*Public Resources At Risk From Bechtel

Soda Mountain Solar Looms Over Mojave National Preserve

By G. Sidney Silliman

The fundamental contradiction in the numerous proposals by private companies to build industrial-scale renewable energy projects and long-distance power lines on acreage administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is that the lands are public while the profits from the construction and operation (or sale) of the power plants and transmission lines accrue to large corporations. The public does gain electricity. Yet the energy would be just as available and the contradiction avoided through siting on private, previously-disturbed lands or through distributed generation at sites near where the electricity is consumed.

The contradiction is especially evident in the proposal by Soda Mountain Solar, a subsidiary of Bechtel Development Company, to site its Soda Mountain Solar project (hereafter, project) on public lands immediately adjacent to the Mojave National Preserve, the third largest unit of the National Park System in the contiguous U.S. at 1.6 million acres.

The proposed project is a 350-megawatt photovoltaic (PV) electric power generating plant set for siting on 4,397 acres of public land administered by the BLM some 6 miles southwest of Baker, California. The application by Soda Mountain Solar, LLC requests a right-of-way authorization to construct a solar field on 2,691 acres, a project substation, an access road, operations and maintenance buildings, and to realign approximately 3.3 miles of Rasor Road. The North Array, on the west side of Interstate 15, is proposed to end in the vicinity of the Zzyzx Road overpass. On the other side of the highway, the South Array will be situated next to the Rasor Off-Highway Vehicle Area. The East Array is proposed for construction immediately to the north, less than one mile from the Mojave National Preserve boundary and at the base of the mountains extending into the park.

The Public Scoping Report was released in January 2013 by BLM, the lead NEPA agency for National Environmental Policy Act proceedings, and San Bernardino County, the lead CEQA agency under the California Environmental Quality Act. The letters of commentary submitted by individuals, environmental organizations, California government agencies, and such national entities as the National Park Service during the October to December 2012 scoping period and summarized in the Report delineate a host of likely environmental consequences to public lands and the Mojave National Preserve, many of which may be irreversible. The potential, significant environmental impacts include decreased spring discharge in the Soda Springs (Zzyzx) area as a result of groundwater pumping for the project, loss of habitat for the endangered Mohave tui chub, loss of high-quality desert tortoise habitat, increased habitat fragmentation for desert bighorn sheep, and the loss of wildlife connectivity with the Soda Mountains. http://www.blm.gov/ca/st/en/fo/barstow/renewableenergy/soda_mountain.html

The consequences for the Mojave National Preserve are of special concern because the project threatens not only the particular resources and landscape that Congress mandated to be protected by the California Desert Protection Act of 1994, but the very integrity of this treasured unit of the National Park System. The integrity of the Preserve — its essential quality — rests on the fact that it (a) protects a relatively intact ecosystem of the eastern Mojave Desert from threats associated with commercial development, (b) provides connectivity between other protected national areas within the Mojave desert region, and (c) provides opportunities for solitude, thereby functioning as a refuge from urban areas.

It is disingenuous to reject this argument merely because the project would be sited on the doorstep of the Mojave National Preserve rather than within its boundaries. The currently undeveloped, natural area at the northwest corner of the Mojave National Preserve where the project might be sited is effectively part of the park. This is most evident with respect to the unobstructed and dramatic view into the Preserve documented in the panoramic photo by Michael Gordon. This vista would be obscured by project buildings and PV panels attached to single-axis trackers with a minimum height of 20 feet. In order to ensure solitude for visitors and a refuge from urban areas, the National Park Service manages the Preserve to protect dark skies. A solar facility at the corner of the Preserve is incompatible with that management goal because a solar facility with all of its lighting will significantly degrade the visitor experience. The project will violate the visual integrity of the Preserve.

The proposal to site the Soda Mountain Solar project near the Mojave National Preserve and the likely consequences of that for local citizens reflect the growing income inequality in the United States, the gap between the richest 1 percent and the remaining 99 percent of the population in America. Bechtel, a transnational corporation that will profit financially from the construction of the project, is a privately-owned engineering and construction firm. Chairman and chief executive officer Riley P. Bechtel is the great grandson of founder Warren A. Bechtel and heir to the company. Riley Bechtel is consistently ranked in the top 200 richest people in the United States and among the richest men in the world. Thus a Soda Mountain Solar project will not be built adjacent to Bohemian Grove in Sonoma County, site of the San Francisco-based exclusive men’s hangout known as the Bohemian Club, where members like Riley Bechtel encamp each summer. But it will be constructed on public land far from the closed-to-the-public encampment in Sonoma.

This is more than an academic argument as the public resources at risk from the project are those enjoyed by the 99 percent. Annually, some 550,000 people visit the Preserve and their experience will be impacted by Soda Mountain Solar. School children from the gate-way community of Barstow, many of whom have never been to a national park, travel via Zzyzx Road (and through the project if it is built) on National Park Service-organized field trips to the Desert Studies Center to experience the desert up close, to learn of the history and culture of the Chemehuevi, and, if they are lucky, to see the bighorn sheep that frequent the springs in the area. The Desert Studies Center, a field station of California State University, is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. It provides an opportunity for these children to receive instruction among natural ponds, dry lakes, and rugged mountains. Local citizens who use the Rasor Off-Highway Vehicle Area will be impacted by the realignment of Rasor Road. The safety of the thousands who travel to and from Las Vegas on Interstate 15 may be at risk from the glare of the estimated 1.5 million PV panels that will comprise the facility. The project simply does not serve the public interest.

There is a larger, regional context for the contradiction between private and public interests revealed by the Soda Mountain Solar project. The once-dramatic view of the Ivanpah Valley on a moonlit night from atop Clark Mountain, a singular unit of Mojave National Preserve, has been altered beyond redemption by the panels, looming towers, and bright lights of the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System, a power facility built by BrightSource Energy and Bechtel. The Iberdrola energy project, proposed for the Silurian Valley a few miles away, would, along with the Soda Mountain Solar project, interfere markedly with connectivity between Joshua Tree and Death Valley National Parks, an essential habitat corridor with Mojave National Preserve at its biological center.

Perhaps, as with the Wall Street movement, those who care deeply about Mojave National Preserve will occupy the contested space to protect the public interest.

G. Sidney Silliman is Professor Emeritus of Political Science at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona and a member of the California/Nevada Desert Committee. The arguments expressed here do not represent the views of the Committee or the University.

*The Colorado, A River Under Stress

Continued Drought Is Forcing Cooperation

By John Hiatt

The Colorado River is vitally important to the residents of the seven western states that share its drainage basin. It supplies irrigation and drinking water to more than 30 million people over an area stretching from Denver to San Diego. Unfortunately, the river is over allocated and over utilized and with the current drought we are reaching the point where who uses its water and how much they use will almost certainly have to change.

In order to understand how we’ve gotten to where we are today it is necessary to look back at how the Colorado River, one of the most regulated in the world, has been manipulated and managed since 1900. Prior to the twentieth century the Colorado ran free and was only utilized by those few people and settlements along the river that used minor amounts for irrigation and municipal purposes. The Colorado is one of the very few rivers in this country that has no major cities along its banks, although Las Vegas is only a few miles away. The river has never really been suitable for navigation, and the extremely hot summers along the lower reaches discouraged settlement. Most of the municipal use takes place outside the river’s drainage basin.

The first real change to the Colorado came in 1900 when the Imperial Land Company started diverting water from the river to the Imperial Valley for agricultural purposes. In 1905 the diversion canal was overwhelmed by the rivers’ spring flood and the river changed course and flowed into the Salton Sink for a year and created the Salton Sea. As the Imperial Valley boomed and became an important farm area, more and more water was diverted. By 1920 the other six states that share the Colorado River drainage basin became concerned that California might claim the entire flow of the river, and set out to assert their own claims. In 1928 the Colorado River Compact was signed. This compact divided the entire flow of the Colorado among the seven states. Mexico got nothing, and no provision was made for leaving anything in the river (in 1945 Mexico was allocated 1.5 million acre-feet in return for limiting Mexican diversions on tributaries of the Rio Grande). The quantity of water allocated to each state was based on then current and potential usage and ten years of flow data from the period shortly before the compact was signed. According to the data available at that time, the average annual flow was 17.5 million acre-feet. California got the largest share at 4.4 million acre-feet annually and Nevada the smallest at 300,000 acre-feet.

Until 1936 and the completion of Hoover Dam there was no storage capacity and no regulation of the river’s annual flow. Since 1936 a number of other dams have been built, including Glen Canyon Dam. Between them, Lakes Mead and Powell, backed up by Hoover and Glen Canyon Dams respectively have a storage capacity of about 60 million acre-feet. This volume equates to some four years of the total normal average flow of the river. During both the 1950’s drought and the filling of Glen Canyon Reservoir in the 1960’s the surface level of Lake Mead fell substantially, but no impact was felt by downstream users because Arizona and Nevada were using only a small portion of their allocations.

In the year 2000 the idea that the Colorado River could be completely consumed and unable to deliver its legal allocations seemed far-fetched. But in 2001 the current drought began and 2002 saw the lowest flows measured since record keeping began: just 25% of normal run-off. The level of Lake Mead fell precipitously and water managers began to take notice. With the exception of two very wet years, the drought that began in 2001 is still with us. The flow during the 2013 water year, which ended September 30, was 35% of average and the second lowest on record. The 2012 water year wasn’t much better with about 45% of average flow.

By 2005, it was apparent that the drought on the Colorado was not going away soon and the States and the Department of Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation, which manages the river, realized that changes to the compact were needed and began work on something called the Quantification Settlement Agreement, which was signed in 2007. This agreement laid out a framework for allocating water based on volume in storage and identified specific Lake Mead levels for the categories of surplus, normal condition, phase1 shortage, phase 2 shortage, etc. It also stipulated that except during times of surplus no State could take more than its legal allocation. The only state really affected by this stipulation was California, which had been diverting more than 5 million acre-feet as opposed to its 4.4 million acre-foot allocation.

The phase 1 shortage level for Lake Mead is 1075 feet above mean sea level. The lake surface currently (November 1, 2013) stands at 1104 feet above sea level and, barring a very wet winter, is expected to fall by about 25 feet by November 2014. This will mean the Bureau of Reclamation will be very close to declaring a shortage, which will require Arizona and Nevada to reduce their diversions from the river below their full allocations.

Starting in 2002 Las Vegas, which uses almost all of Nevada’s allocation, initiated a water conservation program, modest at first but ultimately quite aggressive. It has reduced Nevada’s consumptive use of Colorado River water from 330,000 acre-feet per year to 235,000 acre-feet per year. During this period the population of Las Vegas grew by 400,000 people. This is a remarkable accomplishment.

Approximately eighty percent of the Colorado’s water is used for irrigation. Major conservation efforts in that area are much more difficult, for a variety of reasons. First is cost; agricultural water is cheap, only a few dollars per acre-foot (about 326,000 gallons), due to the subsidies associated with federal water projects. Secondly, in order to thrive, plants need a certain minimum volume of water. In the hot summers of the interior deserts of California and Arizona that is a lot, about 5 acre-feet per acre per year, enough water to cover each acre of farmland to a depth of 5 feet if applied all at once. In addition, since there is a significant amount of salt in water from the Colorado (about 1 ton per acre-foot of water) which remains behind in the soil when irrigation water either evaporates or is transpired by plants, enough water must be applied to the soil to flush the salt through the soil into a drain system. The Salton Sea persists because it receives agricultural drain water from the Imperial and Coachella Valleys and the Mexicali Valley in Mexico.

Nearly a century ago Colorado River authorities made crucial decisions based upon inadequate information and naive assumptions. We are left with an overly-complex system further complicated by Western water law that says, first in time, first in right. Straightening out this tangle is a huge challenge. But under the duress of drought small changes are being made. It is in the interest of the three Lower Basin States, Arizona, California and Nevada plus Mexico to keep the water level in Lake Mead higher than 1075 feet above sea level so that there is not a declared shortage. Hence, there are several agreements in effect that allow conserved water to be stored in Lake Mead for later use. Prior to these agreements the situation was “use it or lose it.” There was no incentive to conserve water.

Based on current knowledge and projections the jobs of those charged with meeting the demands for Colorado River water will become increasingly difficult. We know from tree ring data that pre-historic droughts in the Colorado Basin have lasted as long as thirty years and that the twentieth century was the wettest century in the last two thousand years. Projections of future climate change suggest a drier, warmer climate with greater extremes in this region. We also know from recent experience that river flows are influenced by the previous year(s) precipitation because the soil acts as a sponge and the perennial flows are dependent on the level of saturation of that sponge. A “normal” year preceded by a dry year will have decreased river flows because part of the “normal” year precipitation will be consumed in re-saturating the soil sponge.

Is there any reason for optimism? Yes, I think there is, because we are starting to see some cooperation between the major municipal water purveyors. And Mexico is now partner in the discussions. But the 800-pound gorilla in the room is agricultural use. So far, the irrigation districts– speaking for farmers–haven’t shown much appetite for change. A drying, warmer climate will increase agricultural water demand. At some point we are going to have to re-consider how we use the water of the Colorado, an increasingly scarce and valuable resource.

John Hiatt, a desert activist living in Las Vegas, Nevada, is a member of the CNRCC Desert Committee and is a board member of Friends of Nevada Wilderness.

*A Profile of Superintendent Mark Butler

Appreciating the Subtleties of Joshua Tree National Park

By Seth Shteir

Mark Butler patrolled the winding mountain trails of Yosemite National Park’s backcountry as a National Park Service Wilderness Ranger fresh out of high school. It was a life changing experience for Butler, who was captivated by the beauty of Yosemite, the challenge of the work, and the satisfaction he gained from helping people explore remote wilderness. For 33 years after that summer job, Mark went on to serve the National Park Service in an incredibly diverse array of jobs ranging from maintenance worker, carpenter and utility system operator. He also worked as a physical scientist, environmental compliance manager, and Chief of the Division of Project Management at Yosemite National Park, before finally moving to his current position as Superintendent of Joshua Tree National Park.

“The different positions I’ve held have given me the ability to understand a wide variety of interests and concerns that come from park partners, visitors and staff,” reflected Butler. “Because of this broad perspective, I can work to promote partnerships, reconcile differences between park divisions, and provide balanced leadership.” Joshua Tree National Park has benefited from Butler’s exemplary leadership since he was appointed Superintendent in February 2011.

Superintendent Butler enjoys Joshua Tree National Park’s historic and cultural sites like the Key’s Desert Queen Ranch and the Wall Street Mill. He also finds the ecology of the Mojave/Sonoran Desert transition zone fascinating and is amazed by the diversity and beauty of the park’s oases. He is also impressed by Joshua Tree’s outstanding recreational opportunities and its reputation as a world-class climbing destination.

“As a rock climber, I have really enjoyed the rock formations in the Wonderland of Rocks,” says Butler. “But what’s really incredible about Joshua Tree National Park is that because it has such an open landscape hikers can explore almost anywhere, providing that they are well prepared and respectful of the desert ecology.”

One highlight during Superintendent Butler’s tenure at Joshua Tree National Park was a tour he gave to then Secretary of the Interior, Ken Salazar, to Cap Rock and Hidden Valley. There the Secretary developed a connection with Joshua Tree National Park’s fragile and intense desert landscape. Following this tour, Butler arranged for the Secretary to hear from Basin residents, and local families of active duty Marines, about the importance of the park. “Hearing Basin residents and families express their appreciation for the park was very inspirational,” recalls Butler. Another memorable occasion was an evening hike to White Tank with his wife, Cathy. “There was a full moon rising and we were in awe of the beauty of the desert,” says Butler.

Superintendent Butler thinks that one of the most important resources of Joshua Tree National Park is the ecological diversity of the transition zone between the Colorado and Mojave Desert portions of the park. The park’s vast Joshua Tree forests are also iconic and unique.

“One of the things that I find most interesting about Joshua Tree National Park is the subtleness of the place. On the surface it looks very harsh and very threatening, but when you look at it more closely, you can really discover a tremendous amount of fragility and beauty,” says Butler. “At first glance people think the desert is a harsh, barren and lifeless landscape, but in reality, it’s not. I really think that all park visitors can benefit greatly by attending a park interpretive program or a Desert Institute class to be introduced to and learn more about the desert. This will help them begin to understand and appreciate it.” Butler believes that because there is general lack of understanding about the desert, there has been a long history of threats to Joshua Tree National Park.

“One of the key challenges facing the park comes from the increasing level of large-scale urban and industrial development occurring adjacent to the park’s boundary,” said Butler. Development along the park’s boundary is a concern because it can lead to fragmentation and disruption of wildlife habitat and wildlife migration corridors, resulting in increased levels of genetic isolation among the park’s desert dwelling animals, like mountain lion, coyote, bobcat, bighorn sheep, mule deer and numerous varieties of insects, arachnids, and birds. Development immediately adjacent to Joshua Tree National Park may also be a significant factor in how the park responds to climate change, especially if wildlife corridors that give animals room to roam in order to find food, water, shelter and mates are impeded. Butler concludes that because of these ongoing threats it will be very important for the park to continue to work proactively with all communities on its boundary and within the region to encourage land use and development policies that can help protect the park.

“I think that so much of what has threatened the Joshua Tree National Park in the past is the consequence of people not having visited and experienced its wonder,” says Butler. “A majority of the visitors to the park quickly become desert lovers who appreciate the uniqueness of the landscape and are interested in seeing it protected. They are a key part of the solution by ensuring that this place is preserved and protected for present and future generations.”

Seth Shteir is California desert senior field representative for the National Parks Conservation Association.

*BLM Reopens Parts of Dunes That Had Been Closed For 10 Years

So It’s Back to Court Once Again To Protect The Majestic Algodones Dunes

by Ileene Anderson

The Algodones Dunes, also known as the Imperial Sand Dunes, is North America’s largest active sand dune formation, covering about 200,000 acres in the southeastern corner of Imperial County and barely dipping into Mexico. It provides unique habitat for many imperiled species including the Peirson’s milk vetch (federally threatened), desert tortoise (federally and state threatened), Algodones Dunes sunflower (State endangered), flat-tailed horned lizard (imperiled), several dozen invertebrates that live nowhere else on earth, and the Colorado Desert fringe-toed lizard, which was petitioned for protection under the Endangered Species Act in July 2012. The east side of the Algodones Dunes intercepts the sparse rainfall runoff coming from the Chocolate Mountains to the east, resulting in rich pockets of desert woodland oases that are refugia for numerous migrating birds, burrow deer, and other desert animals.

A relict of the ancient Lake Cahuilla, which dried up after the Pleistocene, is the sand source for the modern day Algodones Dunes. The Salton Sea now covers this former sand source, so little “new” sand is being added. Yet the wind still blows, and effectively it is moving the dunes to the southeast at about a meter per year. Most of the Dunes are public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The Algodones Dunes are a National Natural Landmark and is also considered an Outstanding Natural Area by the BLM.
As much as the Algodones Dunes are an endemic plant and animal hotspot, they are also a mecca for off-road vehicles. During the prime reproductive and growing seasons of the late fall, winter and early spring, up to 200,000 people in off-road vehicles descend upon the Algodones Dunes, most of which are ‘open’ to ORVs. Only 16% of the area is federally designated as wilderness – a designation that does not allow for any motorized access. The Algodones Dunes has also become notorious for off-road mayhem, which results in human deaths annually.

In 2000, Sierra Club joined the Center for Biological Diversity, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), and Desert Survivors in legally challenging management of species protected under the federal Endangered Species Act in the California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA). As a result of that lawsuit, in order to protect the Peirson’s milkvetch and other species, three closures to off-road vehicles were agreed upon between the conservation groups, BLM, and the off-road vehicle groups. They were put in place until the BLM revised the Recreation Area Management Plan (RAMP). These areas include a large central closure of approximately 48,000 acres, a small closure at the north end of the dunes near Mammoth Wash, and a very small closure south of Interstate 8 (which bisects the dunes). Each of these areas was identified for protection of the Peirson’s milkvech. In all, the existing wilderness coupled with these closures, which have been in place since 2000 protected 54% of the landscape from off-road vehicles. The remaining 46% remained open to ORVs.

In 2003, the Center for Biological Diversity, Sierra Club, and others successfully challenged a Bush Administration RAMP that re-opened the approximately 50,000 acres of closures. Also in 2003, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposed critical habitat protection for the Peirson’s milkvetch on over 52,000 acres, but in 2004, ultimately designated only 21,800 acres. By 2006, federal court rulings had kept the closures in place, while directing the BLM to again revise their RAMP. The rulings also directed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to revise the critical habitat designation for the Peirson’s milkvetch. By 2009, the court was satisfied with the paltry 12,105 acres of critical habitat that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had designated for the Peirson’s milkvetch. Finally, in 2012, the BLM released a final RAMP, which re-opened all of the closures – the largest conservation rollback in the California deserts in the last 10 years. It fails to protect all of the Peirson’s milkvetch critical habitat, and it fails to consider a limitation on the number of vehicles on the Algodones Dunes at any one time. The final decision for this ill-conceived RAMP was issued in 2013.

Not only does the flawed RAMP put a long list of imperiled species back in harm’s way, but it is also a blow to sustainable energy planning in the California Desert Conservation Area. Just two days prior to the release of the final decision on the Algodones RAMP, the BLM had assured the public it would take meaningful measures to off-set the impacts of large-scale renewable energy projects in the California Desert Conservation Area. Clearly, reopening previously protected habitat for rare species in an iconic National Natural Landmark to destruction by fossil-fuel guzzling and emission-spewing vehicles misses the mark on every count.

Plants and animals are not the only ones to suffer. Sadly, Imperial County, where the Algodones Dunes are located, has some of the worst air quality in the nation. Dust, also known as particulate matter or PM10, is kicked up by the off-road vehicles as they speed through the Algodones Dunes. Off-road vehicles are also not required to comply with California’s stringent vehicle emission requirements. Once airborne, the small dust particles and exhaust from the off-road vehicles drift into the adjacent communities and exacerbate health related diseases such as asthma in both children and adults.

So the Center for Biological Diversity, Sierra Club, Desert Survivors, and PEER are once again challenging the BLM in court over this faulty plan. The dazzling beauty, the unique plants and animals, and the local community all deserve a more balanced approach to managing the Algodones Dunes, not one that exacerbates air quality problems and destroys rare plants and animals.

Ileene Anderson is a biologist and Public Lands Desert Director for the Center for Biological Diversity. She has worked on Algodones Dunes conservation issues for over 15 years.