile, the drought persists. Elephant Butte is at 8 percent of its storage capacity, the same as when I visited the reservoir last August.
.
.
While the legal case may drag on for years, it is a wake-up call for all states and nations that share transboundary waters to proactively add resilience to their treaties and institutions before crises hit, and even more importantly, to develop workable governing structures over water where they are lacking.
It is also a lesson to invest now in water efficiency improvements so as to reduce pressures on both rivers and aquifers.
Because while the Supreme Court may ultimately decide this Texas-sized water dispute, even the highest court in the land can’t dictate Mother Nature to deliver more water.
.
Sandra Postel is director of the Global Water Policy Project and Freshwater Fellow of the National Geographic Society. She is the author of several acclaimed books, including the award-winning Last Oasis, a Pew Scholar in Conservation and the Environment, and one of the “Scientific American 50.”
 .
Below is a "Comment" to the article from
Dr. William Turner of Albuquerque,
a water broker.
.
Albuquerque, New Mexico
January 21

 Some New Mexico State Engineers have had a screw Texas point of view which is now coming home to roost. For example, in 1972, Charles Crowder, a land developer and visionary, acquired 22,000 acres of land in the area of Santa Theresa. It was his long term vision to build a major metropolitan community and he needed water. So, Mr. Crowder had a meeting with long time State Engineer Steve Reynolds. Mr. Crowder asked Mr. Reynolds if he needed to file applications with the State Engineer Office for the 36 water wells
 he planned.
.
.
  Reynolds replied:  “Hell no Charley.
  Drill all the wells you want. 
  We want to get that water before it gets to Texas.” 
His mismanagement of the Pecos River resulted in the failure
 of New Mexico to deliver water to Texas on the Pecos River. 
The Supreme Court required New Mexico to bring their
deliveries into accord with the Pecos River Compact.
 His mismanagement cost New New Mexico taxpayers more 
than $100 million to retire private water rights
 to satisfy the judgement.


.

.
.
.
.
.
The YouTube piece below is basically a music video
of birds in the Middle Rio Grande Valley set to the music of
Composer/Performer Paul Schwartz.
.
 .
.
The following is from a Middle Rio Grande Conservancy
District office report concerning the testimony of hydrologist
Dr. Frank Titus, after he testified before them as an
expert witness, in January of 2008.  The full report is
available on the San Augustin Water Coalition website.
It should be noted that since 2008 the LLC has modified
and enlarged on the original plan that was publicized -
which had the water being piped to Socorro and then put in
the Rio Grande at that point.  Now they talk about piping it to
Rio Rancho, or perhaps even Santa Fe.  This is also before
their new "idea" that they can catch enough rain to
recharge the aquifer - a ludicrous proposal, at best.
.
Bruce Frederick, the New Mexico Environmental Law Center
attorney that represents many, many parties objecting
 to the Water Grab, has done the math on that one.
It should be noted that this gentleman isn't just a lawyer,
he also has a Masters Degree in Groundwater Hydrology
 from New Mexico Tech.
.
.
Here's what he told the Rio Rancho Observer:
“I think it’s an absurd notion on the face of it,” said New Mexico
 Environmental Law Center attorney Bruce Frederick of the
 proposal of pumping 54,000 acre-feet a year and replacing it
 with rain water.
Frederick has opposed the company’s attempt
 to get a pumping permit.
To meet the company’s goal, he said each acre
 in the proposed project area would have to produce
12 acre-feet, or 3.9 million gallons, of water each year."

.
.Well, unless the same kind of storms that came at Noah's time
are in the forecast, 144 inches of rain per year is
simply NOT in the cards.  Are these people really, really
that stupid - or do they take us all for fools?  Or both?
Anyhow, here's the report about Dr. Titus's testimony.
.
 Dr. Titus said that this proposal to bring 54,000 acre ft. of water per year out of the San Augustin Basin over to the Rio Grande, in his book, is imaginative and if it goes that way that it will be very profitable for somebody. But it will also screw a bunch of people. By his calculations, the 37 proposed wells to provide the water are laid out in an array covering about 14 sections in the vicinity of Datil and running from just south of US Hwy 60 north for about 6-7 miles. If these wells produce 54,000 ac-ft of water per year, and if they create a cone of depression that is twice the area of the footprint of the wells, they will create draw down of 30 feet a year and that is if they have the capacity to produce that much water at all. The proposition that 37 wells can provide that much water assumes that the wells in an aquifer that is as prolific as the aquifer in the vicinity of Albuquerque and this is a unique, marvelous aquifer. The proposition that 37 wells can be drilled in the northeastern part of the San Augustin Plains and produce 2,000-3,000 gallons per minutes is at least highly questionable. At 30 feet of draw down per year they could not produce for very long. The wells are in a highly prolific part of the aquifer, but in order to produce for many decades at that rate they would have to cover the whole basin with wells and have dramatic draw downs over the basin and most of the rest of the basin does not have the permeability
 that that particular part does.
.

If the State Engineer approve such a proposal, the most distressing part is that which is the good aquifer end of the San Augustin Plains it probably also discharges a significant amount of water down Alamosa Creek and ultimately through the box that is about 15 miles down stream and over to the west side of Elephant Butte Reservoir. There is no quantitative data to know how much water is involved coming down the pathway. A proposal to bring 54,000 ac-ft per year and put it in the river in the Socorro vicinity and thereby balance an equal amount of pumping out of the Albuquerque/Rio Rancho area does several things. First of all it would measurably reduce the flow of the Rio Grande surface water system including through the District’s distribution system. Markedly reduce the flow between Albuquerque and the point at which water is put into the Rio Grande Valley in the Socorro area - that is an 80 mile stretch. There is an inevitable reduction in wet water flow. There is the issue of the contribution from Monticello Creek, Alamosa Creek coming out of the San Augustin Basin to the west side of Elephant Butte Reservoir. Assuming that the addition at Socorro matches the withdrawal at Albuquerque at least there would be a balance in that reach. But when you go on down stream, it is inevitable that if you take water our of the San Augustin Basin and you pipe it to Socorro, then you cut off the flow down Alamosa Creek and Monticello Creek into Elephant Butte. Ultimately, even though it may take decades to happen, the total flow of the Rio Grande will be reduced by the amount of water that is taken out of the San Augustin Basin.
.

.
Then there is the problem of the closed basin character of the San Augustin Basin and it’s an issue of how long it is able to continue to contribute that water to the Socorro reach assuming a pipeline is built and water is piped. Over a period of decades the water table will be drawn down so much in the San Augustin region that it will no longer supply fresh water. Once all of the easily available water out of the San Augustin Basin is exploited and no longer able to contribute water to the Rio Grande, then there is no replacement water coming in. If this is approved, we will have created an additional cone of depression and removed water from the Albuquerque area which cannot be replaced now and there will be no more water coming into the Socorro area because the San Augustin region will be exhausted and we will cut off the source of water going down to recharge the system at Elephant Butte. By short sighted approval of such a proposition, we will be put in a position where there is simply no way to balance the amount of water that has been taken out and we will come up seriously short. Of course, it will not be within the tenure of this State Engineer or several others, but the State of New Mexico is going to be around for a long time as well as the MRGCD.  Dr. Titus said that in his personal opinion that for the District to participate in any way in this kind of a thing - it’s basically a

 money making scam by someone that
 owns a ranch over there.
.

.
 STOP THE WATER GRAB!
"A river seems a magic thing.
A magic, moving, living part
of the very earth itself."
Laura Gilpin
. 


."The Rio Grande Yields Its Surplus To The Sea"
Laura Gilpin
1948

.



Sunday, March 31, 2013

THE INCREDIBLE STUPIDITY INVOLVED HERE

.
.
There's a LOT OF REASONS why the
proposal by Augustin Plains Ranch LLC
is STUPID.  Here are a few.
.
1.  The project is unproven science in action.
There is serious disagreement by almost
 everyone who's looked this over about how
much water is actually in the aquifer,
and what the effects of pumping 54,000
acre feet of water per year would be.
The very real possibility that the Rio Grande
and Gila Rivers would be significantly,
 adversely, affected doesn't seem to phase
 the applicants, Augustin Plains Ranch LLC.
Neither does the probability that everyone's
wells in the area would go dry.
.
The New Mexico Bureau of Geology and
Mineral Resources is currently conducting
reasearch on the Rio Grande connection
to the aquifer.  Their "San Agustin and
Alamosa Creek Study" will be finished in
December of 2014.
.
2. The project is all about money, period.
The worth of the water - this volume, for up
to 300 years - is absolutely incredible.  You are
literally talking billions and billions, and it's all
tied to GROWTH, growth for Albuquerque,
Rio Rancho, maybe Santa Fe,
 and wherever else developers and politicians decide 
will be blessed with more water - for what?
Growth. 
Growth of what?  For what?

 More of the mess they can't get a handle on now? 
More stripmalls?  More neighborhoods
that require grills and bars on windows and
 doors, or if you're rich enough you park the
family and pets in a "gated community," so much safer -
 but either way, people look out at the world
 from the eye of an urban or suburban prisoner,
because New Mexico IS dangerous now.
It didn't used to be, well, not much, but it is now.

So let's grow...with no thought beyond a
fast buck and a new lease on
The Land of Enchantment!

More trash food....more teenage pregnancies....
more gang violence....more police shootings....
more stuff, and more stuff, that isn't being
at all adequately addressed now,
 and sure as hell will never be dealt with
intelligently if money rules the game.
You have to love people more than money.

We can't allow decisions about water to be
 made on the basis of cash (read: GROWTH).
It's unethical; it's unconstitutional,
(the words of an attorney, not a PR flack).
.
3.  The project is inherently NUTS.
The very idea that somehow foreigners could
 get their hands on this much water, and then
 sell it back to us, the citizens of New Mexico,
when we technically OWN the water according
 to LAW, is too bizarre for words.
This is a Ripley's Believe It Or Not episode.
.
4.  It adds to the abysmal level of corruption.
New Mexico's report card is dismal
when it comes to honesty and ethics among
office holders and state officials alike.  All
you have to do is look at the past of the LLC
Project Director, Michel Jichlinski, to see
possible problems here.  He was the "Boss" at
a company that got hit with the largest fine
 ever for a war-time contractor - they stole
 millions of tax dollars through fraud, bribery,
accounting trickery, etc.  This guy lies openly
in "Letters to the Editor" concerning the issue
before us.  It's all on the blog.
Things are bad enough here already - we
don't need any additional ethical sewage.
This guy knows a lot about bribery, and worse.
.
5.  Foreign ownership of our water is stupid.
Water is life!  We simply cannot allow a
bunch of shadowy corporate thugs to get
their hands on the pink slip for the agua.
  No one in their right mind would let this pass.
Jichlinski got his degree from the
Hebrew University in Jerusalem.
Do you think the Israelis would allow a
scheme like this on their soil?
You'd probably be looking down the barrel of
 an Uzi if you even suggested the idea.

In Israel, a land owner DOES NOT OWN
the water beneath his land, and is not free
to speculate in "open-market" realities
with the water - it belongs to the state.
Period.
Change the "state" to the "citizens"
and you've got New Mexico.
Period.
.
A foreign corporation/investors group trying to
get their grubby hands on water in Israel?
Best outcome: taken to the airport.
Worst outcome: stupidity brings its own rewards.
.
6.  You don't make big deals with unknowns.
The "investors" are headed by a man named
Bruno Modena, along with his son Vittorio.
Their last escapade in the States was a
so-called eco-resort in Maine -
 the details are on the blog -
 it could basically be called an
entirely new form of extortion. 
But almost no one ever saw them.  Lawyers'
offices in New York that no one can ever find,
hidden away, on purpose obviously.
The "investors" hang out overseas it appears.
They just hire more characters here -
 PR flacks, lawyers, managers of various stripes,
 so-called experts - to do their bidding.
.
You don't go selling off the rights to pump
water that's the equivalent of half of
Albuquerque's thirst each year,
without knowing something about who the
hell is getting this water.
There's no transparency here - no corporate
financial statements, no tax returns, no nada.
People that hide behind corporate veils are
NOT people you want to do business with.
Everything that's known so far is OFF BASE -
you wouldn't sell these people a good dog,
but just maybe a bad one if it was a biter.
There's more if you'll scan the early posts
on the blog - January forward.
.
7.  This would have horrible ramifications.
No one has ever tried to get their hands on
this volume of water in New Mexico.
They don't parade this fact; they're at least
smart enough to figure that certain realities
don't need to be brought up.  It'd be upsetting.
Let's talk a "partnership" with New Mexico
"stakeholders" is what they hype publically.
They've never shown a business plan.
We have no idea what they're thinking
 about what they'll give us as our portion of
the profits....I'm sure they'll be shrewd.
. 
Their claim is that they have the capital 
 and resources to pull this off -
three to five hundred million bucks
 has been mentioned in various sources,
and that is used as an excuse basically,
 to let them in the door.
We Can Do It.  We're Big. 
 We're International.
.
Jichlinski is their key on this.
He could probably float the project under
any number of corporate names - he's tied in
to a big batch of multi-national contractors,
 and money boys, none of whom,
you can be damn sure,
 have even the slightest interest
 in what's good for New Mexico,
or America.
This craziness will be popping up all over
the state, if these guys get away with this.
Once you let this kind of evil in the door,
you're almost done for. 
 You'll be fighting the tide for generations,
 and paying the piper. 
.
International, big-time outfits are watching
what happens with water very closely....
everywhere, but the American Southwest
is a facinating point of reference because of
the severity of the drought and the cash possible
 if you could pull something off....
It's all over the web....it's big MONEY action.
The "comodification" of water is real, it's
happening all over, including here in the States.
Water....they also say it's what the
 future wars will be about, globally, regionally.
.
How do you think the Old West in Catron
and Socorro Counties will react?
This is a place where some of the
Vanishing West vanished,
and where some of it still lives on.
I'll make you a bet....
I'll bet you a round for the house that....
.
                                                                                                       "The Tenderfoot"
.
Postscript
.
There's more that could be listed....such as the
serious damage that this could do (is doing)
 to international relations. 
 There's not much use for "foreigners"
in this part of the country  to begin with. 
 If you add on the idea that these guys are basically
 seen as thieves, water thieves....well,
you can see where all this could go....the Colts
and Winchesters and god-only-knows-what
kind of explosives (this is mining country)
will come out in time, and before you know it
 you've got national and international media people
 sniffing all over the place -
 trying to get some background on 
who's who in the water war -
 which is the last thing, the very last thing, 
the Modena's and their co-investors want.
Not all media outfits are bought, and/or sold.
Some really are investigators.
.
In that sense, for the "investors,"
 it's a Catch 22.
If they get a green light to begin the project,
the violence will probably start right up,
which brings the spotlight of big time media attention.
  And if they got that attention,
which they avoid like a vampire does
 the light of day,
they'd probably either lose the project,
once New Mexicans were AWARE of it,
REALLY AWARE of it,
 or have one devil of a time getting it
to completion.
.
  There's everything from
 archaeological sites on the pipe route,
any pipe route in this country,
 to "threatened" and "endangered"
 species issues,
to plain orneriness on the part of some,
to even more technical and legal arguments,
that could tie this up for a long, long time.
Or at least that's what logic tells us.
Why do these characters insist on pressing on?
The "good guys" need to remember this:
stay calm.
 The lawsuits could fly
  as fast as the bullets.
Get more money for the legal fund,
get ready to "dig in."
   .
                                                  "Smoke of  a 45"
.

.
STOP THE WATER GRAB!
“Thus did a handful of rapacious citizens come to control all that was worth controlling in America. Thus was the savage and stupid and entirely inappropriate and unnecessary and humorless American class system created. Honest, industrious, peaceful citizens were classed as bloodsuckers, if they asked to be paid a living wage. And they saw that praise was reserved henceforth for those who devised means of getting paid enormously for committing crimes against which no laws had been passed. Thus the American dream turned belly up, turned green, bobbed to the scummy surface of cupidity unlimited, filled with gas,
 went bang in the noonday sun.” 
Kurt Vonnegut
God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater  
.
.
Update: 9/23
Since this post there have been numerous
"changes" to the approach the foreigners are taking.
 Now they claim they won't drain the aquifer,
but rather catch ALL the precipitation that falls
in their domain, and RECHARGE the aquifer.
Read more about it here:
http://stopthewatergrab.blogspot.com/2013/08/dr-hydrologist-weighs-in-story-of.html
.

Saturday, March 23, 2013

GILA RIVER WOULD BE CHANGED FOR THE WORSE

.
.
.
.
"They call it the Gila (pronounced Hee-la)
River by a long and convoluted explanation
(each writer and historian has a version)
whereby an unpronounceable Apache name
was supposedly shortened and corrupted by the
 early Spanish explorers.  The explanation
 doesn't bear repeating here precisely because
it would be long and convoluted.  Also possibly
inaccurate.  The best guess is that the word
"Gila" - like the word "Pecos" in eastern
New Mexico and West Texas, doesn't really
mean anything.  Nevertheless one must approve
of the appellation.  The Apaches were the first
people to really own this part of the world -
nobody's ever owned it in quite such a way -
and to work their name for all this into the
musical Spanish language is appropriate.
Couldn't be nicer really."
M.H. Salmon
Gila Descending
.
.
.
.
.
The last free-flowing river in New Mexico,
the Gila, would surely be on the short end if the
 aquifer underneath the San Augustin Plains
 was  tapped for 54,000 acre feet
  of agua per year.
The Gila, and the Rio Grande as well,
are hydrologically connected to the aquifer.
The Gila River is already threatened with
new possible diversions for agriculture and
 more urbanization in southern New Mexico. 
You can read all about it at the
Gila Conservation Coalition website:
.
.
.
Below is a descriptive "overview" of the river
 from the Coalition site.
.
.
.
.
.
.
The Gila Trout is native to the Gila River of New Mexico and
 Arizona, and is a threatened species.  It is like no other with
 cascades of colors that project a golden appearance. These
 trout are very geographically limited, but never-the-less are
 locally common. You can see them at the bottom of creek beds
 competing for food and shelter. They survive on the native
 insect hatches and the occasional unsuspecting grasshopper or
 worm that falls from the riverbank. Their yellow heads and
 black spots are the perfect camouflage for clear bottom creek
 beds and blend rather well amongst the cobblestones bellow.
From the UNM BIOBLOG site
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
STOP THE WATER GRAB!
“We must begin thinking like a river
 if we are to leave a legacy of beauty and life
 for future generations.”
David Brower
.
.
.