FISH 101: Water & Society
The following is my First Debate preparation, Assigned the side of Pro Farmers.
Farmers and the War on Water
In the personal opinion of an individual who is majoring in Aquatics & Fishery Sciences and promotes the conversation of the ocean and local watersheds, I strongly promote the idea of preserving water within the ecosystem in which it originates. However, I also grew up on a farm during my early childhood, and I feel it important to sustain the agricultural industry as it sustains perhaps a small portion of US food resources in relation to imports, but it does provide the wellbeing and sustenance necessary in rural farming communities. Therefore, as an individual I am for the conservation of local watersheds primarily due to the fostering of keystone creatures. Second, as a child having been raised on a farm in the rural Midwest, I find it important to maintain the rights of agricultural communities as they have been founded and based upon their local water supplies. Therefore, my third conclusion and standing finds me left in the middle, not necessarily neutral, but acknowledging either side of the issue and concluding to the necessity of limiting the water dispensed to local communities and perhaps refraining from the amount exported outside of the community.
My opinions of the environmental risk associated with the action revolve around two sides: that of the local wildlife, and that of the farming communities. In relation to local ecosystems in opposition of irrigation, much of the biota is affected by the runoff, waste, and water depletion due to farm prosperity. Often times, farmers pull from the most local water source, and in this case, the Klamath Lake, as it provides rapid irrigation and quickens the process of filtration and transportation, and finally allows for a typically healthier crop yield due to the nearness and beneficial access of water. However, depleting the water levels may have little chemical effect on the biota, however, it does limit the overall availability in spawning grounds, limiting population growth, as well as eases the spread of marine infection due to the lack of mobility. Increasing the water levels would provide immense benefits to the primary species of salmon (including Coho and Chinook, prime fishery species), as higher water levels are essential to the wellbeing of juvenile salmon. Salmon species tend to spend much of their youth feeding and developing within the local waterway, building strength for their long migration out to sea. However, if the water levels are lessened, there is not enough food to be eaten due to the lessened spawning grounds of overall organisms as well as the overall difficulty in accessing the close quartered water on their way towards sea. However, on the side of the farmers, it is of critical importance to provide them with the water necessary to sustain their standard state of living. Many rural communities have founded themselves on agricultural production, and thus, if depleted of the water necessary to sustain crops, not only will many farmers be out competed by larger farming industries (producing unemployed communities due to commercial agricultural businesses) but many families will lose the necessary benefits to provide for their families. Furthermore, much of the land is of fertile nature due to historical volcanic sediments left behind and thus there is tremendous productivity in small grains, potatoes, mint, onion species, hay and more. All of which are items of primary importance for further agricultural activity in relation to livestock production. On another note, the farms located within the Klamath region are smaller than average size, privately owned (family businesses), and self-supported (family typically does the labor). Depriving these communities of their water rights would lead to unemployment and population relocation, threatening the resources allotted elsewhere as agricultural production in the Klamath region would be halted. Furthermore, due to the lack of employment, welfare payments would be necessary and thus gifted from the government, costing more in the long run than it would be to simply supply water from other regions or else continue the development of a balance in water ratios.
Opposing arguments may fall upon the idea of farming communities not being well suited for high desert regions, however, the soil itself is fertile. It is the dry air and inconsistent weathering of the region that provides difficulties, and in more cases than not, irrigation systems are a solution. Other ideas disagreeing with the assistance to farmers may assume the side of fishery communities, however, there is a history of constant overfishing the Klamath region leading to a steady decline in Shortnose Suckers and Lost River Suckers populations, which are now listed as endangered species, alongside the threatened Coho and Chinook. And unlike fish populations in relation to water supply, farms are able to calculate precisely the cost of production, the yield produced, and the profit reaped in relation to the volume of water gifted. Lastly, an argument produced may be that the phosphorous rich water run-off from farms and ranches promotes the algal bloom productivity associated with summer fish kills. This occurs mostly in part by the change in acidity and thus low oxygen levels. However, farm run-off alone is not responsible for this, wind is also a primary instigator. When there is a lack of wind, water becomes stagnant, steady, unmoved. And as this occurs, the upper mixed layer is left undisturbed and algae populations lacking the ability to move further down the water column due to lower levels of water, over photosynthesize due to the amount of sunlight received, producing dead zones. Many algae also die and water quality is worsened. However, as water levels drop, wind is more capable of mixing the upper mixed layer of water, dispersing algae deep within the water column, lessening their ability to access sunlight. As photosynthesis is limited, algae are less likely to be productive. Developing a shield or wall around the Klamath Lake basin may be a possible solution to the amounts of wind affecting the water quality and therefore evening out the balance in water depletion and fish prosperity.
Questions:
1. Where should change really be initiated? Are we starting at the right place (limiting water output from the Klamath)? Or should we be looking at outside effectors such as the reasons for lessened snowfall or limiting wind effects, etc?
2. If the fishery industry is also threatened, how concerned are we truly with the treaty of 1864 with the Klamath Indians by promising healthy fish stocks?
Marisa Elena Patrick
In the personal opinion of an individual who is majoring in Aquatics & Fishery Sciences and promotes the conversation of the ocean and local watersheds, I strongly promote the idea of preserving water within the ecosystem in which it originates. However, I also grew up on a farm during my early childhood, and I feel it important to sustain the agricultural industry as it sustains perhaps a small portion of US food resources in relation to imports, but it does provide the wellbeing and sustenance necessary in rural farming communities. Therefore, as an individual I am for the conservation of local watersheds primarily due to the fostering of keystone creatures. Second, as a child having been raised on a farm in the rural Midwest, I find it important to maintain the rights of agricultural communities as they have been founded and based upon their local water supplies. Therefore, my third conclusion and standing finds me left in the middle, not necessarily neutral, but acknowledging either side of the issue and concluding to the necessity of limiting the water dispensed to local communities and perhaps refraining from the amount exported outside of the community.
My opinions of the environmental risk associated with the action revolve around two sides: that of the local wildlife, and that of the farming communities. In relation to local ecosystems in opposition of irrigation, much of the biota is affected by the runoff, waste, and water depletion due to farm prosperity. Often times, farmers pull from the most local water source, and in this case, the Klamath Lake, as it provides rapid irrigation and quickens the process of filtration and transportation, and finally allows for a typically healthier crop yield due to the nearness and beneficial access of water. However, depleting the water levels may have little chemical effect on the biota, however, it does limit the overall availability in spawning grounds, limiting population growth, as well as eases the spread of marine infection due to the lack of mobility. Increasing the water levels would provide immense benefits to the primary species of salmon (including Coho and Chinook, prime fishery species), as higher water levels are essential to the wellbeing of juvenile salmon. Salmon species tend to spend much of their youth feeding and developing within the local waterway, building strength for their long migration out to sea. However, if the water levels are lessened, there is not enough food to be eaten due to the lessened spawning grounds of overall organisms as well as the overall difficulty in accessing the close quartered water on their way towards sea. However, on the side of the farmers, it is of critical importance to provide them with the water necessary to sustain their standard state of living. Many rural communities have founded themselves on agricultural production, and thus, if depleted of the water necessary to sustain crops, not only will many farmers be out competed by larger farming industries (producing unemployed communities due to commercial agricultural businesses) but many families will lose the necessary benefits to provide for their families. Furthermore, much of the land is of fertile nature due to historical volcanic sediments left behind and thus there is tremendous productivity in small grains, potatoes, mint, onion species, hay and more. All of which are items of primary importance for further agricultural activity in relation to livestock production. On another note, the farms located within the Klamath region are smaller than average size, privately owned (family businesses), and self-supported (family typically does the labor). Depriving these communities of their water rights would lead to unemployment and population relocation, threatening the resources allotted elsewhere as agricultural production in the Klamath region would be halted. Furthermore, due to the lack of employment, welfare payments would be necessary and thus gifted from the government, costing more in the long run than it would be to simply supply water from other regions or else continue the development of a balance in water ratios.
Opposing arguments may fall upon the idea of farming communities not being well suited for high desert regions, however, the soil itself is fertile. It is the dry air and inconsistent weathering of the region that provides difficulties, and in more cases than not, irrigation systems are a solution. Other ideas disagreeing with the assistance to farmers may assume the side of fishery communities, however, there is a history of constant overfishing the Klamath region leading to a steady decline in Shortnose Suckers and Lost River Suckers populations, which are now listed as endangered species, alongside the threatened Coho and Chinook. And unlike fish populations in relation to water supply, farms are able to calculate precisely the cost of production, the yield produced, and the profit reaped in relation to the volume of water gifted. Lastly, an argument produced may be that the phosphorous rich water run-off from farms and ranches promotes the algal bloom productivity associated with summer fish kills. This occurs mostly in part by the change in acidity and thus low oxygen levels. However, farm run-off alone is not responsible for this, wind is also a primary instigator. When there is a lack of wind, water becomes stagnant, steady, unmoved. And as this occurs, the upper mixed layer is left undisturbed and algae populations lacking the ability to move further down the water column due to lower levels of water, over photosynthesize due to the amount of sunlight received, producing dead zones. Many algae also die and water quality is worsened. However, as water levels drop, wind is more capable of mixing the upper mixed layer of water, dispersing algae deep within the water column, lessening their ability to access sunlight. As photosynthesis is limited, algae are less likely to be productive. Developing a shield or wall around the Klamath Lake basin may be a possible solution to the amounts of wind affecting the water quality and therefore evening out the balance in water depletion and fish prosperity.
Questions:
1. Where should change really be initiated? Are we starting at the right place (limiting water output from the Klamath)? Or should we be looking at outside effectors such as the reasons for lessened snowfall or limiting wind effects, etc?
2. If the fishery industry is also threatened, how concerned are we truly with the treaty of 1864 with the Klamath Indians by promising healthy fish stocks?
Marisa Elena Patrick