[env-trinity] New Study Finds the Idea of Logging for Water is All Washed Up

[Tom Stokely]

http://mavensnotebook.com/2016/01/18/news-worth-noting-state-water-board-issues-first-temp-permit-to-capture-rainy-season-high-flows-new-study-finds-the-idea-of-logging-for-water-is-all-washed-up-legal-alert-groundwater-pumping-fees/

New Study Finds the Idea of Logging for Water is All Washed Up
“Old wine in a new bottle”
Environment Now released a new study today evaluating the idea of using logging to increase water flows from forests in California, and found extensive problems with this approach.“While the idea of using logging to increase water flows can seem enticing, especially during times of drought, time and again this claim has turned out to be ill-founded,” said Douglas Bevington, forest program director of Environment Now. “The latest versions popping up in California are just old wine in a new bottle.”These claims are examined in the new study written by hydrologist Jonathan Rhodes and fisheries scientist Christopher Frissell, and funded by Environment Now, a family foundation that supports water and forest protection in California. The study, titled “The High Costs and Low Benefits of Attempting to Increase Water Yield by Forest Removal in the Sierra Nevada,” examines the effects of logging on water supply, the resulting harm to streams and wetlands, and alternative ways to improve water flows.Based on the results of more than 230 scientific studies and reports, Rhodes and Frissell show that the effects of logging on water flows are often negligible, nonexistent, or negative, and even in the more optimistic scenarios, the potential effects are small, short-lived, and ill-timed.Rhodes and Frissell analyze eleven ways that claims of increased water flows from logging are problematic or overstated. For example, Rhodes and Frissell found that in the majority of watersheds examined in a recent report by The Nature Conservancy touting water increases from logging, the available scientific information actually shows that the proposed logging would produce no increase in water yield (see p. 11 in Rhodes and Frissell study).The findings of the Rhodes and Frissell study are particularly timely in light of recent efforts to have California water users pay for Sierra Nevada logging, based on the idea that it would increase water supplies. Rhodes and Frissell caution that “Assessments of attempts to increase water yield on public lands have consistently noted that it is very unlikely that any potential changes in water yield would be measurable at the scale of larger watersheds” (p. 25).Furthermore, logging can produce substantial harms to downstream water users. As Rhodes and Frissell note, “Forest removal would have several impacts that would incur significant costs for downstream water supplies and associated infrastructure and activities.  These costs would be pervasive and enduring” (p. 57). In total, they examine nine types of negative effects stemming from logging done to increase water flows, such as increasing siltation (dirty water) and contributing to downstream flooding during wet seasons.Finally, Rhodes and Frissell explore several alternatives to logging that can reliably contribute to improved flows during drier times when additional water is most beneficial; are self sustaining; do not incur high or enduring environmental costs; provide an array of ecosystem benefits; and contribute to watershed resiliency in the face of climate change.As Douglas Bevington summarized, “If one genuinely seeks to improve water flows in the Sierra Nevada, rather than simply trying to find a new justification for logging, these alternatives offer a better way for us to direct our resources. Using logging to increase water flows is still a bad idea whose time has not come.” 
The Rhodes and Frissell study is available at: http://environmentnow.org/pdf/Rhodes-and-Frissell-water-logging-report.pdf

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20160119/5ed53038/attachment.html>