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.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

New Mexico’s rivers are most threatened waterways in US, report finds

News Feed
Tuesday, April 16, 2024

New Mexico’s rivers, which include the Rio Grande, Gila, San Juan and Pecos, are America’s most threatened waterways, according to a new report. This is largely due to a 2023 US supreme court decision that left more than 90% of the state’s surface waters without federal protections from industrial pollution, according to state officials.“Virtually all the rivers in New Mexico are losing clean water protections,” said Matt Rice, the south-west regional director of American Rivers, the conservation group that publishes the annual list. “It has the most to lose, and the threat is particularly acute there.”New Mexico, New Hampshire and Massachusetts are the only states without permitting power to regulate how much pollution is in their surface water, making them dependent on federal protections from mining activities, wastewater, agricultural runoff and industrial pollution.The Sackett v Environmental Protection Agency decision issued by the supreme court last May could affect more than half of the nation’s wetlands and up to 4.9m miles of streams, an agency official told CNN. In a landmark ruling, the court found that only “relatively permanent” streams, and wetlands with a “continuous surface connection”, are subject to Clean Water Act protections under the guidance of the EPA. In arid New Mexico, many of the state’s waterways only run during the rainy season or during snowmelt periods.“This ruling, and lifting protections for half of the country’s wetlands, is a real, immediate threat to everything from the quality of our water, to the price of our water, to whether our communities can thrive and ecosystems can exist,” said Heather Taylor-Miesle, senior vice-president of advocacy and regional conservation for American Rivers. “A lot of places in the country that enjoy Clean Water Act protections have seen the rug pulled out for them, and as a result, we’re going to be dealing with a lot more pollution.”New Mexico’s more than 100,000 miles of rivers and streams provide drinking water for the majority of the state’s population, including 23 sovereign pueblo and tribal governments, according to the report.“Water is part of who we are as New Mexicans,” said Rachel Conn, deputy director of conservation organization Amigos Bravos. “Water is critical for our many tribal communities here in New Mexico, for sacred ceremonies, and for the health of tribal communities.”In the wake of the Sackett ruling, New Mexico state lawmakers introduced legislation that would safeguard the vulnerable rivers, streams and lakes in the absence of federal protections. In March, the state appropriated $7.6m to improve monitoring of groundwater, and to establish a permitting program that would regulate pollution discharge into surface water.“It is up to Congress to protect and to defend the Clean Water Act,” said Melanie Stansbury, a US congresswoman from New Mexico, who last fall introduced a bill to restore the federal wetland protections the Sackett ruling stripped. She said: “The only way to restore them, now that the court has acted at the highest level, is for Congress to act.”The report also listed the Big Sunflower and Yazoo rivers of Mississippi, which face the prospect of a federal plan to pump 16m gallons of floodwater a day out of the Mississippi Delta’s flood-prone area. Environmental groups have long opposed the project, citing threats to critical wetlands, 80% of which have already been lost, as well as environmental justice concerns – advocates say the pumps could flood majority-Black communities downstream.In Tennessee, population and industry growth are straining water supply from the Duck River, and in South Carolina, the proposed construction of an interstate crossing threatens to rip through more than 300 acres of forested wetlands.

Supreme court ruling left more than 90% of state’s surface waters with no pollution protections, since they don’t run continuouslyNew Mexico’s rivers, which include the Rio Grande, Gila, San Juan and Pecos, are America’s most threatened waterways, according to a new report. This is largely due to a 2023 US supreme court decision that left more than 90% of the state’s surface waters without federal protections from industrial pollution, according to state officials.“Virtually all the rivers in New Mexico are losing clean water protections,” said Matt Rice, the south-west regional director of American Rivers, the conservation group that publishes the annual list. “It has the most to lose, and the threat is particularly acute there.” Continue reading...

New Mexico’s rivers, which include the Rio Grande, Gila, San Juan and Pecos, are America’s most threatened waterways, according to a new report. This is largely due to a 2023 US supreme court decision that left more than 90% of the state’s surface waters without federal protections from industrial pollution, according to state officials.

“Virtually all the rivers in New Mexico are losing clean water protections,” said Matt Rice, the south-west regional director of American Rivers, the conservation group that publishes the annual list. “It has the most to lose, and the threat is particularly acute there.”

New Mexico, New Hampshire and Massachusetts are the only states without permitting power to regulate how much pollution is in their surface water, making them dependent on federal protections from mining activities, wastewater, agricultural runoff and industrial pollution.

The Sackett v Environmental Protection Agency decision issued by the supreme court last May could affect more than half of the nation’s wetlands and up to 4.9m miles of streams, an agency official told CNN. In a landmark ruling, the court found that only “relatively permanent” streams, and wetlands with a “continuous surface connection”, are subject to Clean Water Act protections under the guidance of the EPA. In arid New Mexico, many of the state’s waterways only run during the rainy season or during snowmelt periods.

“This ruling, and lifting protections for half of the country’s wetlands, is a real, immediate threat to everything from the quality of our water, to the price of our water, to whether our communities can thrive and ecosystems can exist,” said Heather Taylor-Miesle, senior vice-president of advocacy and regional conservation for American Rivers. “A lot of places in the country that enjoy Clean Water Act protections have seen the rug pulled out for them, and as a result, we’re going to be dealing with a lot more pollution.”

New Mexico’s more than 100,000 miles of rivers and streams provide drinking water for the majority of the state’s population, including 23 sovereign pueblo and tribal governments, according to the report.

“Water is part of who we are as New Mexicans,” said Rachel Conn, deputy director of conservation organization Amigos Bravos. “Water is critical for our many tribal communities here in New Mexico, for sacred ceremonies, and for the health of tribal communities.”

In the wake of the Sackett ruling, New Mexico state lawmakers introduced legislation that would safeguard the vulnerable rivers, streams and lakes in the absence of federal protections. In March, the state appropriated $7.6m to improve monitoring of groundwater, and to establish a permitting program that would regulate pollution discharge into surface water.

“It is up to Congress to protect and to defend the Clean Water Act,” said Melanie Stansbury, a US congresswoman from New Mexico, who last fall introduced a bill to restore the federal wetland protections the Sackett ruling stripped. She said: “The only way to restore them, now that the court has acted at the highest level, is for Congress to act.”

The report also listed the Big Sunflower and Yazoo rivers of Mississippi, which face the prospect of a federal plan to pump 16m gallons of floodwater a day out of the Mississippi Delta’s flood-prone area. Environmental groups have long opposed the project, citing threats to critical wetlands, 80% of which have already been lost, as well as environmental justice concerns – advocates say the pumps could flood majority-Black communities downstream.

In Tennessee, population and industry growth are straining water supply from the Duck River, and in South Carolina, the proposed construction of an interstate crossing threatens to rip through more than 300 acres of forested wetlands.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

‘Extraordinary longevity’: great whales can live a lot longer than we thought – if we leave them alone

Bowhead whales may not be the only species that can live to 200 years old. Researchers have found that the industrial hunting of great whales has masked the ability of these underwater giants to also live to great agesIn Moby-Dick, Herman Melville’s epic novel of 1851, the author asks if whales would survive the remorseless human hunt. Yes, he says, as he foresees a future flooded world in which the whale would outlive us and “spout his frothed defiance to the skies”.Moby Dick was a grizzled old sperm whale that had miraculously escaped the harpoons. But a new scientific paper is set to prove what oceanic peoples – such as the Inuit, Maōri and Haida – have long believed: that whales are capable of living for a very long time. Indeed, many more than we thought possible may have been born before Melville wrote his book. Continue reading...

In Moby-Dick, Herman Melville’s epic novel of 1851, the author asks if whales would survive the remorseless human hunt. Yes, he says, as he foresees a future flooded world in which the whale would outlive us and “spout his frothed defiance to the skies”.Moby Dick was a grizzled old sperm whale that had miraculously escaped the harpoons. But a new scientific paper is set to prove what oceanic peoples – such as the Inuit, Maōri and Haida – have long believed: that whales are capable of living for a very long time. Indeed, many more than we thought possible may have been born before Melville wrote his book.The paper, published in the journal Science Advances, suggests that the industrial hunting of great whales such as sperm, blue, fin and right whales, “masked” the ability of these underwater giants to live to great ages.It has been known since the 1990s that Arctic bowhead whales, with their slow metabolism enabled by cold waters and plentiful food, can reach 200 years old or more, as indicated by carbon-dating of old Inuit stone harpoon tips found embedded in bowheads that had survived earlier hunts.A fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) off the Azores. The species has been found to live for half as long again as previously thought. Photograph: Nature Picture Library/AlamyBut the new study indicates that the same lifespans may apply to right and fin whales. The first scientific reports of “extraordinary longevity” came when scientists examined the earplugs of fin and blue whales hunted by Japanese whalers in the late 1970s. By counting the annual growth layers of the plugs, they discovered that animals thought to live up to the age of 70 were at least 114 years old.“At the time, these were the oldest documented non-human mammals,” say the authors of the study. “These superannuated ages should not be unexpected. Whales are the largest living animals, and body size is highly correlated with longevity.”Human-caused mortality is shortening [right] whales’ lifespan and reproductive period so much that they are threatened with extinctionThe study offers a better outlook for cetaceans – although only if urgent environmental and human threats are discounted. The moratorium on hunting great whales, introduced in 1982, has helped populations of humpback and fin whales to increase. The report suggests that, without human predation, whales could regain their natural longevity.Conservationists would also argue that this is an even more pressing reason for countries such as Iceland and Japan to halt whaling. The report comes in the wake of news that Iceland wants to kill more fin whales, the second-largest animal on Earth, and Japan wants to resume hunting them.The scientists achieved their new findings by analysing the lifespans of two similar species: the southern right whale – found below the equator – and the North Atlantic right whale, once plentiful off north European shores but now almost entirely confined to the eastern coast of the US. They discovered that up to 10% of the thriving southern species live past 130 years. Of the much-hunted northern species, only 10% lived beyond 47 years. The conclusion is clear: left alone, whales can live to be very old.A sperm whale and her calf off the Caribbean island of Dominica. Longevity is crucial to mammals that have few offspring that take years to reach maturity. Photograph: Philip HoareBut it is a race against time. The population of the North Atlantic right whale, a close relative of the bowhead, is now so diminished after the intensive culls of the past, when it was the “right” whale to hunt due to its thick layer of oil-rich blubber, that it is beyond recovery. According to Massachusetts’ Center for Coastal Studies (CCS), which has carried out one of the longest-running studies of the critically endangered population, there are only 372 individuals left.Declining genetic strength, ship strikes, entanglement in fishing gear, the effects of climate change and sound pollution have weakened them to the extent that they have now been declared “functionally extinct” in the eastern Atlantic, while the west Atlantic population is “not recovering”.Dr Charles “Stormy” Mayo, senior scientist at the CCS, says: “Longevity is critically important to species that produce small numbers of young. So human-caused mortality – once hunting, now maritime industries – is shortening the whales’ natural lifespan and reproductive period so much that they are threatened with extinction.”Christy Hudak, Mayo’s colleague at CCS, reports that the first right whales have just appeared off Cape Cod in Massachusetts on their annual migration north. The returning whales, identified from an aerial survey, are both juveniles, four and three years old.The zooplankton on which they feed – straining the minute organisms through the bizarre, prehistoric-looking baleen plates of their car-sized jaws – is present unusually early this year. “It will be exciting to see if the food source will prove a banner season for right whales in Cape Cod Bay,” Hudak says, with guarded optimism.In the winter months, these rare whales assemble in feeding and mating groups, just off the broad beaches of Cape Cod. The sight of them, rolling and diving in the freezing waters of the Atlantic, remains a sign of survival against the odds – despite what the future may bring.

Water
Animals
Conservation

‘Britain’s wildlife safari’: baby boom in Norfolk as seal colonies flourish

Grey seals are growing in numbers on England’s east coast as a result of environmental safe havens and cleaner North Sea watersIt is a cold winter’s day to be lying on a beach, but the seal pup suckling from its mother doesn’t mind. A few metres away, a pregnant seal is burrowing into the sand, trying to get comfortable, while a third seal, which has just given birth, is touching noses with her newborn pup.The shoreline – a mass of seals and their white pups – is one of Britain’s greatest wildlife success stories: a grey seal colony on the east Norfolk coast. Continue reading...

It is a cold winter’s day to be lying on a beach, but the seal pup suckling from its mother doesn’t mind. A few metres away, a pregnant seal is burrowing into the sand, trying to get comfortable, while a third seal, which has just given birth, is touching noses with her newborn pup.The shoreline – a mass of seals and their white pups – is one of Britain’s greatest wildlife success stories: a grey seal colony on the east Norfolk coast.More than 1,200 seal pups were born between the colony in Horsey and a neighbouring beach in November, and 2,500 more are expected to be born before the breeding season ends in January. It is a dramatic increase since 2002, when the seals first formed a colony at Horsey and 50 pups were born.Richard Edwards, a volunteer seal warden at Winterton beach in Norfolk during the pupping season. Photograph: Joshua Bright/The GuardianStanding on a sand dune that overlooks the North Sea, Richard Edwards, a volunteer seal warden, is keeping a close watch over the colony from a distance. “We can all take pride that this is happening on our doorstep,” he says. “It’s incredible.”Why go to the wilds of Africa when there is such an extraordinary spectacle on the Norfolk coast, he asks, adding: “This is Britain’s wildlife safari.”Seals are flourishing about 50 miles farther south, too. In 2021, a group of grey seals established the first seal colony in nearby Suffolk and began breeding on a remote shingle beach at Orford Ness, now a National Trust site but once the location for cold war weapons-testing.“One day, there were none, and the next day there were 200,” says Matt Wilson, a countryside manager for the trust. “Since then, they’ve come back each year, and the juveniles have stayed.”Grey seals are known to form breakaway groups when colonies reach a certain size and Wilson says he is “fairly sure” the seals migrated from north Norfolk. In just three years, the number of pups born at the site has increased fivefold, with more than 600 seals recorded there this year.“Mortality seems to be much lower than in other colonies,” he says. The first seal pup of this season was born there just over a month ago.The 10-mile beach at Orford Ness, which is closed to the public in winter, is a safe haven for seals during their breeding season, says Wilson. “We don’t get a lot of big boats coming close to shore and disturbing the marine environment locally. Also, in bad weather, the seals can come farther inland to shelter behind a ridge.”The grey seal colony at Horsey in Norfolk. Access to the seals’ beaches is restricted over the breeding season. Photograph: Joshua Bright/The GuardianThis is crucial to the survival of the species because as sea levels rise and storms become more frequent and severe, conservationists fear the mortality rate of seal pups is rising.Sue Sayer, founder of the Seal Research Trust, says: “In Cornwall last year, we had more seal deaths than births – and over half were of seals under a year old.”If seals cannot move inland during a storm, pups can become separated from their mothers by a high surge of water or get washed out to sea. Edwards says: “They die of hypothermia or starvation, or drown.”Some species have seen dramatic declines of up to 90%, just on our site, so to have a species swimming against the tide is amazingIn Norfolk, the charity Friends of Horsey Seals has created a safe, fenced-off area of the dune where seals can retreat inland during a storm, and access to the seals’ beaches is restricted over the winter breeding season. Volunteer wardens such as Edwards patrol the site daily to raise awareness about the need for the public to keep their distance and keep dogs on leads: a female seal, if scared enough, will desert her pup and head into the sea.Volunteer seal wardens at Winterton beach in Norfolk try to keep the visiting public at a distance from the seals during the pupping season. Photograph: Joshua Bright/The GuardianWilson and Sayer speculate that more seals are breeding on the east coast because offshore windfarms may have provided a new footing there for underwater vegetation, crustaceans, molluscs, small fish and other marine life, creating a fish nursery that the seals are feeding on.The structures also form a physical barrier near the coast, pushing shipping traffic further out and preventing commercial fishing boats from competing with seals by the shoreline.Another likely cause of the population growth is that grey seals have been displaced from northern Scotland, where numbers of sand eels – which seals love to eat – have declined.“The seals seem to be moving south, and this is likely to be to do with food,” says Sayer. These seals may be preying on other displaced species, such as anchovies from the Bay of Biscay, which are becoming more common in southern British waters due to global heating, she suggested.Cleaner water in the North Sea may also have contributed to the increase in seal numbers on the east coast, she added. In 2021, an analysis of two decades of research by the North Sea Foundation revealed there is now 27% less beach waste on non-tourist beaches than there was 10 years ago.Another reason why seals are thriving in Britain today is that people are no longer hunting and killing them. “We only stopped culling seals in 1978 and it only became illegal for a fisher to kill a seal in March 2021,” says Sayer.For Wilson, the new seal colony in Suffolk is a source of hope. “We do a lot with wetland birds and waders,” he says. “Some species, particularly large gulls, have seen dramatic declines of up to 90% in their numbers, just on our site, never mind the national picture.“So, to have a species going in the opposite direction – literally, swimming against the tide – is amazing.”The success of the seal colony at Winterton-on-Sea can be measured in the 2,000 pups born there this season. Photograph: Joshua Bright/The Guardian

Water
Conservation
Waste

Revealed: Thames Water diverted ‘cash for clean-ups’ to help pay bonuses

Exclusive: UK’s biggest water company assessed risks before cutting back on cost of environmental work, investigation showsThames Water intentionally diverted millions of pounds pledged for environmental clean-ups towards other costs including bonuses and dividends, the Guardian can reveal.The company, which serves more than 16 million customers, cut the funds after senior managers assessed the potential risks of such a move. Continue reading...

Thames Water intentionally diverted millions of pounds pledged for environmental clean-ups towards other costs including bonuses and dividends, the Guardian can reveal.The company, which serves more than 16 million customers, cut the funds after senior managers assessed the potential risks of such a move.Discussions – held in secret – considered the risk of a public and regulatory backlash if it emerged that cash set aside for work such as cutting river pollution had been spent elsewhere.This could be seen as a breach of the company’s licence commitments and leave it vulnerable to accusations it had broken the law, according to sources and material seen by the Guardian.Thames Water continued to pay staff bonuses worth hundreds of thousands of pounds, and also paid tens of millions in dividends as recently as March this year, while cutting back on its spending promises. The company did so despite public claims from its leaders that improvements to its environmental performance, including on pollution, were a priority.Wildlife presenter Liz Bonnin and naturalist and TV presenter Chris Packham join thousands of environmental campaigners from more than 130 organisations in a March for Clean Water on 3 November 2024 in London. Photograph: Mark Kerrison/In Pictures/Getty ImagesSources told the Guardian that internal deliberations about cutting back on the environmental works occurred as early as the end of 2021 and throughout 2022, when bosses weighed up the political and reputational risks of such a move.Meanwhile, Thames continued to charge customers for the works and Ofwat was only formally told of some of the company’s plans not to deliver these major projects in August 2023. A letter, seen by the Guardian, was sent to the head of the regulator Ofwat, David Black, by the company’s then interim co-chief executive and former boss of the watchdog, Cathryn Ross.In its response to the Guardian and the 2023 letter to Ofwat, Thames said sharp increases in its costs such as energy and chemicals – which it claims went beyond standard measures of inflation – lay behind its decisions to delay the works.It told the regulator that it would not deliver 98 of 826 schemes under the water industry national environment programme (Winep) during the five-year window it had promised. The delivery of these projects, which include schemes to reduce phosphorus pollution in rivers, was a key justification for how much Thames was allowed to charge customers.The revelation comes as Britain’s biggest water company fights for its survival. It is trying to secure £3bn in emergency funding and at least £3.25bn more in equity investment to prevent its collapse, after years of poor performance, fines and hefty dividend payouts.Winep projects include statutory obligations for water companies with potential criminal liability if they breach their licence by failing to deliver them.Thames decided behind the scenes to hold up almost 100 projects as early as 2022 without first warning its regulators. Sources said of some of the projects Thames delayed were among the largest it agreed to do when it asked Ofwat for higher bills as part of its 2019 price review.The cuts to environmental works did not stop the company from paying dividends or bonuses to staff. It continued to pay both throughout the 2020-25 billing period, for which it claimed it lacked the funds to complete works.Ofwat fined the company £18.2m on 19 December for breaching rules on paying “unjustified” dividends, after the company paid out £37.5m in October 2023 and £158.3m in March 2024. On the same day it also gave Thames permission to increase consumer bills by 35% by 2030.Thames’s regulated water services are part of a sprawling network of holding companies. Dividends were paid out of its operating company up towards its shareholders.Ofwat’s dividend rules, which were toughened in April 2023, are meant to stop companies taking money out businesses where their performance does not merit it, and where the payouts do not take financial resilience into account, or “service delivery for customers and the environment”.A spokesperson for Thames Water did not deny that it had delayed environmental works that it had promised and been paid to carry out. The spokesperson also did not deny that some of the funds had been used for other business costs including bonuses and dividend payments.When first asked for a response by the Guardian, Thames said that allegations that it had diverted funds were “entirely false and without merit”.In a later statement, Thames said only that the allegation that it did so “secretly” was false.In public statements from its six chief executives over the past five years, Thames has consistently maintained its position that environmental improvements are a high priority for the company.“Maintaining and improving the health of the rivers in our area matters to me, and I have made reducing pollution a key part of the turnaround plan for the company,” Chris Weston, the current chief executive at Thames Water, said in a river health report published by the company this year. His comments echo those of predecessors in the top job at the water company.The document states that “addressing the level of nutrients (particularly phosphorus) in our rivers remains a key focus”, despite the company secretly trying to cut the money pledged to address such concerns.Phosphorus in rivers and waterways can cause algal blooms that suffocate wildlife.“It is right that we are held to account for complying with our legal obligations,” Weston said on a call with journalists on 10 December, as he noted a sharp increase in pollution caused by the business.“We’ve also maintained high levels of capital investment for the benefit of our customers and the environment,” its former joint chief executive and chief financial officer Alastair Cochran said on the same call.The government’s Winep effort was created to address water companies’ “role in protecting and enhancing the environment” after a series of sewage and pollution scandals. It was intended to “challenge” water suppliers to provide resilient, safe and environment enhancing services to consumers.Thames could face criminal prosecution and unlimited fines if it was found to have breached its permits by Ofwat or the Environment Agency (EA).The EA has fined water companies more than £130m since 2015 and fined Southern Water £90m in 2021, after what was then its largest ever criminal investigation.In response to detailed questions from the Guardian, a Thames spokesperson said: “The allegation of ‘secretly diverted money’ is entirely false and without merit.“The board and leadership team of Thames Water remain focused on turning round the business, and have submitted to Ofwat a robust business plan for the next five years that proposes record investment in our assets.“We’ve been very open about the challenges of delivering all the elements of our Winep 7 programme, which has been impacted by cost increases that are higher than the inflation index applied to our allowances. In this Winep 7 period, we are forecast to spend £601m against an allowance of £369m. This is well documented in our business plan for 2025-30 and on our website.“We remain fully committed to delivering all our Winep commitments, and indeed all the outstanding projects are currently under way and in the process of being delivered.“Shareholders have not received an external dividend since 2017, and our business plan assumes dividends will not be paid before 2030.”

Water
Business
Energy

South Texas Groups Sue State Agency for Allowing SpaceX to Discharge Industrial Water Without Permit

Rio Grande Valley groups are accusing the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality in a lawsuit of bypassing state regulations by allowing SpaceX to temporarily discharge industrial water at its South Texas launch site without a proper permit

MCALLEN, Texas (AP) — Rio Grande Valley groups are suing the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, accusing the agency of bypassing state regulations by allowing SpaceX to temporarily discharge industrial water at its South Texas launch site without a proper permit.The groups — the South Texas Environmental Justice Network, along with the Carrizo/Comecrudo Nation of Texas, and Save RGV — filed the lawsuit Monday after the agency decided last month to allow SpaceX to continue its operations for 300 days or until the company obtained the appropriate permit.It is the latest in a string of lawsuits filed by environmental groups aimed at curbing the possible environmental impacts of SpaceX’s operations at Boca Chica on the southern tip of Texas.Earlier this year, TCEQ cited SpaceX for discharging water into nearby waterways after it was used to protect the launchpad from heat damage during Starship launches four times this year.SpaceX did not admit to any violation but agreed to pay a $3,750 penalty. Part of the penalty was deferred until SpaceX obtains the proper permit and on the condition that future water discharges meet pollution restrictions.The environmental groups say that allowing SpaceX to continue is a violation of permitting requirements and that TCEQ is acting outside of its authority.“The Clean Water Act requires the TCEQ to follow certain procedural and technical requirements when issuing discharge permits meant to protect public participation and ensure compliance with Texas surface water quality standards,” Lauren Ice, the attorney for the three Rio Grande Valley organizations, said in a statement.“By bypassing these requirements, the Commission has put the Boca Chica environment at risk of degradation,” Ice said.A TCEQ spokesperson said the agency cannot comment on pending litigation.Some of the Rio Grande Valley groups are also involved in a lawsuit against the Federal Aviation Administration for allegedly failing to conduct an environmental review of SpaceX’s rocket test launch in April. The case remains pending in federal court.They also sued the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department for agreeing to a land exchange that would give 43 acres of Boca Chica State Park to SpaceX in exchange for 477 acres adjacent to Laguna Atascosa National Wildlife Refuge. SpaceX canceled the deal in November.This story was originally published by The Texas Tribune and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Sept. 2024

Water
Pollution

After Victory Over Florida in Water War, Georgia Will Let Farmers Drill New Irrigation Wells

For more than a decade, farmers in parts of southwest Georgia haven’t been able to drill new irrigation wells to the Floridian aquifer

ATLANTA (AP) — Jason Cox, who grows peanuts and cotton in southwest Georgia, says farming would be economically impossible without water to irrigate his crops.“I'd be out of business,” said Cox, who farms 3,000 acres (1,200 hectares) acres around Pelham.For more than a decade, farmers in parts of southwest Georgia haven't been able to drill new irrigation wells to the Floridian aquifer, the groundwater nearest the surface. That's because Georgia put a halt to farmers drilling wells or taking additional water from streams and lakes in 2012. Farmers like Cox, though, will get a chance to drill new wells beginning in April. Gov. Brian Kemp announced Wednesday that Georgia's Environmental Protection Division will begin accepting applications for new agricultural wells in areas along the lower Flint River starting April 1. Jeff Cown, the division's director, said in a statement that things have changed since 2012. The moratorium was imposed amid a parching drought and the collapse of the once-prolific oyster fishery in Florida's Apalachicola Bay. The state of Florida sued in 2013, arguing that Georgia's overuse of water from the Flint was causing negative impacts downstream where the Flint and Chattahoochee River join to become the Apalachicola River. But a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court in 2021 rejected the lawsuit, saying Florida hadn't proved its case that water use by Flint River farmers was at fault.That was one lawsuit in decades of sprawling litigation that mostly focused on fear that Atlanta’s ever-growing population would suck up all the upstream water and leave little for uses downstream. The suits include the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint system and the Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa system, which flows out of Georgia to drain much of Alabama. Georgia also won victories guaranteeing that metro Atlanta had rights to water from the Chattahoochee River's Lake Lanier to quench its thirst.Georgia officials say new water withdrawals won't disregard conservation. No new withdrawals from streams or lakes will be allowed. And new wells will have to stop sucking up water from the Floridian aquifer when a drought gets too bad, in part to protect water levels in the Flint, where endangered freshwater mussels live. New wells will also be required to be connected to irrigation systems that waste less water and can be monitored electronically, according to a November presentation posted by the environmental agency.In a statement, Cown said the plans "support existing water users, including farmers, and set the stage to make room for new ones. We look forward to working with all water users as they obtain these newly, developed permits.”Georgia had already been taking baby steps in this direction by telling farmers they could withdraw water to spray vulnerable crops like blueberries during freezing temperatures.Flint Riverkeeper Gordon Rogers, who heads the environmental organization of the same name, said Georgia's action is “good news.” He has long contended that the ban on new withdrawals was “an admission of failure," showing how Georgia had mismanaged water use along the river. But he said investments in conservation are paying off: Many farmers are installing less wasteful irrigators and some agreed to stop using existing shallow wells during drought in exchange for subsidies to drill wells to deeper aquifers that don't directly influence river flow.“What we’re going to do is make it more efficient, make it more equitable and make it more fair," Rogers said. "And we’re in the middle of doing that.”A lawyer for Florida environmental groups that contend the Apalachicola River and Bay are being harmed declined comment in an email. Representatives for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and state Attorney General Ashley Moody did not immediately respond to requests for comment.Cox, who lives about 165 miles (265 kilometers) south of Atlanta, said he's interested in drilling a new well on some land that he owns. Right now, that land relies on water from a neighboring farmer's well. He knows the drought restrictions would mean there would be times he couldn't water his crops, but said data he's seen show there wouldn't have been many days over the last 10 years when he would have been barred from irrigating, and that most of those days wouldn't have been during peak watering times for his crops.Three years ago, Cox drilled a well for some land into a deeper aquifer, but he said even spending $30,000 or more on a shallower well would boost the productivity and value of his land.“It would enhance my property if I had a well myself," Cox said.Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Sept. 2024

Water
Business
Waste

Suggested Viewing

The Heart Whisperer

A childhood discovery inspires a woman to push the boundaries of our compassion in this true story. The esteemed Earthlings creator, Shaun Monson, weaves together archived news clips, never seen before arrest footage, and current interviews to tell this tale that crosses countries and decades. Cameo appearances by Joaquin Phoenix and other famous animal advocates.

Water
Energy
Waste

Remnant

An experimental short film from Iran.

Experimental
Culture
Water

Crisis

The state of water in the world is critical, but the relationship between a man and a fish that are in story is more critical.

Animation
Water
Conservation

One Day We Will Dance With You

One Day We Will Dance with You tells the story of two women creating a dance to celebrate water. They imagine dance moves, and argue about science and whether a celebration can still be sad. As the community around them comes together to dance, they begin to imagine a future where the Water Molecule Dance and the celebration of water becomes a part of all our lives.

Dance
Science
Water

Fish

An old couple are living in an apartment, the man is sleeping and the woman is doing housework. The lady wants to change the fishbowl’s water but it slips out of her hand and falls on the ground. They've ran out of water and there’s no water for the fish. But with the help of the man they find water.

Water
Culture
Fiction

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.