← Boiling Point
Boiling Point
The Future of the Colorado River
00:33:33
The Colorado River is shrinking, and the stakes couldn’t be higher for California. Sammy Roth talks with JB Hamby, the state’s lead Colorado River negotiator, about his vision for one of the West’s most important — and most threatened — water sources.
Loading summary
Transcript74 lines
- [00:01]
Sammy Roth
This is an LA Times Studios podcast. My name is Sammy Roth and I'm the climate columnist for the Los Angeles Times. This is boiling point. When J.B. hamby first ran for the board of the Imperial Irrigation district, he was 24 years old, but he knew what he was doing. He'd grown up in the Imperial Valley in California's far southeastern corner along the border with Mexico. JB felt like he was ready for one of the most important, if little known, jobs in the American West. If you've never heard of the Imperial Irrigation District or iid, well, let me fill you in. It's a government agency that historically has had a right to more Colorado river water than the rest of California combined. That's more Colorado river water than the entire state state of Arizona. IID's water is used by a few hundred families to irrigate half a million acres of farmland in the scorching heat of the Sonoran Desert. Those farmers and the Imperial Irrigation District are zealous guardians of their water. When it comes time to elect board members to the iid, the people of the Imperial Valley choose extremely carefully. And back in 2020, they ended up choosing 24 year old JB Hamby. Five years later, JB and his four colleagues on the IID board are helping to shape the future of the Colorado River. The river supplies water to 40 million people and millions of acres of farmland from Los Angeles to Denver to Wyoming. And at the moment, the river is stuck in a 25 year mega drought with climate change playing a major role. If there's going to be enough water to go around, the biggest users of that water need to cut back. That means places like Imperial, which also means everyone in the Colorado River Basin is looking at the IID Board of Directors. That's especially true for J.B. hamby. He's had a pretty meteoric rise in Western water politics. After his election to iid, he was quickly appointed to the Colorado River Board of California. In 2023, he became chair of the board. That means he's California's lead negotiator in interstate Colorado river negotiations. And right now, those negotiations are heating up, if you'll pardon the climate change pun. When I first met Hamby, he was blunt and outspoken. He had a habit of occasionally pissing people off, but his political instincts were sharp. Part of how he got himself elected in 2020 was by attacking a longtime IID over something the Guy had done 16 years earlier. A lot of folks in Imperial thought the attacks weren't fair, but they worked. Since then, Hamby has dialed back his rhetoric. He's made a lot of friends in Imperial and across the Southwest, and now he's got a key role to play on the Colorado. Over the last few weeks, there have been news reports suggesting that Hamby and the other state's negotiators are making progress ahead of a key deadline next year. But nothing is finished. Okay, now that you've got the background, here's my conversation with J.B. hamby.
- [03:45]
Southern California Edison Representative
During one of the most severe windstorms Southern California experienced in more than a decade, the Palisades and Eaton fires ignited, leaving heartbreaking losses in our communities. Now, as we build back, we're building stronger, cleaner and more resilient in communities most vulnerable to dangerous weather conditions and wildfires. Southern California Edison is placing power lines underground, hardening the electric system by installing wires with protective coating, and adding advanced technology to help keep communities safe. So when Southern California faces the next storm, the next most severe event copied.
- [04:33]
J.B. Hamby
Helicopters structures adjacent here at Pipe Road.
- [04:37]
Southern California Edison Representative
We'll be ready. Learn more@sce.com disasterrecovery Today is the worst.
- [04:45]
Abby
Day of Abby's life. The 17 year old cradles her newborn son in her arms.
- [04:51]
Sammy Roth
They all saw how much I loved him.
- [04:53]
Abby
They didn't have to take him from me. Between 1945 and the early 1970s, families ship their pregnant teenage daughters to maternity homes and force them to secretly place their babies for adoption in hidden corners across America. It's still happening.
- [05:10]
Sammy Roth
My parents had me locked up in the godparent home against my will. They worked with them to manipulate me and to steal my son away from me.
- [05:17]
Abby
The godparent home is the brainchild of controversial preacher Jerry Falwell, the father of the modern Evangelical rite and the founder of Liberty University, where powerful men, emboldened by their faith, determine who gets to be a parent and who must give their child away. Follow Liberty Lost on the Wondery app or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [05:45]
Sammy Roth
Jb, thanks very much for being with us on the Boiling Point podcast.
- [05:48]
J.B. Hamby
Thanks for having me, Sammy.
- [05:49]
Sammy Roth
So we're here to talk about the Colorado river and threats to the Colorado river and hopefully how to resolve those threats. But want to start by asking you about a really narrow slice of that, which is solar farms on agricultural lands. The board that you're on, the Imperial Irrigation District. You guys voted a couple of weeks ago to say that you don't want to see any more solar projects built on irrigated agricultural lands in the Imperial Valley. You took that vote. I wrote a column about it a couple Weeks ago, which we'll put in the show notes so folks can go back and read. I'm hoping you can talk a little bit about why you took that vote, why you don't want to see more solar and Imperial. Because I think that on the surface, there are folks who would look at that and say, gee, solar is sort of an easy way to say, okay, there's going to be less water to go around. The Colorado river is shrinking. Why not put some solar on some of these lands, still do something valuable with them and not use as much water? What's the thinking on saying, no, we actually don't want to see more solar?
- [06:49]
J.B. Hamby
So a little bit of an introduction is we're great at two things. One is being sunny and also growing food. And those two things go pretty well together.
- [06:59]
Sammy Roth
I can confirm it's very sunny in Imperial. It's. It's hot.
- [07:03]
J.B. Hamby
Yes, hot, ripe for a sunburn. SPF as high as you can go is pretty nice. So. And we've been growing food in the Imperial Valley. Next year is the 125th anniversary of water making its way from the Colorado river to the Imperial Valley, Turning what was previously a desolate, empty desert into some of the most productive agricultural lands in the country and in the world. Half a million acres, growing everything from A to Z 12 months of the year. So that agricultural land is very productive, and it's something that we want to protect. And there's lots of ample opportunity to develop solar in other places, Other undeveloped desert lands that have minimal ecological value in places that would ensure that we could maintain our agricultural productivity. At this point, there's been 13,000 acres of solar that's been installed in the valley on top of what was for over 100 years, productive agricultural land. None of that solar production actually benefits the local area. It's really all exported for use in coastal urban areas, areas. So I think there's a real problem and a real tension where productive agricultural lands that are the bedrock of our economy or the heritage of the area being basically plowed under to replace it with black glass as far as the eye can see for tens of thousands of acres, all to benefit the needs of other areas and reducing the overall quality of life and ours.
- [08:40]
Sammy Roth
I hear you on all that. I'll push back just a little bit. You said there've been 13,000 acres developed so far. That's out of about, what, somewhere between 450,000 or 500,000 acres of ag lands. Am I getting that somewhere right?
- [08:53]
J.B. Hamby
Yeah, that's right.
- [08:54]
Sammy Roth
You know, is There not somewhat more room for solar. It is a very sunny place. It's a pretty small fraction of the land so far they are producing or will be as tax exemptions come off the books, a lot of property tax revenues. The county's charging a pretty high fee per acre for projects that go into production. Is there no benefit to Imperial County? Is there not more space to do some of this?
- [09:18]
J.B. Hamby
Certainly there's ample opportunity in many hundreds of thousands of acres that are in the outer edges of Imperial county. Areas that are ripe for that sort of solar development. That wouldn't pose a challenge to the existing economy and communities in Imperial Valley.
- [09:33]
Sammy Roth
I think I'm going to want to circle back to this again, maybe at the end, but first, just perhaps to get a little better grounding in what the Imperial Valley is and what this community is like. Because probably most folks listening to this conversation aren't that familiar with it. You've talked about how agriculture and farming is really what makes this place what it is. Talk a little bit about what makes the Imperial Valley so different. Even among farming communities, even among these sort of agricultural heartlands in California. This place is really at the center of all of these battles over the Colorado river and over water. It's even hard for me to articulate after having spent a lot of time reporting on the Colorado river, but. But you're from there. What makes the Imperial Valley different? How would you even begin to describe that?
- [10:20]
J.B. Hamby
There's a lot of things that make it very unique and different. I'll just start with a smattering. So Imperial county is the sixth highest producing agricultural county in the United States. The Imperial Valley is entirely below sea level. It's in a desert. It is one of the earliest and first uses of Colorado river water at any sort of scale. And everything that we see the development of the Colorado river today, Hoover Dam, all of the communities throughout the Southwest dependent on this, on the Colorado river as a supply really traces its roots to the Imperial Valley. With those early developments. There was a number of folks at the turn of the last century who got together and saw that there was an opportunity to take this Colorado river water, divert it to this, this low lying valley that was really just desert and create half a million acres or even more. They thought at the time of highly productive farmland that could settle as part of this Jeffersonian reclamation ideal, settled families and produce incredible communities out of what was formerly desert.
- [11:33]
Sammy Roth
And you know, the, I don't know if I want to say the downside of this, but the sort of inevitable consequence of this is that you guys use a lot of water. I mean, this is where the Colorado river negotiations and debates come into play. I was just. I've got the numbers here in another window on my screen. The Colorado river compact, this famous 1922 agreement that is now kind of up for grabs in these interstate negotiations. And you're doing these negotiations for California divvied up the river into, what was it, 17.5 million acre feet between. Or is it 18.5 between the states and Mexico? Thereabouts, something like that. Some around those. And the Imperial Valley had this water. Right. Of 3.1 million acre feet, which is like 15 or 20%, close to a fifth. That's a ton of water. So when these negotiations are happening, obviously that makes you guys sort of at the center of attention. Right. Because just so much of the water use goes to the fields in Imperial.
- [12:32]
J.B. Hamby
Yeah, certainly Imperial Valley and any of our agencies in California use a good chunk of the water that's available to us under various laws, compacts, contracts, agreements on the Colorado River. But all of us in California put that water to good use and contribute to keeping grocery aisles stocked or keeping faucets going throughout for 19 million people in Southern California. And certainly the question of the Imperial Valley and water use. Imperial Valley uses a good chunk of water and produces a huge amount of agricultural produce as a result. But also, no one on the Colorado river does quite as much to conserve as Imperial Valley does. And despite the fact that Imperial Valley.
- [13:15]
Sammy Roth
One could say no one has as much conservation to do, just to be fair. I mean, you have the highest number.
- [13:20]
J.B. Hamby
Yeah, certainly. And we've got. We hear oftentimes in Colorado river discussions about why folks can't or won't or it's not, not possible to do conservation. And certainly that's not the case in the Imperial Valley who's taken a very aggressive and ambitious effort to conserve Colorado river water and to protect the Colorado river system, as we've been hitting some really critical drought periods in the past several years.
- [13:46]
Sammy Roth
Let's talk about what's gotten us to this point. So you had the Colorado river compact in 1922 divided up the river between the seven states and Mexico. Why are we now at a point where. Where this agreement is in danger, where you and the other negotiators and the federal government are, you know, battling this out behind closed doors, you know, fiercely trying to renegotiate this agreement. What. What has gotten us from 1922, and especially more recently, to the point where there's less water to go around, and everyone has to figure this out, why is this such a crisis?
- [14:21]
J.B. Hamby
So the Colorado River Compact was the first ever compact over a river in the United States. The U.S. constitution allows states to enter into basically, treaties among individual states that are then approved by the US Congress in 1922. The states of the Colorado River Basin, and I'll divide them here as they did then, into two groups. The first is the upper basin states. That's where most of the precipitation falls as snow in Colorado, Wyoming mostly, but as well as Utah and New Mexico. Then you have users or states, what are that are called the lower basin states, and that's California, Arizona and Nevada. States that are pretty much desertous, but are very dependent and develop uses to Colorado river water very early. And then we have Mexico, who's also.
- [15:10]
Sammy Roth
You guys, being some of the earliest in Imperial, which is why you have that senior water, right, as you call it.
- [15:15]
J.B. Hamby
Exactly. And that was very material to how the Colorado river Compact of 1922 came to be, because you had the Imperial Valley, who started to develop very early uses and very early rights, very significant scale to Colorado river water, followed shortly by users in what would become the fledgling Metropolitan Water District of Southern California to serve the larger LA metro area particularly. There was a case in the Supreme Court that decided, well, if you have this thing called the doctrine of prior appropriation, first in time, first in right. If you have that within your individual state, it also applies between states. The concern of folks in Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico and Colorado was these folks in California, in the Imperial Valley and in the LA area are going to develop the rights and the uses to Colorado river faster than we can and basically develop rights to the whole Colorado river downstream before we can develop any uses of it upstream. The essential compromise in the compact was the lower basin would get a certain volume of water, and in exchange, the upper basin would assure and maintain the ability to develop future uses, even though they would be slower to develop and come online.
- [16:35]
Sammy Roth
So all those states up there basically agree that we'll get to use a certain amount down here, but they also get a certain amount up there. They split the river in half is sort of what happened. So why didn't it work?
- [16:46]
J.B. Hamby
So fundamentally, what was happening at the time that the Colorado River Compact was drawn up was a particularly wet period of time over the couple of decades preceding that agreement. So they thought they were still leaving some water on the table to be divvied up later. Turns out the projections of what they thought they would have in the future was actually Much less than it ended up being. So what we're dealing with now is the expiration of some interim rules that were put together in 2007 to how to divvy up shortages and come up with a workable arrangement that was meant to last us for 20 years.
- [17:22]
Sammy Roth
So some of this has to do with climate change and mega drought too. Right. Because, I mean, the river is just getting even, you know, even smaller and less. Less water than you thought there was going to be.
- [17:32]
J.B. Hamby
Exactly. Over the last 25 years, we've seen really declining flows on the Colorado River. Climate change has really reduced the available supply. We're even seeing scenarios, particularly in the upper basin states, where the precipitation begins as snowfall, where the snow sublimates, it doesn't even go from solid to liquid, it goes from solid to gas and goes back in the atmospher. Or the really big challenge is that the mountains in the upper basin and the Rocky Mountains get baked so dry and so hot in the summer months that finally, when the snow does fall, even at normal amounts, it never actually ends up making its way into the Colorado river because it gets sucked up by the dry sponge that is the Rocky Mountains. Wow.
- [18:16]
Sammy Roth
So my basic understanding, and tell me if I'm getting this right, is that the big sticking point between the lower basin states, one of whom California, you represent in these negotiations, and the upper basin states has been that historically the lower basin states have used more than they were legally allocated 100 years ago, and that the upper basin states have never used as much as they were historically legally allocated. And that that's been a big sticking point that they've wanted to maintain the right to continue to, you know, use more if they want to. Is that roughly accurate, do you think?
- [18:51]
J.B. Hamby
Yeah, those are, I think, some of many different perspectives on how to view this current problem in terms of equity and fairness and so on. The real sticking point that we're faced with at this point is we've got climate change, we've got continued drought, but at the same time, we have a whole system that's been built upon this Colorado river compact that requires the upper basin to assure basic water supplies to the lower basin in Mexico.
- [19:18]
Sammy Roth
Right. Although, as I understand it, the upper basin folks would probably say in practice, if it came to that, and there wasn't enough water to deliver, that they don't actually have such an obligation.
- [19:27]
J.B. Hamby
And these are the very sorts of debates that we're trying to avoid having in front of the Supreme Court if we were to end up in a legal dispute about the compact. If we can't come to a collaborative, constructive agreement on how to manage the river, that's where we would end up. And the court would take some time, require a special master. And if it passed as prologue here, the longest case in the history of the United States supreme court was Arizona versus California. That first got started in 1952.
- [19:57]
Sammy Roth
This was a Colorado river water rights case. For those who are unfamiliar. Exactly.
- [20:01]
J.B. Hamby
And it didn't close until finally. Until 2006. So those are the sorts of wait.
- [20:06]
Sammy Roth
How many years did that take?
- [20:10]
J.B. Hamby
Well, at least the first tranche of it. It took about a little over a decade. Opened in 1952, closed somewhere around 1963 or 4 for the first chapter, basically the most important one. But then closing out the whole case took until 2006 to wrap up. A number of reasons we don't have.
- [20:29]
Sammy Roth
That kind of time to deal with the problems on the Colorado river because it's. That's an important water supply for the Southwest. Can't spend decades at the Supreme Court.
- [20:37]
J.B. Hamby
Exactly. So what this really requires is everybody has a theory, everybody feels that they have an entitlement that shouldn't or must not be touched. But the reality of the situation is we have a declining resource that is the Colorado River. We need to manage it carefully and we need to manage it conservatively in a way that we don't continue this trend that we've seen over the last 20, 25 years, which is demands that outstrip supply, but that requires everyone to participate in reducing demands. Not one sector, not one industry, not one part of the basin or one state or another. It's going to require everybody to have to contribute. And that ultimately is some of the biggest challenges that we're experiencing.
- [21:21]
Sammy Roth
And therefore a few more solar farms would not be so bad.
- [21:24]
J.B. Hamby
One can make that case. I think that certainly what we've seen in the past few years in the case of Imperial Valley, rather than turning off agricultural productivity with the significant economic impacts that that has on the valley, is programs like the deficit irrigation program. That's a program, that's a voluntary program that incentivizes farmers to turn off. Actually IAD will come out and lock a farmer's gate for a 45 day period in the summer months when water use increases and productivity declines a little bit. Farmers are able to get some economic relief, particularly when the markets are bad and can deliver quite a slug of water into Lake Mead.
- [22:04]
Sammy Roth
So the farmland doesn't actually come out of production permanently. And I was a little bit messing with you with that question. So thank you for taking it seriously.
- [22:11]
J.B. Hamby
Yes.
- [22:15]
Sammy Roth
We'll be back after a quick break.
- [22:25]
Southern California Edison Representative
During one of the most severe windstorms Southern California experienced in more than a decade, the Palisades and Eaton fires ignited, leaving heartbreaking losses in our communities. Now, as we build back, we're building stronger, cleaner, and more resilient in communities most vulnerable to dangerous weather conditions and wildfires. Southern California Edison is placing power lines underground, hardening the electric system by installing wires with protective coating and adding advanced technology to help keep communities safe. So when Southern California faces the next storm, the next most severe event, we'll be ready. Learn more@sce.com disasterrecovery Today is the worst.
- [23:25]
Abby
Day of Abby's life. The 17 year old cradles her newborn son in her arms.
- [23:31]
Sammy Roth
They all saw how much I loved him.
- [23:33]
Abby
They didn't have to take him from me. Between 1945 and the early 1970s, families shipped their pregnant teenage daughters to maternity homes and forced them to secretly place their babies for adoption in hidden corners across America. It's still happening.
- [23:50]
Sammy Roth
My parents had me locked up in the godparent home against my will. They worked with them to manipulate me and to steal my son away from me.
- [23:58]
Abby
The godparent home is the brainchild of controversial preacher Jerry Falwell, the father of the modern evangelical Rite and the founder of Liberty University, where powerful men, emboldened by their faith, determine who gets to be a parent and who must give their child away. Follow Liberty Lost on the Wondery app or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [24:26]
Sammy Roth
So talk a little bit. There's been some hope and some optimism lately on these Colorado river negotiations. You know, I'm sure there's stuff that you gotta leave in the negotiating room, but talk a little bit about what can be said publicly right now, what's being contemplated between the states that's making everyone hopeful at the moment.
- [24:42]
J.B. Hamby
Basic idea is rather than trying to litigate out our individual points of view about what the 1922 compact means and what responsibilities or obligations, et cetera, exist from one set of users to another. Instead, let's figure out an equitable way to manage the river moving forward. We know that we have less water available on the Colorado River. It's going to require reductions all of the time. The essential idea and framework is the Colorado River. Highly variable, but let's base our operations off of on an annual basis. Take the average of what the the natural flow, how much water the Colorado river generates on an annual basis. Average that over the last three years based on that three year Average release a decided and negotiated percent of the natural flow and let that water out of Lake Powell through Glen Canyon Dam for delivery to users in the lower basin and Mexico. So the essential compromise there is users in the lower basin would have to live within whatever the means that the river is providing under this negotiated percentage and in the upper basin, assure that delivery of that water, either from storage in Lake Powell or other reservoirs in the upper basin, or if that's insufficient, by undertaking conservation or curtailment activities to ensure that that delivery, that requirement is made to the lower basin states in Mexico.
- [26:11]
Sammy Roth
So when I first started reading about these, you know, these whispers of a deal coming out, it seemed pretty hopeful. I also read a blog post the other day by John Flack, writer and scholar out of the University of New Mexico. I'm sure you read his blog as well. Ink Stain. It's excellent for folks following the Colorado River. He was hopeful as well at first, and then he started to seem less hopeful. He made the point. It's like, well, in theory, this is a great idea. In practice, this key sticking point is going to be what is that actual percentage. So one that's a really big sticking point of what percentage of water in the river actually has to get to delivered. My guess is the upper basin is going to want it to be lower rather than what's on the higher end there. Then John's second point, based on reporting he had seen from comments from some of the upper basin folks, the Colorado river lead commissioner as well, who seems to be the main negotiator for the upper basin, what happens if the upper basin is using all of its water and doesn't actually feel like it has the water to deliver that percentage that it's required, Is this just going to end up moving the same argument to a new legal framework? If their percentage tells them, okay, you're supposed to deliver X amount of water over this year based on what's in the river, and you feel you can't deliver this much water because all of your users are using this much, your farmers in your cities, what then happens? Is there going to be the same conflict? So I guess my question for you is, how confident are you at this point that something really sustainable can be worked out based on this natural flow framework? Is this really going to make things better or are we still going to end up just having the same fights?
- [27:50]
J.B. Hamby
In particular, the real challenge is this. In the lower basin in Mexico, we're used to managing reductions and making them happen to live within an increasingly reduced supply. The Basic element here is then when that is insufficient, then we together as a basin need to do even more. And that includes the four upper basin states. So I think what John was pointing out in his observations or his concerns about hope in this process is that this basin wide problem is going to require basin wide solutions. And that doesn't mean just the lower basin states in Mexico, reducing use uses where a majority of the population, a majority of the economic activity, a majority of the agricultural production exists in the lower basin in Mexico. But the upper basin does have a responsibility to participate as part of a larger package here and does require the upper basin to on occasion, conserve water. But ultimately everybody's going to have to participate moving forward. And that's going to require our friends, particularly in the upper basin, particularly in the state of Colorado, who are very good at identifying why they have challenges and why things are difficult or why sometimes they shouldn't have to do something. But the only way that we're going to get to an enduring sustainable agreement on the Colorado river that manages the supplies that we have that Mother Nature provides and not overtaxing those resources and getting away from litigation and ensuring that we get a sustainable agreement is going to require everybody to participate.
- [29:32]
Sammy Roth
I think I just want to sort of ask you maybe a little bit of a values question here and tie it back to the Imperial Valley to close this out. I think, God, I don't have the numbers offhand, so I'm going to ballpark this a little bit. I want to say the numbers I've seen are that something like half or close to half of water use in the Colorado River Basin goes to grow cattle feed. Does that sound right? Does that sound similar to what you've heard or seen?
- [29:59]
J.B. Hamby
Seems ballparkish.
- [30:01]
Sammy Roth
Yeah, I think that's what I've seen. And like you said, probably higher percentages outside of the Imperial Valley, but still, you guys grow a lot of alfalfa and Imperial, a lot of vegetables too. I certainly like to eat vegetables in the winter, so thank you for that. But I've toured alfalfa farms in the Imperial Valley and I see all the cattle feed that gets grown there as well. You know, and you, you referred earlier to, you know, when we were out talking about solar, to, you know, undeveloped desert lands with minimal ecological value. Which is, which is a comment that I think a lot of conservation activists and biologists would probably take issue with. There are definitely a lot of desert lands, public lands in Imperial county and elsewhere, with quite significant biological value for, for endangered species and plants and Part of big interconnected ecosystems that wildlife move across. So I guess I'm kind of putting those things together because I'm just thinking in terms of really big picture. The values of different landscapes, the values of what we use water for, what we use land for. I guess I'm really curious how you think about those things, because I think it's all connected. I mean, we have these decisions to make about what we're putting water to use for and why, what the effects are on climate change. We've got to build a lot of solar and a lot of renewable energy. I mean, there are all of these really big interconnected systems. So when we think about where does the renewable energy go, where does our water go, what do we use lands for? Those decisions can't all be made in silos. They're all made together. And I think a place like the Imperial Valley is really interesting because all of these different forces kind of collide in one place. You're one of the sunniest places in the country. You're one of the best places for growing food. You use some of the most water in the region. You know, how do you evaluate all of those different factors and forces? Because they're very personal for Imperial. I mean, you guys certainly aren't immune to the effects of climate change. If it gets too much hotter in Imperial, that's certainly not going to help. How do you think about all that? I know I'm sort of dumping a lot on your plate right there, but I imagine these are questions that you think about.
- [32:09]
J.B. Hamby
Yeah, it's a good question. I think the answer is, holistically, we have to view all of these different competing values and interests and goals and threats and challenges and try to balance them in an effective and coherent way. So certainly, though, Imperial Valley has priority rights on Colorado river and really doesn't necessarily take a shortage until the river is practically dried up. Nonetheless, you have the Imperial Valley producing the great value of agricultural products that we all rely on all year round in this country and in the world. We also have the need for solar to meet the state's goals and climate goals and increasing demand for power across the state and country. And certainly this is a sunny place, but we don't necessarily need to just limit ourselves to eliminating the place that we grow food. So I think to that question, on the placement of solar, we can do multiple things. We can preserve agricultural land to ensure that we have a sustainable food supply. We can conserve Colorado river water and meet the needs of this declining resource. We can ensure that there's appropriate sharing of the reductions that are required, while also protecting the needs and rights of individual communities. And we can assure that we're developing the energy needs for today and tomorrow while at the various communities, while at the same time not stamping out one in particular.
- [33:42]
Sammy Roth
I'll maybe just put this one to you point blank. Could you grow some less alfalfa and put some solar on those lands and save some water and save some of the desert and do some solar that way? I mean, do we need quite so much cattle feed? Cattle's a big climate contributor too, by the way. But that's a whole separate kind of contentious conversation.
- [33:59]
J.B. Hamby
Yeah, I mean, I was just reading an article the other day about Americans and our protein fad that's going on right now. And one of the biggest new demands for dairy production that's keeping the dairy industry thriving is for whey powder and whey protein, for protein shakes and other things, and, and also the default setting for a cappuccino when I'm at Starbucks or something is. Is not oat milk. It is. It is. Would you like whole milk? And you can always change that. So the need for dairy, whether it's for any of those things or hamburgers or ice cream, which I enjoy and have had for the last couple days here, those demands still exist. And if we want those things, alfalfa meets those needs. Nonetheless, we can still maintain those needs, but also have flexible programs like the Imperial Irrigation District has piloted very well to meet the near term needs on the Colorado river through this deficit irrigation program. Keep those forage fields in production, keep these communities thriving, keep these service economies going by idling these crops for a limited duration, generating a good chunk of conserved water without basically permanently eliminating valuable and finite agricultural lands which we need to protect, whether it's for forage or any other crop.
- [35:25]
Sammy Roth
Do you think the Imperial Valley will look totally the same 30 years from now, or do you think there will be anything significantly different.
- [35:33]
J.B. Hamby
Since the beginning of the Valley125 years ago next year, the valley, the only thing that's been consistent is change. And so I think what we'll see whether it's in the next 20, 30, 50 years, is there'll be continuous change in what we grow, how we grow it, the manner in which we're actively conserving water to meet the needs of our community in the river. The world continues to change and it's hard to predict, but certainly the Imperial Valley will continue to exist and be a strong producer of food and energy for our region. Our state and the country.
- [36:10]
Sammy Roth
Jb, thanks very much for being with us on the Boiling Point podcast.
- [36:13]
J.B. Hamby
Thanks Sammy. Appreciate it.
- [36:20]
Sammy Roth
Next week we'll be continuing the Colorado river river conversation with the journalist Jonathan P. Thompson. He writes the Land Desk newsletter and he was previously Editor in Chief of High Country News. Jonathan's home base is Colorado, and as it happens, I'll have just gotten back from a hiking trip there. So I'm really looking forward to asking Jonathan about a lot of the stuff he covers, especially water, but also public lands and wildfires. Thank you for listening to Boiling Point. I'm your host, Sammy Roth. My producers are Mary Knoff and Jonathan Shifflett. Sound design and original music by Jonathan Shiflett. Elijah Wolfson is our editor. Denise Callahan is our Studio manager. Ben Church is our Production manager. Nick Norton is our engineer. Special thanks to LA Times Studio President Anna Magzagna, President and Chief Operating Officer of the Los Angeles Times, Chris Argentieri and Executive Editor of the Los Angeles Times, Terry Tang. Boiling Point is executive produced by Darius Derekshon and created by me, Sami Roth.
- [37:34]
Abby
Today is the worst day of Abby's life. The 17 year old cradles her newborn son in her arms.
- [37:41]
Sammy Roth
They all saw how much I loved him.
- [37:43]
Abby
They didn't have to take him from me. Between 1945 and the early 1970s, families shipped their pregnant teenage daughters to maternity homes and forced them to secretly place their babies for adoption in hidden corners across America. It's still happening.
- [38:01]
Sammy Roth
My parents had me locked up in the godparent home against my will. They worked with them to manipulate me and to steal my son away from me.
- [38:08]
Abby
The godparent home is the brainchild of controversial preacher Jerry Falwell, the father of the modern evangelical right and the founder of Liberty University, where powerful men, emboldened by their faith, determine who gets to be a parent and who must give their child away. Follow Liberty Lost on the Wondery app or wherever you get your podcasts. My name is Madison McGee. From LA Times Studios comes its latest series, LA Crimes. From deep dives into the Menendez brothers to conversations about why Bravo TV seems to be a hotbed of white collar criminals. We'll cover it all. We'll speak with LA Times reporters and others in the true crime industry to put a lens not just on these cases, but on our own culture's fascination with them and what that says about us. Tune in every Wednesday wherever you stream your podcast.