I had a lucid dream the other night that is perhaps writing about. It started in a new mountain cabin being built by a friend of mine that died last fall. He wasn’t there, but I knew who had built it. It was a nice “woodsy” sort of place, with stairs leading up to a sleeping loft. I was casually inspecting the workmanship, thinking that he had done a better job than I would have expected (I wasn’t aware of him having woodworking skills or experience), but the design of the stairs was not so great. No handrail, not a big enough landing at the bottom, too steep – that sort of thing. While looking the place over my brother (who died about two years ago) came in to visit and we discussed the building a bit. He “comes to visit” me now and then, so that wasn’t really so out of the ordinary – but it did help me realize that I was in a dream and in the realm of the dead. My brother told me that our friend Rocke was in the other room if I wanted to go talk to him, which I did. He was in his old comfortable easy chair, just kind of chilling out. He seemed quite pleased that I can come to visit, and then told me about the heart attack that killed him. He described it as mostly a lot of pressure, not much pain, and he wasn’t frightened because he was ready for something to come along at some point. He seemed quite content and in good sprites (pun intended). About that time a young girl (perhaps five years old) came into the room to talk to him. He excused himself to give her his full attention, so I said my goodbyes and added that I looked forward to seeing him again. He said that was unlikely, he just stopped by for a little bit to let me know that all is well with him.
So there, yet another odd dream about meeting up with lost friends and relatives. I have had these after each of the most important people in my life died. My older brother, my mother, my father, and the brother that was in this dream. I suppose it is all in my head, just my mind saying goodbye to loved ones – but it is always so comforting to see them, get a chance to say my goodbyes without too much drama happening, and that they seem at peace (or happy) with the situation. These dreams aren’t “normal” fleeting dreams where things keep changing and all that. They are solid, lucid, full color dreams that I recall for many years afterward. The first that I had with my brother included being in a rose garden, smelling the strong bouquet of the flowers. Since then I have heard “dream experts” claim that it is impossible to smell in dreams – I know that is in fact false because I did it.
I don’t put too much stock on these dreams. I don’t think that I am somehow talking to the dead, but I don’t discount that possibility either. Whatever is happening is a “real” experience, one that I like and helps me accept the passing of loved ones. Is the event somehow an experience of a “real” thing? Who knows, and I don’t think it actually matters much. I am certain that our experiences of life are by and large dreams that we create in our mind’s eye – so these aren’t all that much different no matter how I consider them.
I had an interesting, and confusing, experience earlier this week. I was sitting in my home office working on a project at my desk when a stranger appeared in my window asking for assistance. My home is located in the middle of a very large agricultural area in California, the closest “town” (of about 20 people) is located five miles away – it is where my post-office box is located (we are too far out in the unpopulated rural area to get postal delivery). There aren’t many (any) strangers wandering by out here. My office window opens directly onto the front porch, so anyone going to the front door passes with about five feet from me. It is extremely rare for anyone to come to the front door, so it is always a bit of a surprise when they do. This time I say a guy walk by my window and assumed it was an Amazon delivery guy or something like that. But it wasn’t.
The young man standing at my window asking for assistance appeared to be perhaps in his 20’s. He was pretty scruffy, bedraggled, and possibly “dangerous”. However, there we were so I talked to him. He said that he had gone to a local Indian Casino with a buddy the previous evening. He went into the casino, leaving his friend with the car. When he came out again the car and his friend were gone. So then he was stuck about 20 miles from town, without a car, without any money, and without a cell phone. Nobody besides his friend knew where he was, and he didn’t know his way around the neighborhood (or this part of the Sacramento Valley), not even knowing how far he was from his home. So he did what he did, which was to start walking toward his home (hopefully). He said he had walked all night, and all morning until finding me at around 2:00 pm.
He looked like he had just walked for hours in the 100 degree heat. It is only 15 miles, so even if he only walked 2 miles per hour it is only 7 or 8 hours, so I assumed it felt like walking for 16 hours. I suspect he actually slept under a bush or something some of that time. In any case, it was too hot to send him back out to continue walking and he was too scruffy (and potentially dangerous) to invite in (especially in these times of the pandemic). He was trying to figure out how to get the rest of the way home, about 60 miles on country roads. So that brought me to the question of “what do I do now?”
I thought about calling emergency services to get him some help. Being on the local fire department, I knew that would bring fireman and at least two big fire trucks – impressive, but would do no good. It would also eventually bring a local sheriff – who would probably take him to some sort of holding facility until such time that they decided that he was safe to let go. They would let him out, putting him ten more miles from home but still without money or transportation.
There aren’t any public transportation services, such as buses, anywhere around here so I couldn’t give him 20 dollars and tell him to get a bus. I suppose I could pay a taxi to take him home, costing at least $150, perhaps more.
I asked him to sit on a bench on my front porch to wait for a little while I thought about it and finished a project I was working on. My wife gave him some sandwiches and fruit (and the rest of my bag of Cheetos!!). I finished up my project in about 30 minutes and went to check on him. He seemed alright, polite and friendly. So I decided to give a ride home (a three hour round trip for me). It went fine and we shared stories along the way. His story of his life was a troubled one. His mother is in prison, he lives with his older brother, his car broke down and he has no money or income so it stays that way. His “work” seems to be a little gardening for people now and then and searching for gold in the Feather River. Neither sounded particularly lucrative. I left him with a few dollars that I had in my wallet – which probably went for beer. Now I will need to get a covid test in a couple of days
So there I was sitting in my office, wondering what the proper and compassionate thing to do might be. Was taking him home the correct choice? I felt like I was putting myself in harm’s way by doing that, but also felt like at some point you just do that sort of thing. I did it fairly regularly as a volunteer fireman – doing dangerous things for total strangers for no pay is part of that job. I asked my wife is she was good with me taking the chance, and she was – so we were sort of partners on this choice. I thought about what an old friend of mine that died last year would have done – he would have done what I did. Was giving him money helpful? Or did that just turn into a hangover? Maybe that is out of my hands – I offered help, if he accepted it as help that’s good, I hope it wasn’t leading him into a bad thing.
This experience reminded me once again that it is such a sad situation when there are so many young people in a similar situation everywhere you look. Homeless folks, people with homes but not enough income or potential for the future, people couch surfing as a way of living. I wonder if we (Society) are going to find a solution, or will this just keep getting worse? It looks to me like we have more people than jobs – so maybe there is no solution. That situation is getting worse as automation continues to increase. Right now there are lots of jobs open because of covid, but nobody is taking them I suppose in part because it is dangerous to do so, it is more fun to not work, and welfare might be sufficient to get along without working. The Federal government was providing assistance of up to $300 a week since last December, ending in three days from now on September 4. I suppose you could live on $300 a week ($16,000 a year), but not comfortably. This is the equivalent of $7.50 a hour and doesn’t get you very far. (For comparison, the poverty level in California is $12,500 a year for a single person.) There are other sources of income, such as food stamps, that help with this so perhaps it is workable. Cutting off that flow of Federal money in three days is going to make this a pretty tough time. I don’t think many people avoid working because their life is so cushy living on the dole. However, perhaps it is not very enticing to go to work when the pay for working is below the poverty line – and just cuts off some of the other benefits.
It doesn’t seem reasonable to me to let people live in abject poverty because employers can keep pay so very low. It isn’t like those at the bottom of the ladder have much bargaining power – they are in a “take it or leave it” situation. I have no answers, but spending a couple of hours with that young man really remindedd me to feel a tiny bit of the plight of so many folks today. I sometimes sit down and talk to homeless folks (at least I did before the pandemic), and found them to be just plain down and out, with no good way to claw their way to a better life. They are stuck – it seems like we need to find ways to be more compassionate and helpful.
This is a story about a dream that I had a few years ago. I was doing dreaming work, trying to get some control over my lucid dreams. I had been reading one of Carlos Castaneda’s books and was attempting to follow don Juan’s instructions for Carlos to look at his hands in his dreams. Looking at your hands in a dream is a practice that helps to open the possibility of lucid dreaming where it is possible to “wake up” in a dream, fully aware and able to take action and create whatever is desired.
I found myself “waking up” in a dream where I was in a spring-fresh, grassy field on green rolling hills, with a blue sky with puffy clouds floating overhead. I stood there for a little while just breathing in the beauty of the place. I then remembered to look at my hands, which I found I could do easily. The action of shifting my attention to looking at my hands seemed to ground the whole event so that it became so real that I found it impossible to determine if it was a dream, or if I was actually standing in the field. I could hear, smell and see normally – but I still knew that it must be a dream because I had no knowledge of how I got there, or where “there” was.
I then had the thought that if it was a dream, I should be able to do anything that I wanted. I decided to see if I could “create” a butterfly. I held my hands out in front of me, closed up as if cupping a small, precious animal within my closed hands. I then “intended” that a butterfly be in my hands. I felt it move, and opened my hands so that I was holding it on cupped hands. It was a very beautiful, rather large, and brightly colored butterfly that spread it wings – holding its wings open for me to see clearly for a few seconds. Then it flew off across the field.
I continued exploring the field for awhile, and finally just woke up into my awake dream with the feeling of having spent a nice afternoon in a warm, comfortable field.
I am hesitant to talk about covid again, but since it is apparently going to be around for awhile longer I will give it another shot. As a System Safety engineer, I have some pretty well developed ideas about topics such as “risk”, “acceptable risk”, “hazard” and things like that – and assumed that my points of view are pretty well in line with my colleagues in the system safety profession. Based upon some things I have recently heard and read by some of them, apparently I am not correct about that assumption. Last week I attended a three day System Safety conference where there were some discussions on this topic, and I see current Facebook posts by others that remind me how difficult this issue seems to be. Our differences seem to be wrapped up in an odd mixture of misunderstanding the science behind the problem, feelings about moral and ethical responsibilities that we have for each other, a desire to “get on with it”, and the proper boundaries of personal “freedom” in a large highly interdependent society like we have in the United States (and worldwide for that matter).
An issue that I came upon at the conference was a presentation concerning how covid is transmitted and how vaccines work. It was an excellent, and interesting, presentation until it came to the final conclusions. One of the final conclusions was along the lines of, “If a vaccine prevents the virus from entering human cells, then it is impossible for that person to create more viruses and therefore impossible to spread the disease to others. Therefore, it is impossible for a vaccinated person to create more viruses and become contagious.” The first part is fairly obviously true, and the second part is obviously false based upon current data. The vaccine does NOT prevent the virus from entering the cells (or maybe it doesn’t prevent the virus from entering all cells), and it does NOT prevent a person from catching it, or spreading it. ). The CDC, other health agencies, the daily news broadcasts, and personal discussions with others in the profession make this point over and over and over again. The vaccine is far from 100% effective in preventing infection, and far from 100% in preventing its spread. It is pretty good (around 95%) at preventing serious illness and death of the vaccinated person. The last number that I heard is that it is something like 53% effective in preventing infection and 0% effective at spreading the infection once infected. That’s pretty good, but certainly not nearly good enough to stop the pandemic on its own.
This last point that it is not good enough to stop the pandemic on its own is a critically important part of how we should be moving forward. I am not privy to the “inside” discussions on the topic, but it appears that the hope is to tamp down the symptoms for long enough for almost everyone to get it but not get too sick in the process – in the hopes that natural immunity will kick in to let us achieve something close to “herd immunity.” Maybe this is the approach, but whatever the plan is that seems to be the likely future.
There are two parts to the story of how we should move forward. One part is related to personal safety. Personal safety is enhanced by vaccinations because it greatly reduces the chances of getting really sick, or dying. This is good to a level of something like 95%. Masks are not very effective at providing personal safety because it is almost impossible to seal the mask to the face, letting large amounts of contaminated air past the mask. Anyone that has attempted to properly fit a mask according to OSHA or NFPA (National Fire Protection Agency) understands that while they are good at keeping out big chunks of stuff (dust masks), they don’t do much for smaller particles. A dust mask does not protect from exposure to vapors or gases. When aerosols are present (which is all of the time), distancing is effective, as is staying out of enclosed buildings where aerosols are likely to be present (stores, night clubs, restaurants and the like). Distancing in outdoor situations where there are breezes is probably pretty good. So, you can minimize infections to yourself by masking (to avoid breathing big gobs of gook), isolation and distancing, and you can minimize the severity of an infection with vaccinations.
Then there is the question of the safety of others. Vaccinations reduce the probability of infection if exposed by about 50%. That is pretty good – but certainly not complete. One of the possible issues is that since they have the potential to reduce symptoms without stopping the creation of virus particles, vaccinations have the likely outcome of creating more “stealth” spreaders. Therefore, it is important to implement actions to prevent spreading the virus to others even though being fully vaccinated. The same old protections apply as since the beginning of the pandemic, wearing masks, washing hands, distancing and avoiding in-door venues with others beyond your immediate “pod”.
Masks are very important to protect others when being around people because they are effective as stopping particles from being ejected toward another person. These particles can easily be ejected 6 to 10 feet just by talking, coughing, singing, breathing and more with a big sneeze. The particles can cause spreading because they can contain a very large number of viruses that can get inhaled directly by others, and by contaminating surfaces with moist, infected droplets. Masks are not particularly effective at stopping aerosols (aerosols are particles so small that they float with the air streams, not settling out due to gravity) when breathing in , therefore they are not very protective for the wearer. Billions of aerosol particles are release simply by breathing, and perhaps by evaporation off of the skin. These particles are quite small, but huge in comparison to the size of a virus – therefore they can contain a significant viral load. It is estimated that it takes a few hundred virus particles to cause infection, and that tens of thousands (or more) can easily be included on a single aerosol particle. However, while not being very good at breathing in, masks are fairly effective at stopping the these tiny particles when breathing out (protecting others).
A thing that is often not understood about aerosols is that they are FAST, and gain their speed by interactions with the air – not so much by the projection forces when expelled. Think about cigar smoke in a room. There is almost no projectile forces involved, but it doesn’t take very long to smell the cigar. This means that it didn’t take very long for the aerosols (the smoke) to get across the room. If you can smell the smoke (or anything else), you could have been exposed to a virus riding on an aerosol particle of a similar size. Aerosols travel at about 500 mph, generally in a complex path that quickly “fills” a very large space.
To prevent exposing others it is important to not become infected; it is important to wear a mask, wash your hands regularly, remain isolated as much as possible, get tested if you might have been exposed (to get treatment and fully quarantine yourself if you get infected), and get vaccinated.
For some unimaginable reason the issue of “freedom” seems to creep into the equation. l really don’t get it, but have come to some conclusions on the topic. The first is that personal freedom extends to those things that impact the safety of yourself – it does not extend to situations where your actions impact the safety of others. This idea has been deeply embedded in social rules, laws and regulations for thousands of years – it is not something new. The USA has hundreds (perhaps hundreds of thousands) of instances where laws have been created based upon this framework. In fact, it might be that almost the entire set of laws and social agreements is based upon the concept of “your freedom stops where my nose begins.” You are not free to shoot up a school, to speed through a residential district, to …. you get the picture. So, since we are clearly in a historically risky pandemic the idea of having the personal freedom to spread it is ludicrous. Of course you do NOT have, and should not, have the freedom to cause others to contract the disease and die. That isn’t freedom, it is murder.
However, you DO have the freedom to take the risks as long as you don’t impact others. I have become firmly convinced that this means staying totally away from situations where you might get infected and/or transmit the virus to others. That means an effective quarantine – either alone or in conjunction with a group of your choice – as long as the entire group remains quarantined. If a group wants to create a “bubble” and everyone is willing to stay within that bubble, that would not only be acceptable – it would be perfect and is likely to be the only way we get out of this problem. Have at it!!! However, this means that you have to stay in that bubble if you get sick – no side trips to the doctor or a hospital. If you want to go to a hospital, then that hospital has to be “inside” of your bubble. Otherwise, you have made your choice and society has no responsibility for your care.
So it is an easy choice in my mind – either do everything you can to work with all of society to control and eventually get past the pandemic , or take your own path. I am convinced that either approach is fine, but not both. This is a situation where you can’t have your cake and eat it to. Make a choice, that’s fine – but don’t make MY choice for me.
A neighbor (and friend) sent me a link to a rather disturbing article in the Washington Post questioning the science behind the predictions of global warming. (https://wapo.st/3jVaArg) He sent it as a idea for a “conversation starter” for our little group of neighborhood friends when we get together for our periodic social gatherings. I am not sure how well that would work out as a conversation starter but it did cause me to write a response – perhaps mostly to help myself clarify my thoughts on the topic. I hope you can access the link, but if not it is an opinion piece by a columnist named George F. Will (whom am unfamiliar with and have no knowledge of).
This article is full of rather odd comments that appear to be logical, but aren’t really. For example, he mentions that CNN stated that oceans are warming at the same rate as five Hiroshima bombs per second – and then points out that the sun provides the equivalent of 2000 bombs per second – and then jokes that the comparison makes it clear that the five bombs per second are not important. Those are rather odd units of energy, but the point is that one is talking about changes in the temperature of the ocean, the other is taking about how much energy the sun provides to the earth, which is normally in balance so there oceans normally stay the same temperature. These are totally different topics and there is no comparisons to be made. The issue is that the oceans are heating up, not that there is a lot of energy in sunshine. He also points out that climate and weather are different (as if he is pointing out something different from what is emphasized constantly by the science community), and therefore there is no possible link between changing in weather and changes in climate (and then he adds that of course climate is changing because of what people are doing). He then goes on to say that humans are responsible for almost all of the climate changes, but since there are some difficulties in separating the purely human impact from the “nature” impacts, there is no point in doing anything to try to modify that impact. Then he says that there has been no detectable changes in hurricanes in the last hundred years (a false statement) – he claims that the reason that they are not detectable is that we have better monitoring so the old values are worthless as comparisons (again, a false statement), therefore since the evidence is less than perfect there are no impacts on hurricanes and hence no impacts on weather by climate changes (not related even if it were true). Then he launches into sea level rising not being caused by melting glaciers (perhaps true, and never claimed to be the cause in any case – the current cause is understood to be mostly due to water getting bigger as it gets warmer). He then makes a point that since glaciers might not be causing oceans to rise means that the average temperature in the USA is about the same as it was in 1900 (perhaps true for that year, but totally unrelated to his discussion which at this point is about sea levels). There are a bunch of other disjointed and meaningless comments before he gets to the final summary “zinger” that the projections by the UN that a 3% C increase might impact the economy by 3% by 2100 – and he then explains that during that time the economy is projected to grow by $400 trillion by 2100, and decrease by $388 trillion because of climate change – which is almost a push and therefore the whole concern about climate change (and presumably carbon dioxide levels) is not worth considering, there is no threat if the economy isn’t projected to crash.
Perhaps it would be an interesting place to begin a discussion. My personal opinion is that it is BS, but not just because much of what he says is false, but rather because of so much that was left out. He claims to be making a rational argument to support his contention that climate change is not a problem, but there is really just a bunch of disjointed statements. This is an example of stringing together “facts” taken out of context and then using them to create a narrative that suggests predictions of future actions that happen to suite the person’s philosophy. It would require much more to explain all of the things that we left out, glossed over, or incorrectly interpreted than it took to write the article.
Suffice it to say, my view is along the lines of “ok” – but so what? The author focuses his attention on what journalists say the scientists say, even though the scientists say no such thing. He is attempting to make the point that since journalists make incorrect, and misleading statements concerning what the scientists are saying that somehow the science is wrong.
A similar thing is happening with the covid issues, especially over the issues of masking and vaccinations. It is almost impossible to find any news that correctly states what the science folks are saying and have been saying for months. The problem isn’t with the scientists, the problem is that the journalists (and politicians) that are ‘interpreting’ the science know almost nothing about either the science, or even how to listen to what scientists are saying. Unfortunately, politicians seem to be even worse than journalists in that regard.
For example, yesterday I heard on the news that all school employees need to either be vaccinated OR tested weekly. This is close to one of the stupidest things that I have heard so far. For one thing, it takes significantly less time than a week to go from “testing clear” to being contagious. Obviously weekly testing won’t catch that, and it wouldn’t be a once in awhile failure to catch the problem, it will be every time someone catches it and then takes it to the schools. The science says that this approach will not work. For this approach to work the testing has to be frequent enough to be able to catch that someone has been infected before they have a chance to spread it – and that isn’t compatible with the once a week model. I am not even certain that it works at all. In addition, the science says that being vaccinated does not stop a person from being infected and spreading it. As far as I can determine, it probably doesn’t even reduce the likelihood of being contagious. The vaccinations minimize the outcome, but not the frequency. So what good does that do for the kids who haven’t been vaccinated ? None. So according to “science” the new demand is not likely to be very effective. Does this mean that the science is wrong? Nope – it means that it is being interpreted for to achieve goals other than protecting the students.
The same things are happening with the stuff about climate change. It isn’t that the science is “wrong” (understanding that by definition science is never “right”), but it is being interpreted to meet other goals.
Just my humble opinion, still interested in talking about these things, but the discussion is complex and long.
I live in the middle of California, in the great Sacramento Valley about 20 miles north of Sacramento, the state’s capitol. I am surrounded on all sides by miles of flat, arid land dedicated to a vast agricultural economy. Because of this situation, the needs of my community are quite different from those in the urban areas of the county. During a recent county election, there was a change in the membership to the Yolo County Board of Supervisors, including the person that represents the rural portions of the county. The new supervisor has been holding “town hall” meetings in an effort to better understand the needs and desires of her constitutes – but has been doing so by holding meetings in town, without notifying or inviting the folks from the rural areas. Because of this, she is finding out what folks from urban districts think about the needs of the rural areas instead of finding out what her constitutes think. Because of this, a number of us in rural areas have made attempts to express our views to her in writing, with the hopes that she will periodically reach out and hold town hall meetings with us. I posting my letter in this blog in an effort to share my views, for whatever they may be worth.
My letter:
Dear Madam Supervisor,
I have been discussing what we observe as being important in our area with my wife and a few friends. We have identified a few issues that are currently on our list of “most important problems”. This in no way means that they are the only concerns, or that they will remain the “most important” – but for now they are as follows (in order of importance):
1) Ensure a dependable, affordable, source of water for domestic purposes.
Without this there is a great risk that the property values of the residences in rural Yolo County will crash and people will be forced to give up their homes, losing most or all of the value of their investments in their homes. Therefore, in many ways this is an existential, top level, concern. Without water there is no life. Currently many of the residential wells are either going dry, being ruined by sand intrusion, or failing for other reasons. It is my understanding that part of this is caused by the lack of recharge during the current drought, and some is being caused by a massive increase in the use of subsurface water to support recent changes in crops.
2) Stop the current high rate of subsidence in the area.
Currently there is a very high, and accelerating, problem with subsidence in the Zamora area (and perhaps the entire rural region of northern Yolo County). The folks that seem to know about such this point to the recent increase in use of subsurface water in the lower aquifer as being the primary cause. Once this aquifer compresses because of removal of water it cannot be “pumped back up” – it is permanent. This subsidence is already destroying local infrastructures, such as houses developing new cracks in walls and foundations. We have heard that it is a significant concern to the road (and freeway) infrastructures, and is likely to turn areas “near” flood zones to being “in” flood zones. Residences tend to be build outside of historic flood zones, but as the ground subsides relative to the river beds the boundaries of those areas changes to include the homes and other facilities. The likely outcome of increasing subsidence is similar to a lack of water because frequent flooding will make the area unlivable.
3) Replace the slow, poor and sporadic internet connections in rural Yolo County with modern high-speed, affordable solutions.
As Society moves toward more and more dependence upon the internet, good affordable high speed connections are becoming a necessity instead of a luxury. Many of the people in the rural areas are in the category of “low income” and therefore can’t afford expensive, slow solutions such as satellite internet or similar solutions. The best solution would be to “wire” the rural areas with fiber optics that serve the community are low (or free) rates so that everyone can benefit from on-line training and access to medical care and other important benefits (especially in times of possible continuing pandemics).
4) Fix and/or replace the roads, bridges and drainage systems in the rural parts of Yolo County.
The rural roads are being torn up by a combination of age, heavy usage and neglected maintenance. Currently, many (perhaps most) of the roads “worn out”, either being patched periodically or closed. The patches fill potholes, but leave a terrible road surface that quickly degrades into new potholes. The edges of the roads are crumbling, encroaching on the travel lanes, narrowing the width of the lanes resulting in most people illegally traveling straddling the center divide and destroying shoulders and drainage ditches. It is time to repair or replace the roads, not just keep attempting to put on many layers of band-aids. Roads, bridges and culverts need to be fixed, replaced and/or carefully inspected for damage and wear.
5) Re-engineer and upgrade drainage systems.
New agricultural practices have negatively impacted county maintained drainage. The vast new almond orchards have resulted in major changes to the patterns and quantify of storm runoff across the County. Land has been “leveled”, denuded, and shaped to ensure maximum runoff from the orchards during storm events (in order to prevent damage to the trees). This has resulted in greatly increased runoff volumes that now overwhelm what used to be adequate drainage systems. All parts of the drainage system needs to be re-evaluated, re-engineered and upgraded sop that it is sufficient to contain storm water. Due to the increased levels of runoff created by new agricultural practices, local flooding of previously “safe” residences and other facilities are becoming common, as are road closures during storm events.
Other issues: In addition to these problems, there is an over-arching issue concerning allocation of water. Currently there are almost no region-wide monitoring or limitations on water use in the rural regions. Therefore, the only “costs” associated with the use of subsurface water drawn from “the commons” (aquifers that we all share and depend upon) are those associated with drilling and maintenance of wells, and the highly subsidized cost of power to run the pumps. This results in the current situation that appears to be a “run on water use” that is typical of California. It is our opinion (and the opinion of those scientists that study such things), that this approach of laissez-faire water management of subsurface water sources (wells) is a recipe for disaster. We believe that given the obvious near and long term impacts of global warming and increased populations this management approach needs to change into a much more sustainable, and equitable, allocation of water allowing the demand to follow the availability of the resource instead of over using resources in an attempt to meet demand. The use of shared resources such as water needs to mirror the ability to sustain the resource rather than the current approach of creating a need and then “mining” available resources to meet that artificially creating need.
In a previous posting I discussed some issues that I am concerned about with regard to the relicensing of the Upper North Fork Feather River Hydoelectric Project, FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) Project 2105. Based upon those concerns, I wrote a letter to the commission in the hopes of applying some tiny pressure to reconsider some of the demands for re-licensing. I wrote the letter a month ago, but perhaps it is appropriate to share it here.
Ms. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION 888 —
1st Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20426-0001
Subject: Upper North Fork Feather River Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2105; California SWRCB proposed Certification and Water Quality Conditions
Your honorable Kimberly D. Bose,
This letter is in response to the plan to use water from Lake Almanor to cool water in downstream sections of the Upper North Fork of the Feather River (UNFFR). The State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB) proposed three alternatives to complying with Condition 6 – Water Temperature Management – of the water quality certification in order to approve licensing of FERC Project No. 2105. Each of the alternatives is intended to add cold water to the UNFFR with the goal of improving cold freshwater habitat (i.e., rainbow trout habitat) by reducing river water temperatures to below 20°C.
Alternative 1 is to release supplemental results of up to 250 cfs from Canyon Dam from June 16 through September 15 and the installation of thermal curtains at the Prattville intake and the Butt Valley Reservoir. Alternative 2 is to install thermal curtains without supplemental releases from Canyon Dam. Alternative 3 consists of stand-alone releases from Canyon Dam of 250 cfs from June 16 through September 15. One of the main problems with these proposals is that there is very little scientific evidence indicating that achieving that goal will achieve any improvement to the rainbow trout habitat, or the health of the cold water species in the river.
It is far better to fix the things that are causing the problem of insufficient cold freshwater habitat (primarily rainbow trout) in the river rather than change things that are not causing the problem. Wasted resources spent in an attempt to slightly modify the river temperature could much better be used to improve the habitat in the tributaries and river basin. The regulations require “reasonable” accommodations to reduce negative environmental impacts of actions. The “action” under consideration is the re-licensing of an existing project. Spending a lot of money, and putting a healthy lake at risk, is not a “reasonable” because it is unlikely to have a significant positive impact on an unknown problem.
After studying the various documents provided by the SWRCB I conclude that there are several major problems with the modeling and hence the development of the three alternatives. In addition, according to top scientists in the field, issues with the rainbow trout populations in the river (if any issues exist) are far more likely to be the result of problems in the tributaries and the river basin itself than the slightly elevated average river temperature during a couple of months in the summer.
The following discussions summarize a few important concerns with the proposed alternatives imposed by the SWRCB as conditions for re-licensing project 2015:
It is not at all clear that reducing the water temperature in the river by approximately 1 or 2 degrees during the summer months will significantly improve fish habitat for fish or other organisms. The stated goal is to improve cold water fish habitat (represented by Rainbow trout) in the UNFFR enough to cause a “rebound” in fish populations as might have existed prior to the installation of the dams and associated power plants on the river. (The population size is a conjecture; there is no substantiated evidence of what those populations might have been.)
Studies have shown that the optimal temperature environment to achieve maximum growth and vigor for rainbow trout isn’t one that is constantly below 20°C but rather one with daily fluctuations between approximately 17°C and approximately 24°C. Spending some time in “warm” water (up to approximately 24°C) appears to be beneficial to trout. A single cutoff temperature, such as 20°C has very little value for determining the best environment. (The single value appears to have come from an old source that was very likely based more upon a “hunch” than solid scientific studies.)
The health and abundance of rainbow trout in the UNFFR is determined to a large extent by the habitat within the many tributaries to the river. These tributaries are the locations where spawning occurs and where fish grow to adult size. Once fish grow sufficiently, they enter the river proper, but spend much of their time congregating around the many underwater streams providing “pools” of cold, fresh water.
The key to improving rainbow trout habitat is to focus on the many tributaries that act as nurseries for the fish. Once the trout are mature enough to enter the river proper they are capable of finding “micro-environments” suitable to their needs. Changing the average temperature of the river by a degree or degree and a half is unlikely to have any significant impact up the suitability of the river for cold water fish, including rainbow trout.
The target temperature of less than 20°C does not appear to be based upon any consideration of the habitat, the fish or the environment. The target appears to be based upon meeting a requirement in a regulation. There is no evidence that the fish population is stressed, endangered or smaller than it should be to maintain a healthy balance within the river system.
The studies sited in the EIR don’t indicate that there is a degraded or damage fish population, but do indicate that if there is such a degradation that it could be caused by a number of causes including lack of adequate gravel beds for spawning, the introduction of non-native predatory fish, the lack of sufficient shading opportunities, warm water, etc. There is no evidence provided concerning whether or not any of these possible issues exist, or if they actually degrade the fish environment. The only evidence provided is that the average water temperature is higher than the regulation for a few weeks a year.
High water temperatures during the months of July and August are identified as possible contributing factors, but no evidence is provided to indicate which of the possible factors are most important or which factors should be improved for the most cost effective, and environmentally sound, solution.
It is well known that the biggest impact upon the health and success of rainbow trout in the UNFFR depends upon the conditions of the many small tributaries. Several simple, relatively low cost solutions have been proposed by the American Indians native to that area. PG&E has offered financial (five million dollars) and other support to assist them in implementing those proposed solutions. However, the State Water Board (SWRCB) turned those solutions down, apparently because they are not in the SWRCB’s jurisdiction. The SWRCB appears to only be interested in solutions that they can mandate and control, not necessarily solutions that improve the ecosystems, fish habitat or the fisheries of the river.
The temperature studies of the impacts of removing large volumes of cold water from Lake Almanor were almost exclusively focused on the impacts to the cold water rainbow trout habitat in the lake. The proposed “solution” to the predicted large scale rainbow trout kills is to periodically stock the lake with hatchery raised, “catchable” rainbow trout. The studies did not address impacts upon other organisms requiring a consistent cold water habitat. Based upon available documentation, it seems that no comprehensive studies were performed concerning the changes to the warm water portion of the lake.
A significant concern is the potential for increased water temperatures resulting in a significant growth of algae. The existence of algae blooms would in turn change the albedo of the water, making the water darker and therefore absorbing more solar radiation – resulting in a feedback loop of further warming the water, thereby increasing the algae… This type of feedback loop has the potential to result in yet another lake becoming a giant green pond (similar to what has happened to Clear Lake in Clear Lake County).
The studies and modeling described in the EIR used to determine the impacts for the various alternatives were performed almost 20 years ago, based upon weather history up to that time. Apparently no attempt was made to forecast future climate conditions caused by global warming. The highly optimistic proposals were based upon an assumption that each of the three alternatives could potentially lower the river temperatures to below 20°C (an approximately 1.5°C reduction in temperature). It is my understanding that new models based upon the projected “global warming” weather regime have predicted a much lower reduction in temperature, closer to 0.25°C – which is insufficient to move the river temperatures into the “safe” zone. If the newer projections are true, then there is little to be gained by either of the three proposed alternatives for removing cold water from Lake Almanor – none of the alternatives are worth the taking the unknown risks introduced to the Lake Almanor hydrologic system.
SUMMARY and CONCLUSIONS:
It is unlikely that decreasing the average temperature of small sections of the North Fork of the Feather River (UNFFR) by a degree or two will result in any measureable improvements to the fish habitat in those sections or in the entirety of the river. However, there is a very real and significant risk to Lake Amanor associated with changing the thermal characteristics of the lake. Until much better, up-to-date modeling of the broader potential impacts of the proposed changes “prove” that the risks to the lake are less than the benefits to the river, then it is not appropriate to “experiment” on a functioning system. The potential for a minor improvement to the river environment do not justify the risks associated with removing the cold water from Lake Almanor, especially in light of the possibility that decreasing river water temperatures might actually result in a poorer environment for the fish.
New information indicates that the new weather conditions associated with global warming will result in less than a 0.25°C reduction in river water at the critical locations on the UNFFR. This is not enough to result in a significant improvement to the fish in the river, but will certainly result in significant degradation of fish habitat in Lake Almanor. The correct approach from an environmental point of view is to focus on the habitat on the UNFFR rather than focusing on an attempt to lower the temperature of the river beyond what is feasible, reasonable or practical given the forecast global changes to weather conditions. The lake should not be put at risk in an experiment that perhaps a slight drop in water temperatures at a few locations on the river will result in a significant (or measureable) improvement to the fish.
As a minimum, the studies supporting the EIR should be repeated based upon new estimates of future weather conditions, using newer more accurate models. The modeling needs to be expanded in scope to include all of the impacts to the lake environment, including impacts on the warm water environment and impacts on cold water species beyond rainbow trout. The potential impacts upon the river cold water species should be further investigated to better determine the overall anticipated improvements due to changes in water temperature caused by the three alternatives. In addition, additional habitat improvement alternatives (such as those proposed by the local Native American tribe) should be investigated to determine impact, cost and feasibility.
I visited my good friend Gary in the “down under” during the spring of 2004. Gary is an old college buddy from Humboldt State College in Eureka, California. He got a degree in Natural Resources from Humboldt State, then a Masters degree in the same subject from the University of Nevada, Reno. Unfortunately, getting a masters degree didn’t translate into getting a job, so he took his family and moved to Australia. He found a government job that took him far out into the “outback” for months at a time, over a period of many years. As a result, he has become one of the most knowledgeable people in the world on this little known and little visited part of the world.
Gary called me over to go on a bird watching trip with him. He has one of those incredible, photographic memories and a great interest in birds. He takes very long traveling surveys of the interior every five years or so making an inventory of the types, numbers and locations of the birds. I was lucky enough to get invited to join him on this trip. Our trip was scheduled to be for about a month in the heart of the country – the great desert roughly centered on the city of Alice Springs.
On one of our excursions we headed south-east from Alice Springs, along the ridges of the Macdonnel Ranges. I am not positive how far we drove, or exactly where we ended up – all that I recall is that it was a very long drive down a dirt road in the Simpson Desert. Our goal was a camp ground in a wash a hundred or so miles from Alice Springs. Gary knew that there were birds to be found, and a lot of ancient petroglyphs. Gary likes birds; we both like petroglyphs, and they were all in the middle of the wonderful desert, we had the best of all worlds.
We arrived at the campground in the late afternoon, tired after a long day’s dusty driving and ready for a nice cold beer. As we sat and drank our beer, we noticed that another car was in the camp ground which rather surprised me because of its remoteness. There was a nice hike up the dry creek bed where you could see the countryside, and find petroglyphs engraved into the rocks along the side of the path. We decided to take the hike but found very few petroglyphs. There were a few scattered along the trail, but hardly the profusion of rock art promised by the sign in the camp ground. It was a nice enough walk, but not a great rock art find. Along the trail we met the other folks, who appeared to be equally less than impressed.
When we got to the end of the creek, the canyon became a box canyon where the trail ended. The petroglyphs at this location were worth the hike. There was an amazing pair of human figures sporting extremely long hair radiating out like a wild Einstein. They are in the photo included in this story. The figures were small, maybe six inches tall, with “hair” (or whatever it represents) at least double the size of the figure. While these figures appear pretty tame in the photo, in real life they made MY hair stand on end. I have seen thousands of petroglyphs in my life, but these two are the most powerful and full of spirit that I have encountered. I felt that they were more than mere drawings; it seemed that they were actually the carriers of the powers that they represented. I felt like some people might feel when they are in the presence of the Pope, or upon entering a splendid cathedral. They literally took my breath away and made me want to fall to my knees in worship. I didn’t do that for fear of looking silly, but maybe I should have. To me, we were obviously in a place of great power and great spiritual importance. I also felt that the “hair” didn’t represent hair at all, it was energy emanating from the figures. Both Gary and I became pretty subdued as we walked back down the canyon to our camp.
When we got back to our camp, we found that the other car had gone and we were once more all alone in the middle of the most incredible country that I have ever encountered. When you are all alone out there, you are REALLY all alone.
We gathered fire wood and started a small fire to cook our steaks and potatoes (steaks put directly on the burning coals, potatoes snuggled down into the coals to cook). The sunset that night was amazing. The sky was ablaze with bright reds and yellows, lighting up the thin clouds drifting in front of the deep blue sky. As the light show in the sky died down, darkness came quite quickly.
We were sitting next to the fire chatting, watching the coals, and enjoying our dinner when Gary jumped up excitedly and starting pointing at a yellow light that appeared to be dancing in the trees a couple of a hundred yards away. He said that it was a Min Min light and that it was the first that he had seen. Apparently, this part of the Simpson Desert is famous for these mysterious lights.
As we watched the light, it broke up into several lights that danced and flew slowly among the trees, and up the wash toward the energy headed petroglyphs. They went along the ground, and then would sail up high into the trees. Bobbing, floating as they joined together and slit apart. We took our flashlights to follow them up the canyon to see what we might find, but when we walked toward them they went out. There was nothing to see. When we went back to camp, they started again – and finally just sort of faded away. I don’t know how long this show went on, but it might have been an hour or more. Gary said that the old aborigines consider the lights to be benign to watch, but dangerous to approach.
In the morning I decided to walk in the general direction of where they were coming from to see if I could learn anything more. As I walked across the rocky and brush filled creek bed I suddenly realized that someone was camped in the creek bed! Someone had apparently been there to see (or maybe make?) the show. I started to go over to talk to them, but was rather mysteriously stopped in my tracks. I just couldn’t go any more in that direction, it felt like I was not welcome and that whoever was there intended to be out in the desert alone. I never even got close enough to tell anything about them. I couldn’t tell if they were male or female, white or aborigine. It seemed like it was just one person, but I am not even sure about that. I told Gary that there was a person over there. Maybe they had a small camp, but there was no tent, fire or anything else “camp like” – just a person sitting next to a tree. Gary expressed no interest at all, he didn’t seem to have any inclination to go visit (which is unusual for him because he is quite gregarious). Gary’s response seemed to agree with my feelings, so we just left the person alone. He told me that sometimes the old ones go to places like that, and if so they should be left alone.
We decided to take another walk up the canyon to see if we could find more petroglyphs. About a third of the way up the creek we took a side creek into a steep and very rugged canyon. What a site it turned out to be! There were thousands (maybe tens of thousands) of petroglyphs. Almost every rock had art on it, and many had dozens of drawings. The canyon was filled to the brim with art of a wildly extravagant and amazing variety.
We hiked far up the canyon which also turned into a box canyon. We decided to climb out of the canyon, which seemed simple enough because by then it had become smooth sided with gentle slopes. We started up the right hand wall to get to the top of the bluff, and as we continued the climbing kept getting steeper and harder. The solid rock started to get crumbly, and I began to worry about slipping into the by now deep gorge. It became clear that we had gotten in a bit over our heads with this climb. A false step could start a slide toward a cliff below us, the rock was too slippery and steep to go back down, and the climbing kept getting harder as we went up. With great relief we finally made it to the top, where it was flat and easy walking through an area covered with Spinifex plants, with their long needle-like leaves that easily puncture through the sides of boots and pants if you were careless enough to brush against it.
The relief of getting to the top was short lived once I realized that we had been concentrating so hard on getting up the cliff that we had neglected to keep track of direction. We found ourselves on top of a wide plain, with no signs of recognizable landmarks. We wandered around for awhile and finally spotted a dry creek, which we assumed was the one we were camping in. I decided that if we could find a way down off of the mesa, we could walk back up the creek and hopefully find our camp. All of this was of course to be done without water because we had planned on just a few minutes of an easy walk up the canyon, but got lead from petroglyph to petroglyph and finally up the side of the cliff. I was getting thirsty, but couldn’t do much about it at this point.
We hiked for a long time on top looking for a way back down. We finally found a winding, and very steep, trail down and eventually came to the creek bed. We walked around the first bush that we came to – directly into our camp! We ended up returning within a hundred feet or so of our camp – heading right toward it. We both just looked at each other and shrugged our shoulders – mysterious things happen in that desert.
One evening in the summer of 2004 I got a call from my friend, Rocke. I had mentioned some of the strange “healing” things that had happened with me in the past so he was aware of my experiences. He called to tell me that I had a “job” to do with these “powers.”
A mutual friend, Sara, from old college days had been in a serious automobile accident and needed some help. She had been airlifted from northern California to the UCD trauma center in Sacramento. Her husband, James, was there with her. Rocke suggested that I should go to the hospital and see what I could do. Not knowing how to turn him down, I went to the hospital in Sacramento first thing in the morning to see if there was anything that I could do.
As I drove to the hospital I tried to recall these old friends, but since they were casual friends, not best of friends, I was having a difficult time recalling their appearances or much else about them for that matter. I hoped that once I came face-to-face, I would remember more. I also wondered what I would be able to do to help. Not having any idea at all along these lines, I just asked my inner being to be awake and act however was most appropriate. I didn’t know how to plan anything; it was an experience of walking into the unknown.
I got there and found the ward where Sara was located, but found the doors closed. I decided to sit in the waiting area and see what might happen. There were a couple of other people sitting there, but I had no idea who they were. It turned out that they were waiting for Sara also. After an hour or two, James finally showed up and luckily I recognized him, and he recognized me.
He told me the story about Sara’s accident. They have a cabin in the woods of northern California, and a house in town near their business. She had stayed at the cabin while he went to town to run the business. She had decided to go for a drive along the dirt roads through the forest. Somehow, she managed to turn the jeep over, it landed on her shoulder, crushing it and pinning her so that she couldn’t get out. Then gasoline started to leak on her and soaked her in fuel. She had no option except to hope that someone would come along and find her. A day or so later James got back and found that she was gone, and realized that she had been gone for some time. He understood that since the jeep was not there, she must have driven off someplace and gotten into trouble. He set off looking for her and finally found her. By this time she was in pretty bad shape from her wounds and the chemical burns/poisoning from the gasoline. Somehow or another he managed to get her out of there, got a life-flight helicopter for her, and she was transferred to UCD a few days before I found out about it.
During her stay they had to amputate her arm at the shoulder, and performed a number of other operations. She had been in a coma the entire time, and her internal organs were shutting down from the stress and from the chemicals. They were finally optimistic that she would probably live, but they didn’t expect her to come out of her coma for another week or two. After she did awake, they estimated another couple of weeks before she would be good enough to go home. At that time they were cautiously optimistic, but were still very worried that her kidneys or some other organ would shut down and she would die. This wasn’t looking good. James had to go back to Eureka that night to look after their animals and business.
I couldn’t figure out what I could do, so I was kind of sidestepping out of the door when James asked me to go look at her. I didn’t really have any desire to look at a person laying in a bed in a coma, but decided that it was the thing to do. We went into her room and it was as bad looking as I imaged. She looked Sarable! Bloated and bruised, with tubes and wires running all over the place. Not a pretty sight. However, as I stood there I noticed that her big toe was sticking out from under the blanket near where I was standing. I had a very strong urge to hold onto her toe, so I did. As soon as I made contact, I could feel that by now familiar feeling of warmth flowing through me and my hands and arms. It wasn’t just from me to her, it was both ways. It felt like “love” flowing between us (whatever that might mean). It was warm, soft, flowing, and very comfortable. After a couple of minutes, the feeling died away and I knew that I was done there. There was nothing more that I could do, so I said goodbye to James and the family members I had been sitting with in the lobby, and went home. I didn’t know if I had accomplished anything of value, but knew that I had done what Rocke had asked me to do.
Early next morning I got a call from my friend Rocke. He started off by saying, “Charlie, what in the world did you do?”
I told him that I had no idea what I had done. I told him I visited with James, went in to see Sara, and held her toe. I mentioned the warm feeling, but said that I didn’t know what else to do so I went home. I asked him why he was asking that question.
The answer surprised the heck out of me. He said he had called James at their home near Eureka to see how things were going. But instead of getting James, Sara answered the phone! He asked her what she was doing (meaning, what was she doing home since he expected her to be in the hospital). She answered that she was cooking breakfast for James!!! After getting back off of the floor after falling off of his chair, Rocke asked to talk to James to find out what had happened and how could that possibly be.
James said that a little while after I left Sara woke up. She not only woke up, but she looked wide awake. In an hour or so she sat up, took the tubes out of her nose and started talking to James and the nurses. The nurses were shocked and amazed, not expecting to see her move, more or less talk, for a couple of more weeks. After another half hour or so Sara asked for her clothes, got up and got dressed, and said she was ready to go home. After checking her, they agreed and signed her out. They asked her to return in a week for a checkup, and sent her on her way.
A week later James and Sara stopped by our house on the way to the hospital for her checkup. Other than the fact that she was missing an arm, she looked and sounded great. She seemed to be in high spirits, and was chatting along about the accident and other things – including her work – as if nothing special had happened. I haven’t talked to them, or heard more about them since but assume that all is going well with them. I didn’t mention anything to them about what I did or felt because it just doesn’t seem like the thing to do – it would somehow be taking away from her strength and energy. She is the one that pulled herself through an amazing and dangerous ordeal. I was just there as a witness. I got to be close to a very powerful healing that she did for herself and feel blessed by that. If my touching her toe helped her in some mysterious way, I am glad I could be of assistance. If it is just a coincidence, then I was glad to have had a chance to witness this amazing transformation.
One of my covid projects has been to fix up a stall in our little barn to be a pottery studio for my wife. It has been a VERY slow process, giving me a project that has lasted for the biggest part of a year. I started with a rather rustic stall without doors, windows and only three walls. Over time I managed to put in another wall separating the space from my “shop” (really just the barn), insulated, sheet-rocked, changed the lighting and a few other odds and ends. I think it came out well. The MINI-Split HVAC isn’t installed yet, but it is close. Here are a couple of photos:
It turned out nice enough that I am not sure I want to “give it up.” I think it could make a pretty pleasant office or perhaps a “man cave”. I have a work bench that will be installed under the windows looking out into the back yard. The windows with small panes look into my shop area, not to the outside. I liked the old windows and didn’t have an outside wall for them, so I put them into an interior wall. It was a pretty fun project, I only worked on it an hour or two at a time to fit into my other projects. The reason for the low ceiling in the alcove is that it makes an overhead storage space in my shop.
