Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

How Last Year’s Wildfires Reignited a Battle Over Water Rights on Maui

News Feed
Friday, September 6, 2024

Native Hawaiians have always understood the value of water. In the Hawaiian language, the word for fresh water is “wai”—and the word for wealth is “waiwai.” An essential asset, water was a resource Hawaiians shared, and they made sure to return what they didn’t use back to the stream. But the 19th-century sugar barons who diverted water to irrigate their plantations did not share those traditions. On Maui, the most important was Alexander & Baldwin, founded in 1870 by the sons of missionaries, which wielded great political and economic power for more than a century. At its height, it sustained its operations by draining plentiful streams of 165 million gallons a day to irrigate its plantation in Maui’s central plain, moving it through 70 miles of tunnels, ditches, flumes, and reservoirs. As stream levels dropped and taro patches dried up, Native Hawaiians, unable to grow their own food, were forced to move. The network became a subsidiary company—East Maui Irrigation—which still controls this water diversion system. Today, EMI is jointly owned by Alexander & Baldwin and agribusiness company Mahi Pono. EMI has been the source of long-running legal battles on Maui, as farmers and environmental groups seek to stop it from sucking up fresh water from the island’s streams. “For more than two decades, Native Hawaiians and the environmental community have been using legal avenues to try to restore at least some flow to these streams,” says Sierra Club attorney David Frankel. “At every turn, A&B and [the Board of Land and Natural Resources] have worked hand-in-hand to thwart those efforts.”   An A&B spokesperson disputes this. “There are laws and statutes in Hawaii that govern the flow of water in streams and these legal processes were followed by the BLNR, A&B, and the Native Hawaiian and environmental communities,” the spokesperson says. “Significant amounts of water have been restored to East Maui streams. A number of priority streams…have been permanently and fully restored and will not be diverted in the future.” The battle over Maui’s water supply intensified last August, when wildfires tore through the island and devastated the community of Lahaina. Earlier that summer, EMI’s legal opponents had scored a victory when a state court reduced the amount it could suck up from Maui’s streams by a quarter. But a day after the historic town was all but wiped out, the state of Hawaii petitioned its Supreme Court to stop the court order and increase the amount of water diverted, ostensibly for the purpose of fighting fires in Upcountry Maui. The state’s petition seemed like a backdoor way to reverse the earlier ruling against EMI, especially when it soon became clear there was more than enough water available to fight the Upcountry fires. And it raised local suspicions that the state was doing the bidding of corporations. Frankel called the effort a “brazen attempt to capitalize on tragedy to subvert the judicial process.” The state Supreme Court ultimately denied the petition. But a year after the Maui fires, the fight at the heart of that case—over who controls the island’s water supply, public or private interests—remains as fierce as ever. The hall of historic Waiola Church in Lahaina and nearby Lahaina Hongwanji Mission are engulfed in flames in 2023.Matthew Thayer/The Maui News/AP Hawaii’s sugar plantations started closing one by one in the 1950s, as production moved to countries where costs were lower. The last of them, A&B’s Central Maui sugar operation, shut down in 2016. The company is now in the commercial real estate and development business, with a portfolio spanning 39 properties and 3,500 acres across Hawaii. On Maui, A&B’s legacy remains complicated. For some it is an extractive force that has denied Native farmers their cultural lifestyle. For others, it is a benevolent presence that provided jobs, medical care, housing, and scholarships for students. “A&B was a major employer on Maui for over a century,” says Lucienne de Naie, the chairperson of Sierra Club Maui Group. “There were people who were very grateful to A&B. They gave immigrants a chance to work in the fields.” But cross the company, de Naie says, and “you were blackballed. It was hard to get any kind of job on Maui.” Because of its history on the island, any issue having to do with A&B, including water, has deeply divided the island community. “While we can’t speak for our predecessors, we are encouraged by the re-emergence of taro cultivation as a cultural practice and important food source in East Maui,” says an A&B spokesperson. De Naie lives in Huelo, a small town in northeastern Maui, where there is no public water supply. Residents retrieve water from streams or through water catchment. If those sources are dry, they have to purchase water. “We live in an area where our water is taken for other people to use, but we have to buy water from people that come in trucks and deliver it,” de Naie says. Hawaii’s constitution declares that water is a public trust for the benefit of all citizens, and the state government is the only entity that can administer this resource. But there’s a loophole: Businesses, such as A&B, can control and sell the use of their water diversion systems. “The operators of the diversion system end up having a significant amount of leverage over who gets how much water,” says Jonathan Scheuer, co-author of the book Water and Power in West Maui. “This is partly because of the amount of information they have available on how the system operates. Other players have to trust them often when they say this is how much water is available.” The state leases water rights to EMI and other companies. For decades, EMI has received one-year revocable permits from BLNR to divert water from Maui’s streams. In exchange for the use of water for its own purposes, EMI must deliver water to rural residents in Upcountry Maui, for which it is paid 6 cents per thousand gallons by the Maui Department of Water Supply. In 2018, the newly incorporated company Mahi Pono bought 41,000 acres of former plantation lands from A&B for $262 million, making it Maui’s largest landowner. The deal also included a 50 percent interest in EMI for $2.7 million. The company currently employs 350 Maui residents. By the end of 2024, it projects it will complete planting 14,830 acres with a variety of crops, including citrus, coffee, macadamia nut, watermelon, and onions. Though Mahi Pono’s name is Hawaiian—it means “to grow responsibly”—the company is not. It is majority owned by Canada’s Public Sector Pension Investment Board (PSP), which manages approximately $200 billion in assets and has been buying up water rights worldwide as long-term investments. “It makes perfect sense for them to invest in water,” says Shay Chan Hodges. She served as vice chair of the Maui County Board of Water Supply from 2018 to 2019, and chair from 2019 to 2021. “Obviously there’s value to 40,000 acres of land, but the real value is the water attached to that land.” Water moves slowly through Lowrie Ditch in 2016 as it passes through a Haiku weir on its way to a siphon on the island of Maui.Matthew Thayer/Maui News/AP That’s something A&B and Mahi Pono evidently agree on, too. Per their sales contract, if A&B is unable to secure water leases with the state of at least 30 million gallons per day or if it’s unable to secure a long-term water lease of 30 years, it must pay Mahi Pono rebates of up to $62 million. Indeed, Mahi Pono’s allocation had been cut below that contractual threshold shortly before the state and A&B petitioned to increase the water usage of the East Maui Irrigation System last August in the wake of the Lahaina blaze. “If Mahi Pono can obtain a 30-year lease from the state allowing for tens of millions of gallons a day (upwards of 90 mgd), the lease itself is an asset that can be monetized and potentially transferred or sold. This adds significant value to Mahi Pono’s holdings,” says Hodges. After the Mahi Pono deal, A&B moved quickly to pursue a 30-year lease to divert up to 92 million gallons per day from Maui’s streams, with 85 mgd earmarked for Mahi Pono’s agricultural holdings. As part of its lease application, EMI filed an environmental impact statement that made plain the Faustian bargain at the heart of Maui’s water system. If it was not granted water rights, its water deliveries “would terminate,” a prospect that would leave tens of thousands of Maui residents without access to fresh water. This language predictably caused local alarm, and the Maui County Board Department of Water Supply created a Temporary Investigative Group in 2019 to research the feasibility of purchasing and maintaining the EMI system. “The Temporary Investigative Group believed that public ownership of the system was necessary for protecting the public health,” says Hodges, who was part of the group. “Because why are we being held hostage? The basic message was, ‘if you don’t do what we say, you won’t get any water.’” Hodges and her colleagues recommended either purchasing or condemning the EMI system, or for the mayor to step in to acquire the long-term leases and give control back to the government, but nothing came of it. For years, A&B and Mahi Pono have sought to influence local politics. “These corporations’ executives have held a number of influential positions in both the state and county governments,” says Keani Rawlins-Fernandez, a member of the Maui County Council. “A&B and Mahi Pono have long donated tremendous amounts to elected officials’ campaigns.” Hannibal Tavares, one of Maui’s former mayors, was a veteran of the sugar industry and an employee of A&B prior to winning office in 1979. The current vice president of A&B also served on the state’s Commission on Water Resource Management (the arm that decides how much water companies can divert) from 2002 to 2005 while working for A&B. Another sugar industry leader twice served on the commission. Since 2006, A&B and its top executives have given hundreds of thousands of dollars to state and county politicians. They’ve donated more than $10,000 to Gov. Josh Green in the past two years. Mahi Pono’s executives began donating to political campaigns in 2020. Thousands of those contributions flowed to Green, too. “This is a case of our elected leaders choosing to be beholden to a private entity,” Hodges says. Workers cut sugar cane at Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar, the state’s last sugar plantation, in this 2010 file photo.Audrey McAvoy/AP Even before last year’s wildfires reinvigorated the fight over Maui’s water supply, activists had begun to gain some ground in their effort to wrest control from A&B and Mahi Pono. Since the former and present mayor didn’t step in, in 2022, voters approved the creation of the East Maui Community Board water authority, which gives the people the power to negotiate water leases with the state. Hodges says she was surprised there was no pushback from corporations when it was put on the ballot, but there was some controversy with the appointment of its 11-member board. After the deadline to apply had closed, the county council received requests to open the process up again. When the county did so, new applicants included a former Mahi Pono executive and former Mayor Alan Arakawa, who had opposed the water authority and said it would “kill Mahi Pono.” (When the 11-member board was eventually approved, it included Arakawa, taro farmers and several water resource experts, including Scheuer, who became the chair.) Delayed by the fire, the water board began holding bimonthly meetings in February, and the director seat will soon be filled. But whether the community water authority and board successfully take East Maui water leases out of the hands of A&B and Mahi Pono, or if more challenges emerge, remains to be seen. If successful, it would be the first time in more than 100 years that the people of East Maui, and not a private corporation, will determine how its water is divided and shared. It could prove to be a model for the rest of the island, where other corporations hold its own separate systems. Currently, EMI has a one-year lease from the state covering 2024, allowing 31.25 million gallons per day to be diverted from East Maui’s streams to Mahi Pono’s land—and the Sierra Club Maui is keeping a sharp eye as its legal battles continue. It’s fighting to stop the issuance of one-year leases, which avoids the rigorous review afforded to long-term leases. De Naie says these court battles will make a difference for the future. “Eventually…we will see a standard set for trusteeship of public resources that should have been in place in the first place.”

Native Hawaiians have always understood the value of water. In the Hawaiian language, the word for fresh water is “wai”—and the word for wealth is “waiwai.” An essential asset, water was a resource Hawaiians shared, and they made sure to return what they didn’t use back to the stream. But the 19th-century sugar barons who […]

Native Hawaiians have always understood the value of water. In the Hawaiian language, the word for fresh water is “wai”—and the word for wealth is “waiwai.” An essential asset, water was a resource Hawaiians shared, and they made sure to return what they didn’t use back to the stream.

But the 19th-century sugar barons who diverted water to irrigate their plantations did not share those traditions. On Maui, the most important was Alexander & Baldwin, founded in 1870 by the sons of missionaries, which wielded great political and economic power for more than a century. At its height, it sustained its operations by draining plentiful streams of 165 million gallons a day to irrigate its plantation in Maui’s central plain, moving it through 70 miles of tunnels, ditches, flumes, and reservoirs. As stream levels dropped and taro patches dried up, Native Hawaiians, unable to grow their own food, were forced to move.

The network became a subsidiary company—East Maui Irrigation—which still controls this water diversion system. Today, EMI is jointly owned by Alexander & Baldwin and agribusiness company Mahi Pono.

EMI has been the source of long-running legal battles on Maui, as farmers and environmental groups seek to stop it from sucking up fresh water from the island’s streams. “For more than two decades, Native Hawaiians and the environmental community have been using legal avenues to try to restore at least some flow to these streams,” says Sierra Club attorney David Frankel. “At every turn, A&B and [the Board of Land and Natural Resources] have worked hand-in-hand to thwart those efforts.”  

An A&B spokesperson disputes this. “There are laws and statutes in Hawaii that govern the flow of water in streams and these legal processes were followed by the BLNR, A&B, and the Native Hawaiian and environmental communities,” the spokesperson says. “Significant amounts of water have been restored to East Maui streams. A number of priority streams…have been permanently and fully restored and will not be diverted in the future.”

The battle over Maui’s water supply intensified last August, when wildfires tore through the island and devastated the community of Lahaina. Earlier that summer, EMI’s legal opponents had scored a victory when a state court reduced the amount it could suck up from Maui’s streams by a quarter. But a day after the historic town was all but wiped out, the state of Hawaii petitioned its Supreme Court to stop the court order and increase the amount of water diverted, ostensibly for the purpose of fighting fires in Upcountry Maui.

The state’s petition seemed like a backdoor way to reverse the earlier ruling against EMI, especially when it soon became clear there was more than enough water available to fight the Upcountry fires. And it raised local suspicions that the state was doing the bidding of corporations.

Frankel called the effort a “brazen attempt to capitalize on tragedy to subvert the judicial process.” The state Supreme Court ultimately denied the petition. But a year after the Maui fires, the fight at the heart of that case—over who controls the island’s water supply, public or private interests—remains as fierce as ever.

A house and palm trees burn in a massive wildfire.
The hall of historic Waiola Church in Lahaina and nearby Lahaina Hongwanji Mission are engulfed in flames in 2023.Matthew Thayer/The Maui News/AP

Hawaii’s sugar plantations started closing one by one in the 1950s, as production moved to countries where costs were lower. The last of them, A&B’s Central Maui sugar operation, shut down in 2016. The company is now in the commercial real estate and development business, with a portfolio spanning 39 properties and 3,500 acres across Hawaii.

On Maui, A&B’s legacy remains complicated. For some it is an extractive force that has denied Native farmers their cultural lifestyle. For others, it is a benevolent presence that provided jobs, medical care, housing, and scholarships for students. “A&B was a major employer on Maui for over a century,” says Lucienne de Naie, the chairperson of Sierra Club Maui Group. “There were people who were very grateful to A&B. They gave immigrants a chance to work in the fields.” But cross the company, de Naie says, and “you were blackballed. It was hard to get any kind of job on Maui.”

Because of its history on the island, any issue having to do with A&B, including water, has deeply divided the island community. “While we can’t speak for our predecessors, we are encouraged by the re-emergence of taro cultivation as a cultural practice and important food source in East Maui,” says an A&B spokesperson.

De Naie lives in Huelo, a small town in northeastern Maui, where there is no public water supply. Residents retrieve water from streams or through water catchment. If those sources are dry, they have to purchase water. “We live in an area where our water is taken for other people to use, but we have to buy water from people that come in trucks and deliver it,” de Naie says.

Hawaii’s constitution declares that water is a public trust for the benefit of all citizens, and the state government is the only entity that can administer this resource. But there’s a loophole: Businesses, such as A&B, can control and sell the use of their water diversion systems.

“The operators of the diversion system end up having a significant amount of leverage over who gets how much water,” says Jonathan Scheuer, co-author of the book Water and Power in West Maui. “This is partly because of the amount of information they have available on how the system operates. Other players have to trust them often when they say this is how much water is available.”

The state leases water rights to EMI and other companies. For decades, EMI has received one-year revocable permits from BLNR to divert water from Maui’s streams. In exchange for the use of water for its own purposes, EMI must deliver water to rural residents in Upcountry Maui, for which it is paid 6 cents per thousand gallons by the Maui Department of Water Supply.

In 2018, the newly incorporated company Mahi Pono bought 41,000 acres of former plantation lands from A&B for $262 million, making it Maui’s largest landowner. The deal also included a 50 percent interest in EMI for $2.7 million.

The company currently employs 350 Maui residents. By the end of 2024, it projects it will complete planting 14,830 acres with a variety of crops, including citrus, coffee, macadamia nut, watermelon, and onions.

Though Mahi Pono’s name is Hawaiian—it means “to grow responsibly”—the company is not. It is majority owned by Canada’s Public Sector Pension Investment Board (PSP), which manages approximately $200 billion in assets and has been buying up water rights worldwide as long-term investments.

“It makes perfect sense for them to invest in water,” says Shay Chan Hodges. She served as vice chair of the Maui County Board of Water Supply from 2018 to 2019, and chair from 2019 to 2021. “Obviously there’s value to 40,000 acres of land, but the real value is the water attached to that land.”

Water moves through an aqueduct in a field.
Water moves slowly through Lowrie Ditch in 2016 as it passes through a Haiku weir on its way to a siphon on the island of Maui.Matthew Thayer/Maui News/AP

That’s something A&B and Mahi Pono evidently agree on, too. Per their sales contract, if A&B is unable to secure water leases with the state of at least 30 million gallons per day or if it’s unable to secure a long-term water lease of 30 years, it must pay Mahi Pono rebates of up to $62 million. Indeed, Mahi Pono’s allocation had been cut below that contractual threshold shortly before the state and A&B petitioned to increase the water usage of the East Maui Irrigation System last August in the wake of the Lahaina blaze.

“If Mahi Pono can obtain a 30-year lease from the state allowing for tens of millions of gallons a day (upwards of 90 mgd), the lease itself is an asset that can be monetized and potentially transferred or sold. This adds significant value to Mahi Pono’s holdings,” says Hodges.

After the Mahi Pono deal, A&B moved quickly to pursue a 30-year lease to divert up to 92 million gallons per day from Maui’s streams, with 85 mgd earmarked for Mahi Pono’s agricultural holdings. As part of its lease application, EMI filed an environmental impact statement that made plain the Faustian bargain at the heart of Maui’s water system. If it was not granted water rights, its water deliveries “would terminate,” a prospect that would leave tens of thousands of Maui residents without access to fresh water.

This language predictably caused local alarm, and the Maui County Board Department of Water Supply created a Temporary Investigative Group in 2019 to research the feasibility of purchasing and maintaining the EMI system.

“The Temporary Investigative Group believed that public ownership of the system was necessary for protecting the public health,” says Hodges, who was part of the group. “Because why are we being held hostage? The basic message was, ‘if you don’t do what we say, you won’t get any water.’”

Hodges and her colleagues recommended either purchasing or condemning the EMI system, or for the mayor to step in to acquire the long-term leases and give control back to the government, but nothing came of it.

For years, A&B and Mahi Pono have sought to influence local politics. “These corporations’ executives have held a number of influential positions in both the state and county governments,” says Keani Rawlins-Fernandez, a member of the Maui County Council. “A&B and Mahi Pono have long donated tremendous amounts to elected officials’ campaigns.”

Hannibal Tavares, one of Maui’s former mayors, was a veteran of the sugar industry and an employee of A&B prior to winning office in 1979. The current vice president of A&B also served on the state’s Commission on Water Resource Management (the arm that decides how much water companies can divert) from 2002 to 2005 while working for A&B. Another sugar industry leader twice served on the commission.

Since 2006, A&B and its top executives have given hundreds of thousands of dollars to state and county politicians. They’ve donated more than $10,000 to Gov. Josh Green in the past two years. Mahi Pono’s executives began donating to political campaigns in 2020. Thousands of those contributions flowed to Green, too.

“This is a case of our elected leaders choosing to be beholden to a private entity,” Hodges says.

Three workers stand in a sugar cane field with machetes, chopping the cane.
Workers cut sugar cane at Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar, the state’s last sugar plantation, in this 2010 file photo.Audrey McAvoy/AP

Even before last year’s wildfires reinvigorated the fight over Maui’s water supply, activists had begun to gain some ground in their effort to wrest control from A&B and Mahi Pono.

Since the former and present mayor didn’t step in, in 2022, voters approved the creation of the East Maui Community Board water authority, which gives the people the power to negotiate water leases with the state. Hodges says she was surprised there was no pushback from corporations when it was put on the ballot, but there was some controversy with the appointment of its 11-member board. After the deadline to apply had closed, the county council received requests to open the process up again.

When the county did so, new applicants included a former Mahi Pono executive and former Mayor Alan Arakawa, who had opposed the water authority and said it would “kill Mahi Pono.” (When the 11-member board was eventually approved, it included Arakawa, taro farmers and several water resource experts, including Scheuer, who became the chair.)

Delayed by the fire, the water board began holding bimonthly meetings in February, and the director seat will soon be filled. But whether the community water authority and board successfully take East Maui water leases out of the hands of A&B and Mahi Pono, or if more challenges emerge, remains to be seen. If successful, it would be the first time in more than 100 years that the people of East Maui, and not a private corporation, will determine how its water is divided and shared. It could prove to be a model for the rest of the island, where other corporations hold its own separate systems.

Currently, EMI has a one-year lease from the state covering 2024, allowing 31.25 million gallons per day to be diverted from East Maui’s streams to Mahi Pono’s land—and the Sierra Club Maui is keeping a sharp eye as its legal battles continue. It’s fighting to stop the issuance of one-year leases, which avoids the rigorous review afforded to long-term leases.

De Naie says these court battles will make a difference for the future. “Eventually…we will see a standard set for trusteeship of public resources that should have been in place in the first place.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

The mayflies are sending us a warning about urban wildfires

The story told by these streams and their tiny inhabitants is clear: Urban wildfires pose a serious threat to water quality and aquatic life.

A tiny, vibrant world thrives along the rocky bottom of most streams. As sunlight filters through the water, mayfly nymphs, no larger than your fingernail, cling to algae-coated cobbles. Six spindly legs anchor them against the current, while feathery gills wave gently, drawing oxygen from the flowing water.Subscribe for unlimited access to The PostYou can cancel anytime.SubscribeThis scene is common in well-maintained creeks and streams that flow through populated areas. But when wildfires sweep through, the toxic materials left behind can devastate this ecosystem.When you think of urban wildfires, you might picture charred trees and houses. But beneath the surface of nearby streams, fires can also cause a silent upheaval — one that affects populations of creatures that are important indicators of the water’s health.Wildfires are a natural part of many ecosystems. They rejuvenate landscapes by clearing out dead brush and releasing nutrients from vegetation and soils.When fires move from nature into neighborhoods, however, they encounter a drastically different set of fuels. Urban conflagrations consume a mix of synthetic and natural materials, including homes, vehicles, electronics and household chemicals. This creates a unique set of problems that can have far-reaching consequences for waterways and the creatures that call them home.As an environmental engineer, I study how human actions on land affect the chemistry and ecology of surface water systems, including an important group of stream dwellers: benthic macroinvertebrates. These tiny creatures, which include mayflies, stoneflies and caddisflies, are not only food sources for fish and other stream life but also serve as nature’s own water quality monitors.The author collects samples from a stream. (Adam King)The Camp Fire’s wake-up callIn November 2018, the Camp Fire devastated the town of Paradise, Calif., destroying over 14,000 homes and other structures. In the aftermath, my colleagues and I examined the effects of large-scale urban burning on the chemistry of nearby watersheds.The results were alarming: Metal concentrations in affected watersheds increased dramatically — up to 200-fold from pre-fire levels. Concentrations of these metals exceeded Environmental Protection Agency aquatic habitat acute criteria, recommended levels that indicate when a metal has reached the threshold of “toxic” for organisms in the water.For humans, contaminated watersheds can compromise drinking water sources by requiring extensive water treatment or even making some water supplies temporarily unusable.Wildlife, particularly sensitive aquatic species such as fish and amphibians, face immediate threats from these pollutants. The toxic metals can disrupt their reproductive cycles, impair growth and destabilize ecosystems.Silent witnessesIn their larval stages, benthic macroinvertebrates live on the benthos, or bottom, of streams, where they are constantly exposed to the water and sensitive to changes in stream chemistry.Fly-fishing enthusiasts might recognize these creatures as the inspiration for the flies they tie. They are food for other aquatic life, but their presence, diversity and abundance also provide insight into both short-term pollution events and long-term environmental changes that chemical tests alone might miss.Because many species have short life cycles, they allow scientists to observe changes quickly, and different species can provide a nuanced picture of water quality.Just as we were finishing up our analysis of the Camp Fire samples, on Dec. 30, 2021, the Marshall Fire devastated communities in my home state of Colorado, destroying over 1,000 homes in Boulder County’s Coal Creek watershed.For two years following the fire, I worked with a team at the University of Colorado at Boulder to monitor water chemistry, benthic macroinvertebrate populations and algae in Coal Creek. We found that the runoff from fire debris dramatically altered both water quality and the ecological balance at fire-affected sites.Our findings showed persistently elevated toxic metal levels and declines in sensitive aquatic species, indicating potential long-term risks to human activities, such as fishing and irrigation. They also showed that recovery would likely take many years.A toxic cocktail for streamsSimilar to after the Camp Fire, at Boulder County’s urban, fire-affected sites, we observed elevated concentrations of nutrients and metals, including copper, nickel, lead and zinc. By measuring stormwater, we showed that these pollutants were conveyed by concrete drainage systems that quickly funneled the water into the creek. We noted 84 instances where metal concentrations exceeded EPA aquatic life criteria limits in the first year.We also measured significant changes in the types and numbers of benthic macroinvertebrates present. One of the most striking findings was the impact on algae-eating mayflies, which are particularly sensitive to changes in water quality.In the burned urban stretch of the stream, we observed an interesting phenomenon: abundant algae growth but fewer algae-eating mayflies. This suggests that nutrients from burned vegetation are likely stimulating algae growth, while toxic metals from the urban fire debris are hurting sensitive organisms such as mayflies.The algae, while plentiful, may be accumulating toxic metals from the water. When other organisms consume this algae, they could ingest these metals as well. This process, known as bioaccumulation, can lead to increasing concentrations of toxic materials moving up the food chain.What does the evidence mean?It’s important to note that the full impacts of urban wildfires on stream life are still being studied. We can’t yet say definitively whether organism numbers are low because those organisms are dying or if they are experiencing subtler effects, such as reduced reproduction. The decrease in mayfly populations, however, is a concerning indicator of ecosystem stress.For humans, the implications are nuanced. While Coal Creek isn’t a drinking water source, it is used for irrigation and recreation. Metal-contaminated water could accumulate in stream sediments and continue to affect sensitive organisms long term.The creek’s overall health also affects its ability to filter water and support biodiversity.The story told by these streams and their tiny inhabitants is clear: Urban wildfires pose a serious threat to water quality and aquatic life. To protect streams, communities need to reduce fire risk and runoff afterward. Improving urban planning, management of stormwater and watershed monitoring can help safeguard water resources.The health of streams affects the health of communities. Everyone can benefit by listening to the mayflies’ warning.The writer is a researcher in environmental engineering at the University of Colorado at Boulder.This article was produced in collaboration with theconversation.com.

Billpayers in England and Wales tricked into ‘stealth bailout’ of water companies

Campaign group challenges industry regulator over price rises for customers that will pay to upgrade infrastructureThe water industry regulator has been accused of overseeing a “stealth bailout of water companies” over proposals to increase bills by up to 44% over the next five years.Campaign group Windrush Against Sewage Pollution (Wasp), which exposed suspected illegal discharges of sewage across England and Wales, has challenged Ofwat, the industry regulator, over the proposed price rises. The final determinations are due to be announced in December. Continue reading...

The water industry regulator has been accused of overseeing a “stealth bailout of water companies” over proposals to increase bills by up to 44% over the next five years.Campaign group Windrush Against Sewage Pollution (Wasp), which exposed suspected illegal discharges of sewage across England and Wales, has challenged Ofwat, the industry regulator, over the proposed price rises. The final determinations are due to be announced in December.In a submission to the regulator, Wasp says the review should not be finalised until ongoing investigations into the industry are concluded, including a wide-ranging review of the industry announced by environment secretary Steve Reed.It also says the regulator has failed to provide key data on how much shareholders in water firms have paid in upgrading infrastructure since privatisation, warning that billpayers have footed the bulk of the bill.The citizen science organisation believes that it forced environmental watchdogs into action after it deployed AI to detect previously untracked sewage discharges, publishing a paper in March 2021.Eight months later, the Environment Agency announced its largest ever criminal investigation into potential breaches of environmental conditions at wastewater treatment works.Ashley Smith, founder of Wasp, said water firms had built “illegal operation” into their business models, presiding over sewage pollution in rivers and along the coastline in England and Wales while taking billions of pounds in dividends. Consumers were now expected to pay for the clean-up operation.He said: “If the price review carries on as planned, customers are going to be forced to pay higher bills to conduct a stealth bailout of water companies. We think Ofwat is tricking the public into funding it.”Ofwat’s 2024 price review sets the price controls for water and sewage companies for 2025-30. It published a draft determination in July, proposing to increase total spending by the water industry in England and Wales from £59bn over 2020-25 to £88bn over 2025-30. The water firms requested investment and expenditure of £105bn.On average, household bills from water and wastewater companies will rise by £19 a year over the five years, before inflation.Average bills at Thames Water, the UK’s biggest water and sewage company, will rise more than £99 over the five-year period, from £436 to £535. The biggest increase is for customers of Southern Water –its proposed bills will rise by £183 (44%), from £420 to £603.From left: minister for water and flooding Emma Hardy, environment secretary Steve Reed and financial secretary to the Treasury Spencer Livermore at a water industry roundtable meeting this week. Photograph: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs/PAOfwat says its regulatory framework has “enabled £200bn of investment since privatisation” but has not provided, on request from Wasp, the proportion of this investment that was paid for by shareholders in water firms. Wasp also alleges that Ofwat has not adequately tracked how this money has been spent and its impact on water quality in the environment.Since privatisation, water companies have paid out £53bn in dividends, according to Ofwat’s figures.A report in May by David Hall, a visiting professor in the Public Services International Research Unit at the University of Greenwich, claimed that shareholders had “invested less than nothing of their own money” in water companies in England and Wales. Ofwat said in response at the time that it “strongly refuted” the figures.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe Wasp submission says: “It appears that the information underpinning Ofwat’s assertions regarding £200bn investment does not include reportable analysis of how much of that money came from shareholders. Not even a broad figure of percentage.“We accept the urgency of the need to resolve the infrastructure ‘black hole’, but that urgency should not be an excuse for exploiting the captive billpayer.”In 2022, the government’s Office for Environmental Protection announced that it would carry out an investigation into Ofwat, the Environment Agency and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs over the regulation of combined sewer overflows in England. That is ongoing, and Wasp says a price review cannot be conducted in the usual way until this inquiry and others have reported.An Ofwat spokesperson said: “We have received responses to our consultation from many organisations, including environmental and consumer organisations, water companies, customers and investors.“Inevitably these reflect a diverse range of views on the proposals we have made. We will consider all of these responses carefully and set out our final decisions on 19 December.”A Water UK spokesperson said: “Water companies want to invest £105bn to support economic growth, build more homes, secure our water supplies and end sewage entering our rivers. Ofwat wants to cut that investment by £17bn – a record amount.“We cannot delay upgrading and expanding vital infrastructure any longer. Ofwat needs to reconsider its approach and approve these plans in full so we can get on with it.”

Judge sides with Illinois attorney general in lawsuit over Chicago Trump Tower's water use

A Chicago court ruled this week that the Windy City’s Trump Tower violated the Illinois environmental protection law with its use of water from the Chicago River. In his ruling, Cook County Circuit Court Judge Thaddeus L. Wilson sided with a 2018 lawsuit from Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul (D) and a coalition of environmental...

A Chicago court ruled this week that the Windy City’s Trump Tower violated the Illinois environmental protection law with its use of water from the Chicago River. In his ruling, Cook County Circuit Court Judge Thaddeus L. Wilson sided with a 2018 lawsuit from Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul (D) and a coalition of environmental groups. Raoul’s office filed the suit based on a referral from the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA), which accused the building of neglecting to obtain necessary Clean Water Act permits for its cooling water intake system. Later that same year, Raoul’s office, Trump International, as well as the Sierra Club and Friends of the Chicago River, agreed to join an interim order requiring the building to abide by expired National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits and report its daily discharges of heated water. Last year, Raoul amended the suit to further accuse Trump Tower of violating both state law and state pollution control board rules, alleging it underreported discharge figures for several years. Structures of the tower’s size are required under federal law to conduct studies of their water intake due to the amount of marine life affected by the process. In the summary judgment, Wilson ruled the Trump Organization “liable on all counts.” Raoul’s office said in a statement that it intended to seek an injunction and civil penalties at a future hearing, which has not yet been scheduled. “The recovery of the Chicago River into the healthy heart of our downtown is a major accomplishment for the people of Chicago and the Clean Water Act,” said Sierra Club Illinois Director Jack Darin. “Trump Tower openly violated the Clean Water Act for years, putting the river and the wildlife that call it home at risk. We’re proud to hold these scofflaws accountable, and applaud our pro bono attorneys and the Attorney General for stepping up to protect our river and its recovery.” When the lawsuit was initially filed, during the Trump presidency, the organization alleged it was politically motivated. The Hill has reached out to the Trump Organization for comment on this week’s ruling.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.