DOCSLIB.ORG

Riparian Ecosystems and Their Management: Reconciling

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Riparian Ecosystems and Their Management: Reconciling This file was created by scanning the printed publication. Errors identified by the software have been corrected; however, some errors may remain. Dividing the Water: Basic Precepts of Colorado River Water Law 1 2 David L. Hegner The extent of riparian vegetation development along the rivers and streams which comprise the Colorado River System is a function of a myriad of legal and operational factors. The utilization of Colorado River water can be identified with several key issues, federal acts, and treaties. This paper ~vill outline the major arguements and perceptions which define the present day levels of water and hence the extent of riparian vegetation along the river corridors of the Colorado River System. INTRODUCTION Thff main objective of this paper is to outline the legal and operational decisions and constraints The "Law of the River" as applied to the Colorado whith define the flow levels that have shaped and River, has evolved out of a combination of both continue to regulate the extent of the riparian Fedeual and State statutes, inter-state compacts, community. court decisions, contracts, an international treaty, operating criteria, and administrative decisions. Prior to exploring the law of the Colorado River, The cummulative effect of all these apportionments it is necessary to understand the underlying logic have defined the development and extent of the which defines ~·Jestern r1ater law. Specifically, the riparian vegetation along the river corridors of "appropriated right'" to water and the percieved the Colorado River System. neces-sity to hold the right to water use have defined the entire development of water in the The Colorado River begins its journey in the moun­ \Vest. Hhen the first settlers made their way into tains of Colorado and flows nearly 1400 miles before the Basin, they quickly realized that the key to it terminates in the Gulf of California. The development and control centered around who had Colorado River is the second longest river in the the ultimate control of the water. In contrast to United States and holds the dubious distinction of the water law of the East, the developers initiated being the most closely regulated of the major rivers. a reservation system of water that defined that The 900 mile long basin can be seperated into two use had to be beneficial to development and in distinct basins: the Upper Basin, consisting of most cases led to complete diversion from the portions of Hyoming, Colorado, Utah and New Mexico; river channel. Since water 'vas of very limited and the Lower Basin, consisting of portions of supply, the user had to hold a legal right to Nevada, Arizona and California. Numerous Federal, beneficially utilize the 'vater. The right was State, and private water projects utilize the river allocated on a first in time logic and as such basin water both directly and indirectly. For the the first ones on the scene laid claim to the period of time from 1976 through 1980, the states primary use of the water and were defined as the of the Colorado River Basin collectively utilized "senior"' water right holders. The initial users over 15 million acre-feet of water (BOR, 1984). of the river generally gained the major control of the water resource, With this basic concept in mind, the remainder of the paper will outline some of the major development issues associated with 1 Paper presented at the North American tha Colorado River. Riparian Symposium. Tucson, Arizona, April 16-18, 19"85. EARLY DEVELOPMENT (PRE-1900) 2 Grand Canyon Study Manager, U.S. Bureau o f Reclamation, Division ·Of Water and Land, Salt The first non-native irrigators in the Colorado Lake City, Utah 84147 River Basin were the Jesuit missionaries in the Tucson area around 1732 (U,S. Dept. Int., 1946). After the Civil 1-lar had ended, a number of people began to move into the Colorado River Basin and specifically the California and Arizona areas. 453 Thomas Blythe recorded the first use of Colorado 1925 TO PRESENT River water for irrigation purposes in the Palo Verde Valley in 1856 (U.S. Dep~. Int., 1946) By With the passage of the Compact, the Lower Basin 1877, Blythe made the first legal filing for immediately took advantage of several studies Colorado River water in California. Within this investigating mainstem storage and irrigation The same time period of the late 1800's, the Mormon Kincaid Act (1924) and the Fall-Davis Report (1922) pioneers were developing and designing extensive documented the need for flood control and storage irrigation works in Hyoming, Colorado, and Utah. to provide water for the Imperial Valley of south­ By 1883, the Grand Valley Canal had been built and ern California (U.S. Dept. Int., 1978). Out of was supplying irrigation water to a large area of these studies, irrigation canals were recommended the Western Slope area of Colorado. for the Imperial Valley and the need was seen to develop a storage dam in the Lower Basin, These and other recommendations led to the Federal govern­ 1900 TO 1925 ment pass·ing the Boulder Canyon Project A'ct in 1928. This· Act provided for the building of Hoover Dam In the history of the Colorado River water develop­ and the definition of the amount of water that ment, the early 1900's were the most significant. California could legally utilize. To finance the During this period, the use of water in the Lower project, irrigation and hydroelectric power contracts Basin had reached the maximum possible without the were initiated to repay the development over time. development of extensive storage and regulation. The major component of the Boulder Canyon Project The passage of the Reclamation Act of 1902 signaled Act, Hoover Dam, was completed in 1935. the beginning of the investigations. into to feas­ ibility of building large regulation and irrigation The country of Mexico became concerned that the works in the West. Several reports and studies were development in the United States would utilize all conducted and analyzed. Several of these plans led of the Colorado River water before it had a chance to the development of the modern day Bureau of to get to Hexico, In 1944, a treaty was signed Reclamation. between the United States and Mexico to provide on an annual basis, a quantity of 1,500,000 acre­ By the 1920's, the development of the Upper B.asin feet of water to be supplied to Mexico, The treaty was considerably lagging behind that of the Lower required that ~1exico construct a diversion struct­ Basin. However, mainstem development in both basins. ure and that the United States would build the was impeded by the lack of storage facilities, water Davis storage dam and reservoir for regulatory shortages, and the continual threat of floods and and flood control purposes. the aggravated siltation problems. During this time period, several public and private agencies and In 1948, the Upper Basin States entered into a groups were seeking the rights to develop hydro­ compact of their own defining'· individual state electric power and were proposing to provide storage percentages of water available for development and and flood control on only an incidental basis. established a commission to explore the potential These recommendations were analyzed, but the Upper for developing water and irrigation projects within Basin states regarded any development in the Lower the Upper Basin. After numerous studies and Basin as threatening to their established priorities investigations, the federal government, at the to the water and could preclude future use of the insistance and pushing of the rpper Basin states, resource. The states thought that they s.hould passed the Colorado River Storage Act of 1956. The control the use of water within their own states, major features of this act were to provide for the but the Federal government claimed the ultimate development of four major storage projects within jurisdiction over the water based on it being an the Upper Basin ( Glen Canyon, Flaming Gorge, interstate waterway. Some form of agreement was the three reservoirs of the Currecanti Unit, and obviously needed before any comprehensive develop­ Navajo)J for the establishment of repayment contracts ment of the Colorado River Basin could proceed. for the structures and for the future development The Lower Basin favored a compact becaus.e they of other storage and irrigation features within the desired to enlist the support of the Upper Rasin basin. Glen Canyon Dam was initiated in 1956 and states in securing federal legislation for main-­ completed in 1963. The primary purpose of Glen stem development. The Upper Basin states favored Canyon Dam and Lake Powell is for the regulation any type of decision which would secure their of water to the Lower Basin and to provide for rights to future development of the water. Thes:e hydro~owe~ revenues for the Upper Basin. concerns and hopes were consumated through. the development and passage of the Colorado River As the m~in features of the Colorado River Storage Compact in December of 1922. The divisi.on point Act were being built , the State of Arizona was between the basins was set at Lees Ferry, Ariioha pushing for the full recognition of their water and it was determined (based on existing annual rights and to restrict California from excessive flow information) that the Upper; Basin must guar­ us·age of the the Colorado River water. California antee to the Lower Basin statesl an aggregate of had been developing and expanding far faster than 75,000,000 acre-feet of water for any period of any other s·tate of the Colorado River Basin and te~ consecutive years.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Awwa Ca/Nv Section Water Conservation Training and Certification Program “Need to Know” Criteria for Level 1
    AWWA CA/NV SECTION WATER CONSERVATION TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION PROGRAM “NEED TO KNOW” CRITERIA FOR LEVEL 1 The “Need to Know” criteria” presented below is based upon the general knowledge requirements expected for level 1 AWWA CA/NV water conservation certification and focuses on water end uses and conservation measures and on regional water issues and resources. Terms and definitions associated with the subjects discussed below. Units of measurement and formulas. Basic units (English) of measurement used in the water industry and formulas for landscape water use and budgets. Examples are Cubic Foot and Acre Foot, Arithmetic such as Multiplication Division and percentages, volume, pressure (psi). U.S. Water Resource Facts; Federal, Nevada and California Water Providers and Regulators; Regional water issues; Professional associations. Different types of water providers in U.S. and primary source of water for average U.S. water providers. Knowledge of water supply from groundwater and surface water in California and Nevada. Agricultural and urban demand in California and Nevada. Sources of water in California. Sources of water for Nevada Colorado River water rights; Type of water agencies in California. Roles of Federal Nevada and California water agencies and regulators. Agricultural and urban MOU and Best Management Practices; Urban Water Management Plans; California water issues including CALFED and Bay-Delta; and professional associations (including California Urban Water Council, ANSI and ASME). Utility water demand characteristics and water conservation measures. Important utility water use data and customer demand characteristics; long-term versus short-term conservation programs; utility conservation measures; type and accuracy of water meters; quantity-based rate structures; unaccounted-for water; water system audits and leak detection; system water pressure: and recycled water.
    [Show full text]
  • Water in California
    CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY CALIFORNIA HISTORY SECTION RESEARCH GUIDES WATER IN CALIFORNIA VISIT US California History Section 900 N Street Room 200 9:30-4 Monday-Friday 2 Are you a California resident? Have you eaten California produce? Then you are affected by California’s history of water resources development. From dams, to canals to flumes and groundwater replenishment, water planning affects almost every aspect of California life and industry. Explore the vibrant political history of California’s most precious resource via the California History Section's rich collections! Digitized Resources ………………………………..………………4 Reference Works: Books…………....……….……………………………………..5 Periodicals…………….....……………………………………...8 Manuscript Collections…....……………………………………..9 Photograph Albums……....……………………………………..11 Search: Catalog General Research Tips.…………………………………..12 Subject-Specific Resources in our Catalog.………………………..13 County-Specific Resources in our Catalog.………………………..14 On-site Research Resources….…...……………………………..15 Other On-site Resources….……...……………………………..16 Other Places to Look….….……….……..……………………..17 Enjoy Your Research! 3 Can’t come to the library just yet? No worries! There are a number of online resources you can explore related to water in California! Digitized Publications A few years ago we digitized some of our more fragile resources on California’s water. You can see them on Internet Archive! URL: https://archive.org/ Type in Search Box: (water* OR irrigation) AND collection:(californiastatelibrary)&sin=TXT Select Option: “Search full text of books” Digitized Images We have scanned and digitized a portion of our image collection. Check them out and remember that we have a lot more in the library. URL: https://calisphere.org/institution/51/ items/ Type in Search Box: ( (water) OR (irrig*) OR (dams)) 4 Unsure about where to start? Consult a book! If you are interested in the history of California’s water resources, these items will point you in the right direction.
    [Show full text]
  • California Water & Sierra Nevada Hydrology
    - Adaptive management - California water & Sierra Nevada hydrology - SNRI & UC Merced Roger Bales Sierra Nevada Research Institute UC Merced Forest adaptive management: water 3 objectives: Measure changes in water quality & water budget in representative areas subjected to Framework/SPLATS treatment Estimate the impact of forest treatments on water quality, water budget & aquatic habitat at three levels: watershed, forest, bioregion Provide basis for continuing operational assessment of how Framework treatments will impact streams, water cycle & forest health Sierra Nevada Adaptive Management Program snamp.cnr.berkeley.edu Tasks: Water Quality & Quantity Field measurement program – before/after treatment – controls in parallel w/ treatment – stream temperature, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, electrical conductivity – stream stage/discharge, soil moisture – meteorology, erosion, soil temperature, snowpack, precipitation Modeling & spatial scaling – integrate observations using hydrologic model – estimate model parameters from satellite & ground data – extend impacts across hydrologic & watershed conditions – couple watershed, erosion, stream responses Sierra Nevada Adaptive Management Program snamp.cnr.berkeley.edu Tahoe NF catchments Hydrology focuses on 3 smaller catchments: − treatment − control − higher elevation, future treatment Same strategy in Sierra NF California’s water resources challenges: increasing pressure on mountain resources 1. Changing urban & agricultural water demand 2. Sea level rise 3. Reduction of average annual snowpack
    [Show full text]
  • Water Availability for Cannabis in Northern California: Intersections of Climate, Policy, and Public Discourse
    water Article Water Availability for Cannabis in Northern California: Intersections of Climate, Policy, and Public Discourse Betsy Morgan 1,2,* , Kaitlyn Spangler 2,3 , Jacob Stuivenvolt Allen 2,4 , Christina N. Morrisett 2,5 , Mark W. Brunson 2,3,6 , Shih-Yu Simon Wang 2,4 and Nancy Huntly 2,6,7 1 Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322, USA 2 Climate Adaptation Science Program, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322, USA; [email protected] (K.S.); [email protected] (J.S.A.); [email protected] (C.N.M.); [email protected] (M.W.B.); [email protected] (S.-Y.S.W.); [email protected] (N.H.) 3 Department of Environment and Society, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322, USA 4 Department of Plant, Soils, and Climate, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322, USA 5 Department of Watershed Sciences, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322, USA 6 Ecology Center, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322, USA 7 Department of Biology, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322, USA * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: Availability of water for irrigated crops is driven by climate and policy, as moderated by public priorities and opinions. We explore how climate and water policy interact to influence water availability for cannabis (Cannabis sativa), a newly regulated crop in California, as well as how public discourse frames these interactions. Grower access to surface water covaries with pre- cipitation frequency and oscillates consistently in an energetic 11–17 year wet-dry cycle.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Available for Replenishment
    State Water Project and Central Valley Project: Reliability and Availability Water Available for Replenishment Appendix B. State Water Project and Central Valley Project: Reliability and Availability 1 State Water Project and Central Valley Project: Reliability and Availability This page left blank intentionally. 2 State Water Project and Central Valley Project: Reliability and Availability Contents Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 Background on the Central Valley Project and State Water Project ............................................................ 4 Regulations Governing Operation of the CVP and SWP ............................................................................... 7 State Water Resources Control Board Decision 1485 .......................................................................... 8 Coordinated Operations Agreement .................................................................................................... 8 Water Right Order 90-5 ........................................................................................................................ 8 Central Valley Project Improvement Act .............................................................................................. 8 1995 Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan and State Water Resources Control Board Decision 1641 .......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • California Water and the Rhetoric of Crisis
    UC Berkeley Berkeley Planning Journal Title California Water and the Rhetoric of Crisis Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6gg4203t Journal Berkeley Planning Journal, 23(1) ISSN 1047-5192 Author Pollak, Josh Publication Date 2010 DOI 10.5070/BP32318173 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California 1 California Water and the Rhetoric of Crisis By Josh Pollak Abstract Water management in California has always been politically charged and fraught with controversy. In the summer of 2009, the last year of a three-year drought, a specific type of “water crisis” emerged in political rhetoric, in which constructing new dams and lifting protections for endangered fish species could solve California’s water problems. This piece critically examines these claims by presenting a brief background on how water is used and managed in California, highlighting the disconnect between the cost to deliver water and the price users pay, and explaining misconceptions that led endangered species protections to be attacked. California needs to take a proactive stance in water management by examining how water is currently allocated, reforming our water rights system, and dealing with difficult water issues before they reach a “crisis” level. Keywords: Water crisis; California water; water management; water infrastructure; water allocation “California’s water system is in a crisis.” -Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) “Our water crisis underscores the urgent need to update California’s water infrastructure so we are able to capture excess rain in wet years and have the necessary reserves in dry years like this one.” -California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, February 2009 “The San Joaquin Valley continues to face a water crisis in which our water supplies have become inadequate to meet expanding needs .
    [Show full text]
  • Saving Water in California
    Saving Water in California California is a mosaic of diverse culture, climate, and geography from its hot, dry deserts to its snowcapped peaks and foggy shores. The state’s varying water needs and resources are both a reflection and a consequence of this diversity. Balancing water supply and demand is a perennial problem for California. This has made the state a national leader in water efficiency and conservation initiatives. SOURCES OF WATER California relies on three main, interconnected water sources: mountain snowpack, reservoirs, and aquifers:1 • The Sierra Nevada snowpack, which melts in the spring and summer, provides runoff to rivers and reservoirs. In normal years, melted snowpack typically supplies about 30 percent of the state’s water supply.2 • The state’s reservoirs store water from precipitation events and receive the runoff from melting snowpack. Less precipitation and snowpack results in decreased reservoir storage. • When the supply of surface water is unable to meet 2011 demand, groundwater is pumped from aquifers, accounting for nearly 60 percent of the state’s water supply in a dry year.3 SUPPLY ISSUES • Beginning in 2012, California experienced not only its driest three consecutive years, but also historically high temperatures. This resulted in well­ below-average snowpack. A survey of the Sierra Nevada snowpack in April 2015, when snowpack is typically highest, revealed that there was no snow.2 • Due to declining snowpack, the supply of water in the state’s reservoirs has also decreased. In August 2015, the major reservoirs were at 17 to 62 percent 2014 of their historical average storage levels.4 Drought conditions have caused water levels in California’s • As a result, Californians have increased their Lake Oroville to consistently decline over the years, as seen reliance on groundwater, causing the depletion of by the change in visible land surroundings highlighted above aquifers.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality Control Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. Amendments to the 1994 Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins The Third Edition of the Basin Plan was adopted by the Central Valley Water Board on 9 December 1994, approved by the State Water Board on 16 February 1995 and approved by the Office of Administrative Law on 9 May 1995. The Fourth Edition of the Basin Plan was the 1998 reprint of the Third Edition incorporating amendments adopted and approved between 1994 and 1998. The Basin Plan is in a loose-leaf format to facilitate the addition of amendments. The Basin Plan can be kept up-to-date by inserting the pages that have been revised to include subsequent amendments. The date subsequent amendments are adopted by the Central Valley Water Board will appear at the bottom of the page. Otherwise, all pages will be dated 1 September 1998. Basin plan amendments adopted by the Regional Central Valley Water Board must be approved by the State Water Board and the Office of Administrative Law. If the amendment involves adopting or revising a standard which relates to surface waters it must also be approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) [40 CFR Section 131(c)].
    [Show full text]
  • Cvp Overview
    Central Valley Project Overview Eric A. Stene Bureau of Reclamation Table Of Contents The Central Valley Project ......................................................2 About the Author .............................................................15 Bibliography ................................................................16 Archival and Manuscript Collections .......................................16 Government Documents .................................................16 Books ................................................................17 Articles...............................................................17 Interviews.............................................................17 Dissertations...........................................................17 Other ................................................................17 Index ......................................................................18 1 The Central Valley Project Throughout his political life, Thomas Jefferson contended the United States was an agriculturally based society. Agriculture may be king, but compared to the queen, Mother Nature, it is a weak monarch. Nature consistently proves to mankind who really controls the realm. The Central Valley of California is a magnificent example of this. The Sacramento River watershed receives two-thirds to three-quarters of northern California's precipitation though it only has one-third to one-quarter of the land. The San Joaquin River watershed occupies two- thirds to three-quarter of northern California's land,
    [Show full text]
  • Water-Quality Assessment of the Sacramento River Basin, California Water Quality of Fixed Sites, 1996-1998
    U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Water-Quality Assessment of the Sacramento River Basin, California Water Quality of Fixed Sites, 1996-1998 Water-Resources Investigations Report 00-4247 cience for a channina world Water-Quality Assessment of the Sacramento River Basin, California Water Quality of Fixed Sites, 1996-1998 6/Joseph L Domagalskl and Peter D. Dileanis U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 00-4247 NATIONAL WATER-QUALITY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM tn CNI i o CO CVJ CO Sacramento, California 2000 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director The use of firm, trade, and brand names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services Water Resources Division Box 25286 Placer Hall Denver, CO 80225-0286 6000 J Street Sacramento, California 95819-6129 FOREWORD The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey Improve understanding of the primary (USGS) is to assess the quantity and quality of the natural and human factors that affect earth resources of the Nation and to provide informa­ water-quality conditions. tion that will assist resource managers and policymak- This information will help support the development ers at Federal, State, and local levels in making sound and evaluation of management, regulatory, and moni­ decisions. Assessment of water-quality conditions and toring decisions by other Federal, State, and local trends is an important part of this overall mission.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Use in California MAY 2019 Jeffrey Mount, Ellen Hanak
    Water Use in California MAY 2019 Jeffrey Mount, Ellen Hanak Water in California is shared across three main sectors. Statewide, average water use is roughly 50% environmental, 40% agricultural, and 10% urban, although the percentage of water use by sector varies dramatically across regions and between wet and dry years. Some of the water used by each of these sectors returns to rivers and groundwater basins where it can be used again. Environmental water provides multiple benefits. Environmental water use falls into four categories: water in rivers protected as “wild and scenic” under federal and state laws, water required for maintaining habitat within streams, water that supports wetlands within wildlife preserves, and water needed to maintain water quality for agricultural and urban use. Half of California’s environmental water use occurs in rivers along the state’s north coast. These waters are largely isolated from major agricultural and urban areas, and their wild and scenic status protects them from significant future development. In dry years, the share of water that goes to the environment decreases dramatically as flows diminish in rivers and streams. At the height of the 2012‒16 drought, the state also reduced water allocations for the environment to reserve some supplies for farms and cities. Agricultural water use is falling, while the economic value of farm production is growing. More than nine million acres of farmland in California are irrigated, representing roughly 80% of all water used for businesses and homes. Higher-revenue perennial crops—nuts, grapes, and other fruit—have increased as a share of irrigated acreage (from 16% in 1980 to 33% in 2015 statewide, and from 21% to 45% in the southern Central Valley).
    [Show full text]
  • Priorities for California's Water
    PPIC WATER POLICY CENTER PRIORITIES FOR CALIFORNIA’S WATER OCTOBER 2017 CONTRIBUTORS Ellen Hanak, Caitrin Chappelle, Alvar Escriva-Bou, Brian Gray, Jelena Jezdimirovic, Henry McCann, Jeffrey Mount ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thanks to Celeste Cantú, John Fleck, Maurice Hall, Phil Isenberg, David Mitchell, Nathaniel Seavy, and Jay Ziegler for very helpful reviews of a draft of this report, and to Lori Pottinger and Lynette Ubois for expert editorial guidance. Any remaining errors or omissions are the responsibility of the authors alone. ©2017 Public Policy Institute of California. The PPIC Water Policy Center spurs innovative water management solutions that support a healthy economy, environment, and society—now and for future generations. The Public Policy Institute of California is dedicated to informing and improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research. We are a public charity. We do not take or support positions on any ballot measure or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor do we endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office. Research publications reflect the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of our funders or of the staff, officers, advisory councils, or board of directors of the Public Policy Institute of California. INTRODUCTION This past year was a prime example of California’s highly variable climate—and a precursor of the types of extremes that are expected to become more common. After five years of drought exacerbated by record heat, 2017’s record rain and snow brought more challenges— stressing dams and levees, causing landslides, and adding fuel to fire-prone landscapes.
    [Show full text]