Water action as answer to climate change – collaborative action for resilience. (2021, October 28). UN-Water. https://www.unwater.org/water-action-as-answer-to-climate-change-collaborative-action-for-resilience/

This article by the United Nations Water page, illustrates a program which is offered in Early November of the year. This past year at the UN Climate Change Conference when they hosted the multimedia Water Pavilion, there were demonstrations of “ways that water is enabling transformative climate action”. The demonstrations consisted of ways for adaptation and mitigation and how they can be implemented into national policies around the world. Nations can get involved by integrating these techniques in and around their rivers, lakes and other bodies of water in order to slow the rapidly increasing climate change impact.

I personally think that this article sheds light on not just the United Nations, but how people are searching and trying to promote and integrate new and more beneficial ways to save our planet. I think this conference is trying to promote ways to use and reuse and take care of our water by implementing policies enforcing people to do so. This conference got many organizations and “stakeholders” involved therefore people are trying to get these policies enforced and therefore take action on not only our climate change issue, but in an effective way. We have so much water on our planet that is not necessarily being used to its fullest potential, and my hope is that the UN continues on the track they are on to find great ways to conserve it, and help the environment and climate by getting policies and rules in place.

Russell, K. (2021, August 21). Thousands Of Water Rights Holders Ordered To Stop Pulling Water From Delta. SFGATE. https://www.sfgate.com/news/bayarea/article/Thousands-Of-Water-Rights-Holders-Ordered-To-Stop-16401688.php

On Friday, August 20, The State Water Resources control board ordered many California Water rights holders to stop pulling and using water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta source. Around 4,500 out of 6,600 water rights holders were banned from using this source in order to keep a sustainable amount of drinking water available and to keep ecosystems in the water alive and thriving during the drought. The state will be making sure this order is being followed by “investigating water diversions” but will be providing assistance to all these people who are now cut off, because to many this will be a major impact. 

This article is a further step ahead from my first article from July 8. It came to me as a somewhat relief to know that there is now a regulated rule being enforced which is going to help out California’s current situation. I think that this will cause some commotion due to these water rights being basically taken away from thousands of people, but I hope they know that this is only in order to keep the environment thriving and to keep people with resources for a longer amount of time. While I can imagine not all of these people will obey this change, I believe that even if more than half of them do, it will make a positive impact and show others that it is doable. By restricting the amount of water being taken from this natural source, we are protecting the environment and all the species that live in it. Additionally we are allowing more water to be saved rather than wasted on the excess amount of food that was happening previously. Now people are basically being forced to be more resourceful and environmentally friendly.

Fuller, T. (2021, August 4). Battling Drought, California Will Cut Water to Farmers. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/04/us/california-drought-water.html

This article from the New York Times was looking ahead to the steps that the State Water Resources Control Board was going to take. The article was written on August 4, and stated that in around 2 weeks, “the lifeblood of the agricultural Central Valley would be subject to drawing restrictions”. This means that the board was going to finally take action and create either a ban or restriction on many water users’ water supply from their main source, The Delta. There was also another restriction placed in Northern California regarding the Russian River. 

I personally think that it is somewhat crazy to me to think that we are having to take away water rights from so many people that truly rely on this water in order to make a living. Whether they are farmers or drinking water producers, they rely on having this water to make their living. According to the article, this is the 4th time that this has happened somewhat recently and that “experts say climate change is likely to make similar restrictions more regular”. Once I heard this, it really opened my eyes to see that this is a step that I think will need to be taken in order to help our environment and our state, and I hope these people that it will affect will realize it as well. 

Walters, D. (2021, August 9). Opinion: Big Battle Looms Over California Water Rights as Drought Worsens. Times of San Diego. https://timesofsandiego.com/opinion/2021/08/08/big-battle-looms-over-california-water-rights-as-drought-worsens/

About 2 weeks ago, Times of San Diego released an article debating the different sides of the water rights argument that exists among Californians nowadays. As the drought worsens, the question of adjusting California residents’ water rights is up in the air. The debate can be seen as farmers vs. environmentalists. The farmers in California need water in order to produce food, however they use “too much in the eyes of environmental groups”. The article states that if the drought continues and worsens, the water rights in California will have to be reevaluated and regulations may be put in place in order to protect Californians from further damage. 

While water is a necessity to farmers and therefore they may be against the thought of restrictions being put in place, the restrictions would not fully cut off all of their water supply, it would just limit it. Right now, farmers are producing an abundant and excess amount of food, which people may look at as a waste of both food, space and water. Therefore if the water rights were reevaluated and restrictions were placed on the amount of water there is accessible, farmers may not be able to produce as much as they used to, however then we are saving water so we can continue to produce food longer in the future. If we were to continue on the path we are on now, environmentalists say that wildlife, especially fish, will become endangered and we will run out of resources at a much faster rate. This article shows a lot of the legal actions that can and may be acted upon in the future in order to keep a sustainable environment and water amount. 

Freidenrich, D. (2021, July 19). Newsom isn’t doing enough on water use. Blame the recall. Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-07-19/newsom-isnt-doing-enough-on-water-use-blame-the-recall

On July 8, 2021, Gavin Newsom made a statement to the state of California, “asking but not requiring Californians to cut their water use by 15%”. California has been facing one of the largest droughts in modern history due to the heating climate and severe lack of rainfall. At this point in time, Newsom was being seen as “not doing enough”, however the article stated that he may be scared of the fact that if he was to force California residents to cut down their water usage, he would be bumped out of his Governor position.His statement also was seen as being “too little too late”.

 This article shows the reader how yes, California has seen severe droughts before, however this political stance is what makes the situation worse and ineffective. If Gavin Newsom just asks California residents to cut down on their water usage, only few people will actually do that. The rest of the people will continue to use the water because it is not forbidden or officially a rule. Relating back to environmental science, if Newsom does not effectively limit these water rights, Californian’s will continue to dip us deeper into this drought which will lead to more fires, less conserved water, and possibly less drinking water in the future. I think Gavin Newsome took the wrong approach to this situation as it is better to attack this problem with a strong front earlier on, rather than trying to reverse the damage that has already been done when it’s too late. 

Water, W. (2021, March 30). California weighs changes for new water rights permits in response to a warmer and drier climate. The Water Desk. https://waterdesk.org/2021/03/california-weighs-changes-for-new-water-rights-permits-in-response-to-a-warmer-and-drier-climate

This source written on March 30, 2021 by The Water Desk evaluates the causes and effects for changing the Water Rights that people in California hold. It shares how the State Water Board needs and will continue to change and align the water rights as the climate grows drier and warmer and water amounts lessen. The main point of this article was to show that there is a chance that curtailments for water use permits will be reevaluated, therefore, “Some water users fear the report could be the beginning of a move to restrict their access”.

Water rights may be a privilege to some, however they do remain a human right to the people who obtain them. This means that they do have the right to access this water and these sources for whatever it may be that they use it for. Thousands and thousands of people rely on this water in order to make a living or to eat or have drinking water, and this article to these water rights holders is most likely very worrisome. The fact that one of their personal rights may be stripped from them is a huge step and really shows that we as Californians must be going down a bad path. The fact that there is no other option than to take away one’s rights in order to help and save our environment is crazy and scary to many. This whole article ties into environmental science because it shows us the effects of not managing or conserving our natural resources well enough. It is extremely difficult if not impossible to reverse the damage that is already done, and we only have one earth. If we use up all of our water or too much of it, we are hurting wildlife ecosystems and species, and we will end up hurting our human selves by not having drinking water or water to grow crops. 

Source: Hall, Alexandra. “California Files Lawsuit to Block Trump Administration Delta Water Rules: KQED News.” KQED, 21 Feb. 1970, www.kqed.org/news/11802722/california-files-lawsuit-to-block-trump-administration-delta-water-rules.

Abstract: When Trump visited the central valley to celebrate more water being allocated to growers in the area, he was met with lawsuits that would prevent this from happening. These lawsuits were filed to ensure the safety of the delta smelt, an endangered species. California feels that moving more water to the growers will ultimately endanger other fish, such as salmon. Trump feels that this water will help California’s economy and will ultimately promote agricultural reform across the country. Although he was stopped almost instantly, he is still trying to send water in the direction of the central valley, and it is a priority of his to recognize the agriculture industry in California. 

Reaction: This article is super relevant. We talked about the smelt in class and the different ways to protect them. There are two sides to this lawsuit. The first is Trump’s side, where he is looking out for the people living in the central valley, and there is the California government, which is looking out for an endangered species. There is more to look into, but both sides have a valid point on why the water should go, or not, to the growers.

Source: “Africa, Decade, Water for Life, 2015, UN-Water, United Nations, MDG, Water, Sanitation, Financing, Gender, IWRM, Human Right, Transboundary, Cities, Quality, Food Security.” United Nations, United Nations, www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/africa.shtml.

Abstract: The title is ironic. It is a hook to draw the reader to show that there is barely a water supply for 50 years in many parts of Africa. This article is more statistics than anything. The most important stat is that there is only 61% current water coverage in Africa. The target number is 75%, which is a long way away given the circumstances in Africa when it comes to clean and safe water. Without continuous change, Africa slides into periods of stalling and little to no change. There are many issues that parallel the drought, such as food issues, economic issues, and climate change.  

Reaction: This article opened my eyes to the real problem. I work better with numbers than with words, and seeing statistics allows me to see the magnitude of a problem. As the problem progresses, there will be more countries that are willing to help, but there is no direct way to help. The regions in Africa that need attention are in unlucky locations. It is hard and expensive to get water flowing into these regions and could cost more than most can pay.