Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Environment

High Plains Water Crisis Will Force Farmers to Think Like Environmentalists

By Julene Blair, CounterPunch. Posted July 30, 2007.


If Midwest farmers continue pumping water at current rates, they'll be forced to revert to dry-land agriculture within decades.
Advertisement

Environmentalists get a bad rap in farm country. Many farmers complain that environmental regulations interfere with their property rights and ability to feed a hungry world. To that end, these farmers want unfettered access to chemicals and genetically engineered seed. On the semi-arid High Plains, where I grew up, they also want all the water they can pump.

Yet only those who ignore science news can deny the human threat to every natural system on which life depends, be it climate, water, air or soil.

Carl Jung, who pioneered our understanding of the subconscious, wrote that when humans are unaware of their "inner contradictions, the world must perforce act out the conflict and be torn into opposite halves."

We externalize the side of us that we do not want to own. We look for scapegoats. Instead of getting upset about the possibility that humanity's present course could end civilization as we know it, we get angry with those who name the problems.

Environmentalists speak the other side of our own consciences. We vilify the messenger to drown the message. If we heeded the message, few of us would avoid implication.

I should know. If I wish to place blame for the most disturbing crisis on the High Plains, I need look no further than myself.

That crisis is depletion of the Ogallala Aquifer, the huge groundwater reserve underlying the Plains all the way from South Dakota to Texas. In some areas of western Kansas and northern Texas, the water usable for irrigation is already gone.

My family sold our Sherman County, Kansas, farm last year, but up until then, we were irrigators. Most of the water accumulated in the aquifer over 10,000 years ago. It took us only four decades to reduce the reserves under our irrigated fields by one-third. If the new owners keep pumping at the rate we did, drawing the water table down one foot per year on average, they can continue only approximately 60 more years.

In most years the 158 irrigation farmers in Sherman County, only one of several dozen High Plains counties where irrigation predominates, use more than half the amount of water consumed by the 1.12 million people served by Denver's main water utility. And for what? To grow a notoriously thirsty crop -- corn -- which is mainly used for livestock feed and ethanol.

If farmers continue pumping at current rates, they'll be forced to revert to dry-land agriculture and livestock grazing within decades. With encouragement from government farm policy, they could make that switch now. Then, limited primarily to domestic uses, the aquifer could continue supporting life on the High Plains for hundreds, if not thousands of years.

My father embraced irrigation's arrival, as did most of our neighbors. The water seemed limitless, and it removed one of the many wild cards that make farming such a gamble. Before and after he died, I complained about the waste. But he left other heirs as well, and not irrigating would have reduced our farm income by two-thirds. I found it very difficult to war against my family's financial interests.

Not only are farmers implicated in environmental problems. Many city dwellers water lush lawns in desert climates, spray those lawns with chemicals every time a dandelion appears, and buy unsustainably grown food that travels 1,500 fuel-consuming miles to reach the supermarket. They drive SUVs to work for companies that also waste resources and pollute.

Yet most of us would like a healthy environment and want our resources conserved. A 2005 Roper poll found that 90 percent of SUV owners want government to require higher fuel efficiency.

Fortunately, we still live in a democracy where we can choose lawmakers who will pass environmental protections. Only such government action can halt or reverse the damage we've done.

Instead of demonizing the environmentalists, we should vote for them. But making that choice in the voting booth requires that we acknowledge our own internal debates. Instead of dividing the world into "opposite halves," we would then begin to appreciate the unity of our self-interest and that of the general good.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: water, environmentalism, rural

Julene Bair, of Longmont, Colo., is the author of One Degree West: Reflections of a Plainsdaughter and is nearing completion of The Whole Song, a book on the Ogallala Aquifer.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
That would be correct
Posted by: messedup on Jul 30, 2007 6:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But they won't think like environmentalists until they really have to, which is approximately 60 years or less away. Here in Wisconsin in 2007 we planted the most corn since 1944, and most of those corn farmers do not irrigate. I worry more about turning the dirt into sand and polluting the groundwater with all the chemicals they use. Dairy farmers are no longer small, they are huge, they smell terrible, and the cows no longer go out to pasture because it's used to grow corn and alfalfa. I also think our aquifers will dry out sooner than we think, especially as we continue to destroy or dry out our wetlands.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And Kansas...
Posted by: bob t on Jul 30, 2007 7:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...just continues voting for Bush and the Rethuglikkkants. And these people will scream they are christians as they rape the land until they destroy it. Such is the nature of todays christians as they condemn everyone else and at the same time are so self righteous.It's called right wing religious hypocrisy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hemp people!!! Kaneh bosm!
Posted by: garry minor on Jul 30, 2007 9:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is only one plant source on this planet that has the ability to feed, fuel, shelter, medicate, bring pleasure, and spirituality to us, Kaneh bosm, cannabis, hemp!!!
Hemp is ten times more efficient than corn for ethanol and requires little or no fertilizer, herbicides, or pesticides to foul the soil and water. It will grow in soil and conditions that other crops will not grow in, from the equator to the Arctic circle. The truth is that the reason cannabis was made illegal in the first place was to protect the Dupont, Hearst, and other Corporations profits. They could not compete. Hemp industrialization would have destroyed them. Henry Ford built and fueled a car with it. The cellulose plastic panels ten times stronger than steel. Neither he or Diesel intended to run their engines on petroleum. In 1938 Popular Mechanics wrote that it is the most desirous thing to grow and would be the first billion dollar crop. At that time they knew of over 25,000 products that could be made with it, from cellophane to dynamite. All paper, plastics, paints, varnishes, textiles, pressed board, and many, many building products can be made with environmentally friendly hemp. One acre of it equals four of timber for pulp and you harvest it every year, tree's take a lifetime. It's seed is the most nutritious thing you can eat and can also be used to feed livestock which would eliminate the need for the addition of hormones and remnants that are the cause for American beef being banned in Europe. These additives are believed responsible for BSE's in our food chain which are linked to plaque buildups and mental deterioration in humans. Canvas is Dutch for cannabis. For thousands of years all ships sails, rope, and most clothing were of kaneh fiber. It's fiber is the longest and strongest in nature. The original draft of the Constitution is on hemp paper. Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Lincoln, and Kennedy were known users of cannabis. It was legal to pay taxes in Colonial America with it. The War of 1812 was fought over it. You and I have cannabinoid receptors in our body. In 2006 in Canada it was proven that cannabis promotes the growth of new brain cells. In Madrid in 2000 it was found to destroy tumors. It has been found very helpful with Alzheimers, MS, autism, epilepsy, migraine, arthritis, depression, chronic pain, obesity, glaucoma, nausea, Parkinsons, Huntingtons, Tourettes, Crohns disease, and more.
I dont know about you all, but does it not seem strange that in the year 2007, with all the supposedly intelligent people on this Earth that we, the public, seem to know so little about this amazing plant. The truth is that we know as much as the media will let us know and since they are controlled by money, we continue to be deceived. The reason cannabis is illegal has never had anything to do with it's supposed intoxicating effects on us. The reason it is illegal is so that billionaires can remain billionaires.
The really Good News is that in 1936, Sula Benet, a Polish Anthropologist discovered that in the original Hebrew of the Old Testament the word
"kaneh bosm" had been translated as calamus or fragrant cane by the Greeks when they first rendered the Books in the 3rd century BC. Benet claimed through her research and etymological comparison that the proper translation is cannabis. In 1980 the Hebrew Institute of Jerusalem confirmed her claim that "kaneh bosm" is indeed cannabis.
In Exodus 30:23 God instructs Moses to use 250 shekels of "kaneh bosm" in the oil to anoint all Kings, Priests, and Prophets, for all generations, including Jesus and today. The title Christ/Messiah means literally "anointed", covered in oil. Kaneh is also listed as an incense tree in Song of Songs 4:14. The mistake was repeated in Isaiah 43:24, Jeremiah 6:20, and Ezekiel 27:19. There are 141 references to anointing and 145 for burning incense in the standard Bible.
I'm going with God! Psalm 133

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A deep and difficult problem
Posted by: liv4musick on Jul 30, 2007 9:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Water usage is becoming a critical and complex problem all over the world. Ms. Blair addresses one area, in a thoughtful and appropriate way. It is not an "us vs. them" situation. The variety of responses here already indicates the variety of viewpoints on the issue. People are going to need to collaborate to solve not only the immediate problem of water depletion, but the economic and social problems that have contributed to the issue; and that will be further exacerbated by depleted resources. Collaboration is possible, but cannot be achieved in a hostile atmosphere. It will take government finesse; and sadly, our current government is seriously short on finesse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

First it was topsoil depletion, then fertilizer, now water? No one is listening.
Posted by: Sojourner on Jul 30, 2007 9:57 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The huge dead sea area in the Gulf of Mexico continues to grow from fertilizer runoff. Even after the infamous Dustbowl experience of the 1920-30s, little has been done to sustain the topsoil. Now it's 60 more years of the aquifer.

No one cares about the dead sea area or the Dustbowl. So who is listening about water depletion 60 years from now?

Al Gore ran on an environmentalist platform in 2000. He was defeated by the farming/ranching voters. We, Americans, are a sick people. It is the spiritual sickness that Native Americans told us about 400 years ago. We weren't listening then. We're not listening now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And the worst problem is...
Posted by: sphoenix on Jul 30, 2007 10:36 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As the author mentioned...whenever I talk to people...even family members, about the coming water crisis, they think I'm nuts. I am looking across the country for a small farm to buy and become as self-sustaining as possible...and they think I'm nuts for that too.

You see, I want to know where ALL of my food comes from. Better yet, I want to grow ALL of my food, without fertilizers, without chemicals, without gross irrigation. But in order to do that I need a place with good quality water...which is becoming increasingly scarce. I have ruled out huge sections of the country due to water scarcity, which is already a reality.

Heck, if the US and other countries keep raping the environment at the pace they are going...it won't be long before death and disease become the norm. The ship is beginning to sink, but the rats (that's us humans) have nowhere to abandon ship to...we're stuck here living in a cess-pool of our own creation.

And yet...I'm the one they call nuts...because I see the problems and I see the only solution that makes sense for me...go back to being a steward of the land...working in harmony with it to support and sustain myself and my family members.


And yet...they call me nuts.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Extreme Corrections
Posted by: Jarmadi on Jul 30, 2007 11:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This aquifer can sustainably support a very large amount of irrigated farming. But the limits have been exceeded. I don't see that the entire area needs to revert to dry land farming or pasture lands, as this writer suggests, but it seems logical that there be a prohibition of any new irrigation, and a scaleback on present irrigation volume untill a level is reached that allows the aquifer to recharge. A moderate increase might be allowed once the aquifer has recovered to it's past levels.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Instead of demonizing the environmentalists..."
Posted by: David V on Jul 30, 2007 12:20 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Instead of demonizing the environmentalists..."

What would conservatives talk about if they weren't demonizing half of America?

The entire rise of the Republican party in the late 20th century was built on a foundation of demonizing any and all who disagreed. Our current administration has a personal adviser whose very existence is to come up with new ways to demonize Americans.

War going badly? Let's blame those unpatriotic, liberal traitors. Country going down the shitter? It's the fault of those damn gays trying to marry each other.

Demonization is now an official government function.

To hell with facts! Name-calling, demonizing, and ad-hominem attacks are very effective in controlling the weak mind.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Victims of our own success.
Posted by: PJAW on Jul 31, 2007 6:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That's likely what we will become as a species. It's really too bad, with a little bit of forethought and some intraspecies cooperation and understanding, we might be able to sustain a comfortable and happy existence on this planet for many millenia yet to come.

Unfortunately, there are many among us who are absolutely committed to seeing the whole thing end in a spectacular conflagration. And they'll likely take the rest of us with them. Whoopee..... (freakin' assholes)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gee, do you suppose humans should stop overbreeding?
Posted by: Pat Kittle on Aug 2, 2007 8:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just maybe?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Sky is Falling, The Sky is Falling!!!
Posted by: IPF on Aug 3, 2007 4:25 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wow!! All I read here is we're murdering ourselves, we're killing each other, we're polluting ourselves to death, and - of course - we're over-breeding. Let's not forget the very helpful - "we are a sick people" comment.

A definite dearth of constructive commentary or fruitful discourse.

Perhaps we should discuss the options available to farmers - legal ones that is - or perhaps the options fr irrigation. It seems to me that would be more... American like, or Yankee ingenuity at work. Defeatism will get you nowhere people, whether an election is won or not.

Solutions need to be found - and throwing money at problems is not a solution either. So, if you see things as though we are being victimized, perhaps you should crawl back into your hiding hole and cry some more. Otherwise, get up do your bit, be positive and think of ways to SOLVE the problems.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]