Reflections on Water Management

The experience of water management in California has not been all positive. Some critics have attributed California’s land, water, labor, and environmental problems to “immense centralized institutions” ruled by oppressive bureaucratic elites who have manipulated water resources in their own self-interest. There is some truth to that, but the reality of a war of fragmented authorities contradicts some of that.  “That is confusing,” Theo thought, as he was in the middle of the book: The Great Thirst (page 547). It reminded him of what Senator Wolk had been fighting for, in California. 

She submitted a law, or what she hoped would become law, limiting the drilling of new wells for irrigation. The ground water levels are going down at an alarming rate, especially in the Central Valley. Water consumption in California way outpaces the amount replenished through rainfall and snow, that melts in the Spring and is collected in reservoirs.  California water rights are still based on the old rule that groundwater is accessible to any grower, however deep he has to drill, limited only by economics. Surface water is something else. Only the land owner through whose property a river is flowing, has water rights to that water, as much as he needs. The governor can put limitations on surface water use, but not on ground water consumption for irrigation purposes. Theo had mixed feelings about that. He was fortunate to live in Northern California, where there was enough water for farming operations, but his farm friends in the Central Valley had to rely on a lot of well water. 

The law did not pass, because the Farm Bureau was able to put a stop to it. This was the same Farm Bureau that had been so helpful to Theo over the years.  This issue was going backwards on water consumption in California. There is no all-encompassing program on water consumption and water allocation in California. It is all these “immense centralized institutions” making it impossible to have a uniform water policy. What reasons did the Farm Bureau give for fighting the limits on new wells? They would not say, except give some vague response, like: “Who will grow food for the population, if water was not supplied in sufficient amounts?”  If the farmer had to pay the real price of water, they would not grow tomatoes, plant almond trees, and the like. That land would require other purposes. It reminded Theo about what happened in the Klamath Valley Basin.

The Klamath is the most important coastal river south of the Columbia River for anadromous fish migration. Its salmon, steelhead and rainbow trout have adapted to unusually high water temperatures and acidity levels relative to other rivers in the Pacific Northwest. The numerous fish were a major source of food for Native Americans, who have inhabited the basin for at least 7,000 years. The first Europeans to enter the Klamath River basin were fur trappers for the Hudson's Bay Company in the 1820s; they established the Siskiyou Trail along the Klamath and Trinity rivers into the Sacramento Valley. Within several decades of white settlement, native peoples were forced into reservations. Most human use of the watershed is limited to the upper basin. Despite the semiarid climate, dams have been built, irrigation water has been supplied from the Klamath and Lost rivers, and plentiful groundwater has been drawn to transform most of the upper Klamath Basin to farmland. At least 11,000 years ago, Lower Klamath and Tule Lakes in the rainy season would combine into one giant freshwater marsh that was nearly 290 square miles (750 km2) large. This, combined with the over 100 square miles (260 km2) of Upper Klamath Lake, formed a temporary habitat for millions of migratory birds.[25][26] These lakes are all remnants of a large Ice Age lake, Lake Modoc, that covered about 1,100 square miles (2,800 km2). Although all of the marshlands have been developed with the exception of Upper Klamath Lake,[27] about 3.7 million migrating birds still pass through the watershed each year. (Wikipedia)

The Valley Basin is a semi-arid section of Oregon, that receives relatively little water. Ground water was plentiful, at one time. Farmers, settling there, by the middle of the 20th century were feeling the pressure of an increasing population, and industry needing more water. The area had been known for being the 2nd largest salmon river after the Columbia.  For Indians the land also represented an ancient, sacred, and spiritual inheritance. It became clear that the natural flows would not be enough to satisfy all parties; farmers, Indians, industrialists, and growing population. About every 6-7 years or so, an extreme drought would make it really hard to allocate the water. Volatility between parties became understandable. Farmers succeeded to have the federal government build four power generating dams that helped light up the area, blocking the salmon from swimming up stream to lay their eggs and pumps churning up the fish that came back down the river. Feeder lakes were drained to make arable land. Later the power generators were not needed anymore, but the damage was done. Then in the mid-nineteen fifties, the federal government, as part of its efforts to assimilate the Indians, duped the tribes into selling off their land, leaving them without a home, overlooking one important provision in the 1864 treaty: It allowed tribes to hunt, fish and gather on their former lands. This included retaining their water rights, so the farmers found themselves as second in line. Beyond that, the “sucker fish” had to be protected which caused a lot of small farmers to go bankrupt. 

Theo could imagine the arguments and bad feelings that created among the Valley Basin constituents. You would have a pickup full of teenagers going through town, shouting obscenities at the Indians they encountered, derogatory comments, putting bullet holes through signs in front of businesses. At one point, during a drought, the President allowed the release of water to save the salmon, but it was too late. The water was too warm for salmon to survive. The government tried, but only provided temporary relief, and was too far removed to understand the battles and history of water provisions for Oregon and California. 

Enter Jim Root, a newcomer to the Medford based fruit export business. He bought a farm which had a river running through it, so had one of the oldest water rights available. But that did not exclude him from seeing the water wars and pain around him. He had more water than he needed. The water spread out over his pasture land, was not the most economical use.  Jim’s conscience played a role in deciding to not irrigate for pasture anymore. This provided people downstream access to more water. His decision did not go unnoticed by the Indians, and he gained their respect. Not only the tribe, but also his neighbor, a rancher noticed it and soon the two became friends. They both saw how big the problem of the water shut-off was and they tried to figure out a way to solve it. Thomas, the neighbor, had a good standing with the ranchers and Jim had the respect of the tribe. 

Jim had attended a Rotary International Convention which had generated discussion to attempt to end the Falkland Island war between Britain and Argentina. Jim was intrigued in the way the dialogue was moderated. Rotarians from both sides, listened to each other and talked to their respective governments, which contributed to ending that war. Jim was impressed! It was seventeen years after that convention that Jim Root found himself in the above described situation. He wanted to give all sides an opportunity to speak, in a safe place. No editors with paper and pencil or cameras! He knew the importance of sharing a meal, where it was a lot more than just eating. When the tribal representatives arrived they suggested an age old plan of putting the tables in a circle, so all would be facing each other. It was their first break-through. Remembering some simple points that were put up at that Rotary intervention report, seventeen years earlier, he put up four bullet points: 

  1. Develop trust.
  2. Actions that consider the entire community.
  3. Balance the flow of water in- and out- of the community.    
  4. Improve water quality considering: “good ecology equals good economy.” 

Jim would ask for facts, and wrote those down for everyone to see. The initial goal was to meet from 8-noon, but by lunch time there was so much energy in the room, that he decided to have the place serve up some sandwiches and salad, so they could continue for awhile. “Awhile” ended up to be a full eight-hour meeting! The meetings became a weekly event. People felt free to get up and take a stretch, there would be rest periods when informal conversations would take place. Even if someone had to vent, they vented, that was ok. There were local events, like the potato festival, where the tribe offered to cook the salmon. The ultimate was this question posed by a farmer’s wife:

“What would it mean,” she asked the then Klamath Chairman foreman, “if somebody just said they were sorry?”

Global Warming vs. Global Warming

Ben drove up, and saw Theo inspecting his tomato field. It was the second planting, which they had just been finished thinning, and about ready of another irrigation. The plants were big enough now, to where Theo did not sprinkle anymore, but ran water in every other grove between the beds. It was the end of March and they had just a sprinkle of rain, which did not amount to anything.

 “Well,” said Theo, “global warming is making itself known; we didn’t have much rain this season.”   

“Really,” Ben replied, “and what is the definition of global warming?” 

“That includes a lot of things. The way the ice caps are melting, sea levels are slightly but continuously rising, and what we humans add to the equation from our pollution, like CO2 and other greenhouse gasses.”

“Oh,” Ben replied, “you mean the melting of the ice caps and current increase of the oceans is due to us polluting?” 

“Listen to this, Theo replied: Human influence has been detected in warming of the atmosphere and the ocean, in changes in the global water cycle, in reductions in snow and ice, in global mean sea level rise, and in changes in some climate extremes. This evidence for human influence has grown since AR4. It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.”  

“Oh yea, that is based on computer models in which the more recent and more sophisticated data is extrapolated over hundreds or even thousands of years prior! I’m not saying that global warming is not taking place. The Dutch are very aware of it as they see the sea level inching up and the below-sea-level ground sinking, just as is happening in the Central Valley. They are getting scared of having to raise the dikes all the way around,” Ben responded all in one breath. He went on: “here in the USA, global warming, also called climate change, I believe, is so heavily impregnated with CO2 expulsion created by carbon discharge of the use of carbon fuels and greenhouse gasses, emitted by humans. If we control all of that better, that would reduce global warming and the Dutch would not have to worry so much about having to raise the dikes.” 

“So,” Theo replied:  “is it not better to reduce our pollution?” 

“Of course we should control our pollution, but not with the expectation global warming will be controlled,” Ben replied, and went on: “We are sterilizing the earth, reducing the bee population, redirecting water, so Los Angeles can grow bigger, and much natural life gets killed off. For the most part we currently don’t even know we are doing that. Aren’t we learning anything from history?” 

Ben went on to explain that “global warming,” in Holland and much of Europe has an entirely different meaning than in the USA. “In Europe, global warming is seen much more like a long-term process from ice-age to ice-age, which takes place over a much longer period than from the time the first automobile was produced until now. I’ve seen Los Angeles with brown polluted skies during the 1970’s-1990’s. But that has to change through stricter car and industry air pollution legislation. Of course we need to control pollution better, but that is an entirely different story than global warming.”  

“Got to go, we’ll continue this conversation later,” said Theo as he got in his pickup to go and prepare for the next irrigation.

How to Proceed with my story

 So I started NaNoWrimo, this November 2016. The first day was great. Almost got my 1667 words for the day. The next day got another 500 or so words in. Then, about November 8 I went dry, but let me backtrack. I am pretty good at setting parameters, the historical setting, and what I call, the technical components of my book: A Drop in the Bucket. The parameters are the timeframes, theme, and locations. The timeframes are dictated by the locations and the theme. The theme is water and how it is used in different cultures. The timeframes are determined by what is happening at the various locations. The technical components are what I use in the various locations, and concerns mostly in agriculture, water engineering, floods, precipitation or the lack thereof.

I start with farming and water conditions plus its uses in the Sacramento valley during the 1970s. One of my characters came from Holland, and as the story unfolds, he compares water management in California with water management in Holland. He refers back to the 1953 flood in Holland and how that is managed to this date. In the third phase, his water engineer brother comes over and wants to see the consequences of Katrina in New Orleans, which took place in 2005. He also used to live in Bangladesh, working on water projects there. Notice that all four locations are part of a delta from one or more rivers that culminate and flow into the ocean; different oceans, which in turn dictate how these water flows are affected. 

So far so good. This is where the MS writing group comes in. Each Wednesday we go to Sacramento, have lunch together at the Carlton Senior Center rest home, then go to the library where we write for about 1 ½ hours and read our writings out-loud. Len writes pieces on how MS affects him, and some detective-like stories. John, in Oregon, writes about a theme in what I call exaggerated tale form, but right-on. David often writes light-hearted stories. Harold writes short stories and Irene wrote a very nice piece about her mother-in-law last week. Marise is expanding on her life story, and John can write much to the point about characters. It is all about characters, for each one of the team. That is what I like. That is what I need to flesh out my characters and to make the story more interesting. To make the story a story. I also need some drama such as the mis-use of water policies, policies developed for selfish reasons by its authors. And I need some intrigue, which I notice in all of the other team’s writers. How do I do that? That is where I am stuck. What are the questions I should ask?

One California, Two Water Philosophies

California started out as a Spanish colony. Spanish law permeated the area; California, Mexico, and all Spanish colonies. Spain developed laws over its history, including those pertaining to water. Spain is a semi-arid country, where water is at a shortage, many years. The main philosophy has always been that all residents shared the royal patrimony in common. “We have ordered that the pastures, woods, and waters be common to the Indies,” proclaimed the monarch in 1541 in a decree reaffirming an even earlier pronouncement, “… and the foregoing shall be enforced where no title or grant of ours orders differently.” To the missions of California, grants of land and water were strictly temporary. Title remained with the crown and missionaries as trustees for the Indians. Civil pueblos  had title to approximately 27 square miles, which became permanent if the residents met certain prescribed requirements, but they could not obtain title to water. Under Spanish law, water in a municipality did not belong to separate individuals, but was passed on from the monarch to the entire community. “Pastures, woods, waters, hunting, fishing, stone quarries, fruit trees, and other privileges shall be for the common benefit of the Spaniards and Indians residing therein.     (Source: The great Thirst, by Norris Hundley Jr.)

When there was a limit of water, Spanish legalisms took on great significance.  Water remained under rule of the Spanish crown. 

Moving forward to 1846, when California was taken over by the USA and two years later gold was found, just outside of Sacramento. The whole philosophy changed. People came in hordes to go for the gold. Those were all free-thinking people, wary of Washington government intervention. They wanted local control, somewhat similar to the Spanish law which acknowledged that land use should be controlled locally as much as possible. But to the new locals that included water rights. Gold diggers need water, but soon water was becoming limited in California, like it always had been in Spain. What about newcomers, who would prospect between you and the water source?  The law did not really address that yet. Soon the locals created their own law: First in time, first in right. That became law, and to this day people in California defend that position. That is why we see two farms side by side; one lush with fruit trees, row crops and big barns, while their neighbor barely gets by with dry farming. One inherited water rights, his neighbor was not as fortunate. 

In later years, California law distinguished between surface water and ground water. Surface water is regulated, but ground water is not. A farmer can dig as deep as he wants to pump water, no matter that such water was not limited to the area under his own land. That is why the Colorado river appears to be providing less and less water. Water gets sucked up by adjoining fields pumping out ground water, which then gets replenished from Colorado river water. 

Today, Governor Brown is trying to control groundwater as is surface water, because the San Joaquin valley is dropping!

Are you an Outliner or a Pantser?

Economics has fascinated me for some time. I even started a blog on it, until I came to the conclusion that there are hundreds of blogs about economics. I started to focus more on "water", driven by the drought I encountered, upon return to California in 2009. But just writing about the drought, or "water" in California was also a subject that was overdone, and only of interest to Californians. Other states in the country heard about the drought, but could not grasp its intensity. Even in California people felt it was not that bad and could be legislated out of existence, if the government would get their act together. 

The waterway from the harbor of Rotterdam to the North Sea. Rotterdam used to be world's largest port for many years.

I like the big picture, so decided to incorporate economics, politics, geography, history, and culture into the equation. But to what could I compare it? The first thing that came to mind was how water is managed in Holland (the Netherlands). First there was the Afsluitdijk, a dike built across the Zuider Sea in 1932, making it a lake. Then we had the big flood in 1953 and how after that plans were solidified more quickly to protect the country from it happening again. Then there was hurricane Katrina in the Mississippi delta in 2005, just as Holland is a delta. My brother, who was a water engineer, put projects together in Bangladesh, which is a humongous delta where the snow melt from the Himalayas streams into the ocean.

So here is how my story is developing now: 

Theo migrated to Missouri with his family. His dad started a dairy farm in the early to mid 1800's. Theo is the oldest son who would be expected to take over the farm, but is not so inclined. He will move to California, following the gold-rush crowd. Not so much to dig for gold, but to get involved in the politics of water management. His grandson will meet Ben, who immigrated from Holland with his new bride. Ben is also interested in water and the two get together to share notes about water management in California vs. Holland. Ben's brother, Rudolf, visits his brother in California, but is also interested in the ramifications of hurricane Katrina, being a water engineer himself and having worked on rebuilding the dike systems in Holland after the 1953 flood. His company sent him out to Bangladesh to engineer water projects there. He also was sent out to Israel to maintain and raise the levees around the Dead Sea for potassium winning. 

Fascination comes into play, to see how different politics plays out in each of those developments, and how the geography and economics play a role in each. It will become a novel for which I need to develop personal challenges for my characters, yet. 



   Move into action. The note-taking, list making, and research has to end at some point. Your plot comes one of two ways: from outlining or from diving directly into the writing and engaging in a process of discovery. Either way, you’ve got to start getting words onto the page.

Are you an Outliner or a Pantser?

You know what an Outliner is. Pantsers are the opposite. They write by the seat of their pants, by process of discovery. Like Stephen King, they try to put interesting characters in difficult situations and write to find out what happens.

Let the fun begin with whichever style fits you best. It may take some experimenting, but most novelists are one or the other. Neither is right or wrong, and whichever one you are, at times the other seems preferable. But pick one and run with it.

Outliners carefully map out the story before they write the first word, sometimes even developing a detailed plan for each scene. They find they can’t write a novel any other way.

Dostoyevsky wrote eight outlines of The Idiot, changing his conception of the story dramatically each time. Henry James wrote detailed scenarios of his novels before he began his first drafts; his scenario for The Ambassadors ran 20,000 words.

Pantsers believe that if they can be surprised, delighted, disappointed, horrified, or moved in the course of writing, the reader will be too. I happen to be a Pantser. author: Jerry Jenkins

I have referred to "Outliners" and "Pantsers" before. The above quote is from Jerry Jenkins Fiction Jumpstart course.

These are the basic two forms a writer uses, depending on his / her personality. I think I am also a "Pantser". My characters develop as I write, and as I "need" them to make a flowing story. Theo's personality comes from the Dutch book Soldaat van Oranje's main character. When I wrote my first book, my memoirs, I used more of an outline writing it in chronological order. 

Let me ask you again: