Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

How the Arrival of an Endangered Bird Indicates What’s Possible for the L.A. River

News Feed
Tuesday, November 19, 2024

Along a gentle bend of the Los Angeles River, in a stretch of land called Taylor Yard, a sound like a high-pitched record scratch can just be heard above the cacophony of city life. This is the call of the least Bell’s vireo, an olive-gray songbird that is only five inches from tip to tail. The riparian species native to Southern California has lived an endangered existence for more than 40 years. Now, the small bird’s return here symbolizes a new future for one of the country’s most maligned waterways. Before the concrete tide of urbanization washed over the Los Angeles River Basin, the river-fed wetland that was here represented the perfect habitat for this rare species. But for the past century, this area was one of the largest rail yards in the region, and as an expanding city grew right up to the river’s now concrete-laden banks, the vireo all but disappeared. Until, suddenly, it returned. The 2007 creation of Rio de Los Angeles State Park, which is itself part of the sprawling rail yard, set the stage. In the early 2010s someone reported hearing the vireo’s memorable call. A few years later, a photo captured a vireo mid-song, and in 2022 a nesting pair took refuge in a tree. This year, the news was even better. “We actually saw fledglings,” says Evelyn Serrano, the director of the Audubon Center at Debs Park in Los Angeles. “We saw the nest and we saw the babies, so we were very excited. It’s tough to survive in an urban environment when you’re a little bird like that, but it’s definitely possible.” A least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) sings at Taylor Yard on March 22. California placed this songbird on its endangered species list in 1980, but this rare vireo has recently returned to central L.A. thanks to habitat restoration and the return of the natural riparian ecosystem along a section of the Los Angeles River. Alecia Smith / Audubon California Serrano is part of the local Audubon Center’s long, ongoing effort to rewild Taylor Yard, especially within the existing state park. Over the years the center has planted 1,000 endemic plants including 200 native trees as well as mule fat and mugwort for nest protection, and black sage and golden currant for food sources. But the nearby river—one of the few naturalized, soft-bottom sections of what is otherwise a concrete channel—is what really allows the vireo to thrive. “[The vireo] needs to be near water, and that specific part of the river that’s soft-bodied has more water than other parts,” Serrano says. “This bird also lives in a very specific elevation, and it just so happens that all of those things … are all in one place.” The return of the least Bell’s vireo shows what’s possible along a more natural Los Angeles River, and Taylor Yard represents the city’s largest opportunity to create vital habitat for many of its vulnerable endemic species. For years, a partnership of government groups and nonprofits has pushed to make the remaining 100 acres of the abandoned rail yard the “crown jewel” of L.A.’s river restoration project. The resulting collective, known as the 100 Acre Partnership, hopes to complete the restoration by 2028, which is just in time for the L.A. Olympic Games. The project is just the latest effort to create a new vision of Los Angeles that’s been in the works for nearly a century. What was lost Long before its starring role as an entertainment mecca, the basin that makes up Los Angeles was known for its river. Fifty-one miles of free-flowing waters formed the beating heart of an 871-square-mile watershed transporting rainwater and snowpack from the nearby Santa Monica, Santa Susana and San Gabriel Mountains. Fed by various washes and tributaries, the river formed rich wetlands throughout the San Fernando Valley in the north all the way to the lower delta. At most times a trickle and at others a flood, the L.A. River meandered all over the region, either emptying into San Pedro Bay or even veering west toward Santa Monica Bay. Because of the river and the region’s separation from the rest of California by mountains to the north, this alluvial floodplain became one of the most biodiverse regions in the world, filled with stunning amounts of endemic flora and fauna. Eventually, a native tribe known as the Tongva—also called Gabrieleño or Kizh—settled throughout the river basin, which included around 5,000 people spread across some 100 villages. They built their largest village, named Yaanga, in hills along the river near where Los Angeles City Hall stands today. Although many picture L.A. with its vast sandy beaches to the west, the old Pueblo de Los Angeles actually formed further inland, as the river provided the necessary water for the entire settlement. This is why Candice Dickens-Russell, the CEO of the nonprofit Friends of the L.A. River, describes the river as the city’s “origin story.” “We’re one of the only ‘coastal’ cities that’s not on a coast,” Dickens-Russell says. “We’re an inland downtown because of the river.” For centuries, the river provided the water needed to grow crops, irrigate orchards and sustain a growing population. However, ignoring the Tongva practice of building slightly uphill from the river in recognition of its meandering course, the expanding city built up right along its banks. And as that city grew, its tolerance for the river’s floods diminished. After a devastating flood in 1914, calls for flood control efforts grew louder, and the city formed the Los Angeles County Flood Control District a year later. In the following decades, the city began channelization and levee efforts and even built a few dams, but nothing substantial enough to fully prevent floods. Then, the river met its first major crossroads. In 1930, Frederick Law Olmsted Jr., the son of the famous Central Park landscape architect, devised a sprawling plan to build parks and public spaces along the river with green flood prevention measures, saying at the time that “continued prosperity in Los Angeles will depend on providing needed parks.” The timing of the proposal couldn't have been worse. While L.A. already had a long history of privileging private real estate over public spaces, the stock market crash only months earlier soured any remaining appetite for Olmsted’s vision. After two more destructive floods in 1934 and 1938, the Army Corps of Engineers slowly began encasing the L.A. River in concrete—one mile at a time—until its completion in 1960. Located in South Gate, Lynwood and Downey at the confluence of the Los Angeles River and the Rio Hondo tributary (right), this area is one concrete-laden section of the river where Frank Gehry Partners has proposed building a platform park. Darren Orf “Olmsted’s vision is what L.A. could have been,” says Ben Harris, a senior staff attorney at Los Angeles Waterkeeper, an environmental watchdog for the region’s coastal and inland waters. “It was bad circumstances, but the right vision.” The right vision As the river receded from the landscape, it also faded from the minds of many Angelenos who lived within its basin. Dickens-Russell, who grew up in Cerritos just east of the river, says she was totally unaware of its existence when she was younger. “[The river] was not in my consciousness at all,” Dickens-Russell says. “It wasn’t until I went away for college, came home and started working in the environmental world in L.A. that I started to hear about the river and Friends of the L.A. River.” The first major nonprofit group to start restoration along the river’s 51 miles, Friends of the L.A. River wouldn’t have been possible without the trailblazing work of Lewis MacAdams. A journalist, political activist and poet, MacAdams founded the nonprofit in 1986 as an act of civil disobedience. He envisioned a city with a restored river where animals and Angelenos could seek refuge, so that year he cut through a wire fence separating the river from the city and declared the channel a public space. In his poetry, he describes his organization’s role as the river’s emissary. … we address ourselves to the river. / We ask if we can / speak on its behalf / in the human realm. / We can’t hear the river saying no / so we get to work. And for 40 years, MacAdams was the river’s relentless advocate. In the mid-1990s, when the Army Corps of Engineers began scraping vegetation away from the soft-bottomed section of the river, MacAdams placed himself in front of the bulldozers. Meanwhile, he tirelessly fought for the waterway to be recognized as a natural river. “He’d show up at meetings with the Army Corps and the Department of Public Works,” says Jon Christensen, an environmental journalist and historian with the Institute of the Environment and Sustainability at the University of California, Los Angeles, “and they’d talk about the ‘flood control channel’ and he’d just say ‘river.’” In keeping with this activist spirit, kayakers in 2008 proved that the L.A. River was a navigable waterway by traversing its entire 51 miles. Two years later, the Environmental Protection Agency agreed and granted the river certain protections under the U.S. Clean Water Act, which strengthened the ability of local, state and federal agencies to fight against pollution and other forms of environmental degradation. Though just one element of a bigger plan, Harris points out, Taylor Yard is a really good opportunity to examine the challenges of restoring the river—for both animals and the estimated one million people that live along the waterway’s path Transforming Taylor Yard In 1911, Southern Pacific Railroad bought land owned by Taylor Milling Company and adopted the name for its eventual 243-acre rail yard. After the rail yard shut down in the mid-1980s, parts of it were parceled off, with the least toxic areas being sold first. Some parcels became schools, apartments and even Rio de Los Angeles State Park itself. Then in 2017, after four years of negotiations, the City of L.A. purchased a long sought-after parcel from Union Pacific, a 42-acre stretch of land sandwiched between the current park and the river. Today, the 100 Acre Partnership, a joint effort by the City of L.A., Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority (MRCA), and the California Department of Parks and Recreation, is overseeing the creation of the Paseo del Rio, the name of the planned park that encompasses that parcel and one bow-tie-shaped parcel that connects to the north. The final design, approved in 2023, contains walking paths along the river, a community pavilion, a sloped meadow incorporating the rail yard’s old turntable and a wetland habitat fed by stormwater from the surrounding community. Along the northern section of the planned park, the Nature Conservancy is developing an area that will showcase how stormwater can be cleaned using natural systems. Crucially, the Paseo del Rio at Taylor Yard also reconnects the surrounding community with the L.A. River and provides even more vital habitat for riparian birds like the vireo, but also osprey, and many other native species including side-blotched lizards, pacific chorus frogs, big brown bats and arroyo chub fish. The one thing that stands between the present and this bright, green future is the land’s industrial past. After decades spent as a rail yard, part of the land is simply too toxic for biking, running and lounging. Lead and petroleum hydrocarbons at the site lie in shallow soil, meaning they’re easier to remove. But volatile organic compounds sink lower into the ground, and this creates complicated layers of pollution, which makes cleanup difficult and expensive. Brian Baldauf, chief of watershed planning for the MRCA, says the partnership is still working with the U.S. Department of Toxic Substances Control to get a cleaning plan approved. “This was the active working heart of the rail yard,” Baldauf says. “When the city purchased it, one of the requirements of Union Pacific was that the city would be responsible for cleaning it up.” He adds that the 100 Acre Partnership and the Department of Toxic Substances Control need to come up with a strategy for creating a safe site that can have new habitat over it. Once that strategy is in place, things can move quickly, according to Baldauf. If all goes according to plan, Taylor Yard will be a moving display for what the L.A. River could be—and just in time for the 2028 Games. “The Olympics in Los Angeles is an important consideration for a lot of public work,” Baldauf says. “The city is going to be a showcase, and we want to have this project ready.” A divided future Today the L.A. River forms in Canoga Park in the San Fernando Valley and cuts around the eastern side of Griffith Park, before heading south through the soft-bottomed Glendale Narrows. Eventually, it makes its way through the Gateway Cities region before reaching Long Beach. In its course, the river passes through 17 cities, each with its own history and relationship to the river. While environmental groups argue for a more natural river—one that can play host to humans and habitats alike—the river’s engineered role of moving massive amounts of water as quickly and safely as possible hasn’t changed, and that dichotomy has led to disagreement. “We’ve inherited in the American West these hybrid systems—they are engineered and natural, and there is no rewinding the tape of history,” Christensen says. “What do we want out of these hybrid systems?” Over the decades, various master plans—at the local and federal levels—have offered suggestions for addressing challenges found within these river communities. Some address green gentrification, which occurs when newly developed natural space brings in investment that eventually displaces the local community. A key example of this phenomenon, according to Christensen, is New York City’s High Line, an abandoned industrial train track renovated into an elevated park that sent nearby home prices skyrocketing. Other plans suggest searching for ways to introduce green space into park-poor areas, create arts and culture opportunities, and improve river access. Taylor Yard is a rarity of sorts. Its 100 acres is unlike any other opportunity along the river basin—as most planned parks are well under 30 acres. And because Taylor Yard is designed to be an example of how to rehabilitate contaminated sites along the L.A. River, the project doesn’t feature some of the more controversial river restoration ideas that have percolated in recent years. The most divisive example is the L.A. River Master Plan, originally commissioned by L.A. County, which outlines possible investments along the river. In 2015, the Los Angeles River Revitalization Corporation asked famous architect and longtime L.A. resident Frank Gehry to take the design reins for reimagining the L.A. River as part of the master plan. Some were excited by the idea of Gehry turning his attention to the river, but others worried the architect wasn’t a good fit. “I would remind them that the last time there was a single idea for the entire river it involved 17,000 people pouring three million barrels of concrete,” MacAdams said back in 2016. In 2022, environmental groups, including Friends of the L.A. River, East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice, the Nature Conservancy in California and Los Angeles Waterkeeper, pulled support for the L.A. River Master Plan, with the latter saying it “failed to treat the L.A. River as a natural and living river.” A part of the dispute centered around the idea of “platform parks,” proposed by Frank Gehry Partners, that would effectively cap the river to provide green space. In other words, these parks create a concrete channel for water to pass under while the park on top remains undisturbed. The plan also includes new buildings, like the Southeast Los Angeles Cultural Center, to be constructed right along the river’s floodplain, and environmental groups argue that the plan doesn’t take out enough existing concrete. Los Angeles Waterkeeper and the Center for Biological Diversity swiftly sued Los Angeles County over its approved master plan. Tensho Takemori, a partner at Frank Gehry Partners, acknowledges that a concrete-free river is the river everyone wants but says that when the firm looked at taking out all that concrete, they determined it just wasn’t possible if they wanted to also maintain the river’s flood management role. “If you take out the concrete and put in grass or trees, it’s adding a significant amount of resistance … the water slows down, and it floods,” Takemori says. “To be honest, if we could have figured it out—and if that was scientifically possible—we would have proposed that.” However, Harris and other activists believe that many ways remain to create a river that’s more natural than what’s currently proposed, including improved river management techniques upstream and expanded stormwater capture technologies. For years, L.A. has also invested millions transforming into a “sponge city” by replacing concrete with more permeable surfaces. During a particularly rainy stretch in early February this year, the city captured 8.6 billion gallons of water, which is enough to sustain 100,000 homes for a year. “Now is the time to be ambitious and work toward those goals,” says Kelly Shannon McNeill, associate director of Los Angeles Waterkeeper. “We have unprecedented federal funding to invest in green resilient infrastructure, something we haven’t seen since the New Deal.” Although conversations around the river’s fate are much more centered on revitalization than in the past, the debate about its future remains a contentious one. A river runs through it Standing on the Taylor Yard Bridge, completed in 2022, Baldauf looks at the slowly meandering L.A. River as it passes by what could become the crown jewel of the city’s restoration efforts. With the smoldering midafternoon sun overhead, egrets, cormorants and herons mingle in the river below as the swaying reeds are barely heard over passing traffic. With a swoop of its wings, a heron takes flight. “This is why so many people fight for it. They’re inspired by it. They come here to contemplate,” Baldauf says. “The fact that there’s nature in the city and that we’re watching a great blue heron fly right over us.” A naturalized section of the Los Angeles River just south of Taylor Yard Darren Orf While the shape of the river’s future continues to be argued in the courts—of both law and public opinion—plans are not on hold. Major ecology efforts like the Los Angeles River Fish Passage and Habitat Structures Design Project are creating spaces to aid in the return of the steelhead trout. And thousands of volunteers every year participate in Friends of the L.A. River’s Great L.A. River Cleanup, the largest urban river cleanup event in the nation. And while Taylor Yard remains the river’s largest restoration opportunity, other areas are becoming more and more wild. The Dominguez Gap Wetlands in Long Beach sustain local plant and animal habitat; a 30-acre passive park in South Gate called Urban Orchard has fruit trees growing at the river’s edge; the Tujunga Wash Greenway and Stream Restoration Project recharges the San Fernando Valley Groundwater Basin; and vegetated ditches called bioswales in Caballero Creek Park filter stormwater pollution. Each improvement is a valuable opportunity for the river’s endemic residents, including the small-yet-resilient vireo, to return to the City of Angels. “We are nature, and we live in nature—even the nature we’ve created for ourselves,” Serrano says. “We must be making some kind of change that is making it easier for all of our wildlife neighbors to be present in the spaces we’ve created.” Get the latest Science stories in your inbox.

Could the waterway that the city was built around make a comeback?

Along a gentle bend of the Los Angeles River, in a stretch of land called Taylor Yard, a sound like a high-pitched record scratch can just be heard above the cacophony of city life. This is the call of the least Bell’s vireo, an olive-gray songbird that is only five inches from tip to tail. The riparian species native to Southern California has lived an endangered existence for more than 40 years. Now, the small bird’s return here symbolizes a new future for one of the country’s most maligned waterways.

Before the concrete tide of urbanization washed over the Los Angeles River Basin, the river-fed wetland that was here represented the perfect habitat for this rare species. But for the past century, this area was one of the largest rail yards in the region, and as an expanding city grew right up to the river’s now concrete-laden banks, the vireo all but disappeared.

Until, suddenly, it returned. The 2007 creation of Rio de Los Angeles State Park, which is itself part of the sprawling rail yard, set the stage. In the early 2010s someone reported hearing the vireo’s memorable call. A few years later, a photo captured a vireo mid-song, and in 2022 a nesting pair took refuge in a tree. This year, the news was even better.

“We actually saw fledglings,” says Evelyn Serrano, the director of the Audubon Center at Debs Park in Los Angeles. “We saw the nest and we saw the babies, so we were very excited. It’s tough to survive in an urban environment when you’re a little bird like that, but it’s definitely possible.”

Least Bell’s Vireo
A least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) sings at Taylor Yard on March 22. California placed this songbird on its endangered species list in 1980, but this rare vireo has recently returned to central L.A. thanks to habitat restoration and the return of the natural riparian ecosystem along a section of the Los Angeles River. Alecia Smith / Audubon California

Serrano is part of the local Audubon Center’s long, ongoing effort to rewild Taylor Yard, especially within the existing state park. Over the years the center has planted 1,000 endemic plants including 200 native trees as well as mule fat and mugwort for nest protection, and black sage and golden currant for food sources. But the nearby river—one of the few naturalized, soft-bottom sections of what is otherwise a concrete channel—is what really allows the vireo to thrive.

“[The vireo] needs to be near water, and that specific part of the river that’s soft-bodied has more water than other parts,” Serrano says. “This bird also lives in a very specific elevation, and it just so happens that all of those things … are all in one place.”

The return of the least Bell’s vireo shows what’s possible along a more natural Los Angeles River, and Taylor Yard represents the city’s largest opportunity to create vital habitat for many of its vulnerable endemic species. For years, a partnership of government groups and nonprofits has pushed to make the remaining 100 acres of the abandoned rail yard the “crown jewel” of L.A.’s river restoration project. The resulting collective, known as the 100 Acre Partnership, hopes to complete the restoration by 2028, which is just in time for the L.A. Olympic Games. The project is just the latest effort to create a new vision of Los Angeles that’s been in the works for nearly a century.

What was lost

Long before its starring role as an entertainment mecca, the basin that makes up Los Angeles was known for its river.

Fifty-one miles of free-flowing waters formed the beating heart of an 871-square-mile watershed transporting rainwater and snowpack from the nearby Santa Monica, Santa Susana and San Gabriel Mountains. Fed by various washes and tributaries, the river formed rich wetlands throughout the San Fernando Valley in the north all the way to the lower delta. At most times a trickle and at others a flood, the L.A. River meandered all over the region, either emptying into San Pedro Bay or even veering west toward Santa Monica Bay.

Because of the river and the region’s separation from the rest of California by mountains to the north, this alluvial floodplain became one of the most biodiverse regions in the world, filled with stunning amounts of endemic flora and fauna. Eventually, a native tribe known as the Tongva—also called Gabrieleño or Kizh—settled throughout the river basin, which included around 5,000 people spread across some 100 villages. They built their largest village, named Yaanga, in hills along the river near where Los Angeles City Hall stands today.

Although many picture L.A. with its vast sandy beaches to the west, the old Pueblo de Los Angeles actually formed further inland, as the river provided the necessary water for the entire settlement. This is why Candice Dickens-Russell, the CEO of the nonprofit Friends of the L.A. River, describes the river as the city’s “origin story.”

“We’re one of the only ‘coastal’ cities that’s not on a coast,” Dickens-Russell says. “We’re an inland downtown because of the river.”

For centuries, the river provided the water needed to grow crops, irrigate orchards and sustain a growing population. However, ignoring the Tongva practice of building slightly uphill from the river in recognition of its meandering course, the expanding city built up right along its banks. And as that city grew, its tolerance for the river’s floods diminished.

After a devastating flood in 1914, calls for flood control efforts grew louder, and the city formed the Los Angeles County Flood Control District a year later. In the following decades, the city began channelization and levee efforts and even built a few dams, but nothing substantial enough to fully prevent floods. Then, the river met its first major crossroads.

In 1930, Frederick Law Olmsted Jr., the son of the famous Central Park landscape architect, devised a sprawling plan to build parks and public spaces along the river with green flood prevention measures, saying at the time that “continued prosperity in Los Angeles will depend on providing needed parks.” The timing of the proposal couldn't have been worse. While L.A. already had a long history of privileging private real estate over public spaces, the stock market crash only months earlier soured any remaining appetite for Olmsted’s vision.

After two more destructive floods in 1934 and 1938, the Army Corps of Engineers slowly began encasing the L.A. River in concrete—one mile at a time—until its completion in 1960.

Los Angeles River and Rio Hondo
Located in South Gate, Lynwood and Downey at the confluence of the Los Angeles River and the Rio Hondo tributary (right), this area is one concrete-laden section of the river where Frank Gehry Partners has proposed building a platform park. Darren Orf

“Olmsted’s vision is what L.A. could have been,” says Ben Harris, a senior staff attorney at Los Angeles Waterkeeper, an environmental watchdog for the region’s coastal and inland waters. “It was bad circumstances, but the right vision.”

The right vision

As the river receded from the landscape, it also faded from the minds of many Angelenos who lived within its basin. Dickens-Russell, who grew up in Cerritos just east of the river, says she was totally unaware of its existence when she was younger.

“[The river] was not in my consciousness at all,” Dickens-Russell says. “It wasn’t until I went away for college, came home and started working in the environmental world in L.A. that I started to hear about the river and Friends of the L.A. River.”

The first major nonprofit group to start restoration along the river’s 51 miles, Friends of the L.A. River wouldn’t have been possible without the trailblazing work of Lewis MacAdams. A journalist, political activist and poet, MacAdams founded the nonprofit in 1986 as an act of civil disobedience. He envisioned a city with a restored river where animals and Angelenos could seek refuge, so that year he cut through a wire fence separating the river from the city and declared the channel a public space. In his poetry, he describes his organization’s role as the river’s emissary.

… we address ourselves to the river. / We ask if we can / speak on its behalf / in the human realm. / We can’t hear the river saying no / so we get to work.

And for 40 years, MacAdams was the river’s relentless advocate. In the mid-1990s, when the Army Corps of Engineers began scraping vegetation away from the soft-bottomed section of the river, MacAdams placed himself in front of the bulldozers. Meanwhile, he tirelessly fought for the waterway to be recognized as a natural river.

“He’d show up at meetings with the Army Corps and the Department of Public Works,” says Jon Christensen, an environmental journalist and historian with the Institute of the Environment and Sustainability at the University of California, Los Angeles, “and they’d talk about the ‘flood control channel’ and he’d just say ‘river.’”

In keeping with this activist spirit, kayakers in 2008 proved that the L.A. River was a navigable waterway by traversing its entire 51 miles. Two years later, the Environmental Protection Agency agreed and granted the river certain protections under the U.S. Clean Water Act, which strengthened the ability of local, state and federal agencies to fight against pollution and other forms of environmental degradation.

Though just one element of a bigger plan, Harris points out, Taylor Yard is a really good opportunity to examine the challenges of restoring the river—for both animals and the estimated one million people that live along the waterway’s path

Transforming Taylor Yard

In 1911, Southern Pacific Railroad bought land owned by Taylor Milling Company and adopted the name for its eventual 243-acre rail yard. After the rail yard shut down in the mid-1980s, parts of it were parceled off, with the least toxic areas being sold first. Some parcels became schools, apartments and even Rio de Los Angeles State Park itself. Then in 2017, after four years of negotiations, the City of L.A. purchased a long sought-after parcel from Union Pacific, a 42-acre stretch of land sandwiched between the current park and the river.

Today, the 100 Acre Partnership, a joint effort by the City of L.A., Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority (MRCA), and the California Department of Parks and Recreation, is overseeing the creation of the Paseo del Rio, the name of the planned park that encompasses that parcel and one bow-tie-shaped parcel that connects to the north. The final design, approved in 2023, contains walking paths along the river, a community pavilion, a sloped meadow incorporating the rail yard’s old turntable and a wetland habitat fed by stormwater from the surrounding community. Along the northern section of the planned park, the Nature Conservancy is developing an area that will showcase how stormwater can be cleaned using natural systems.

Crucially, the Paseo del Rio at Taylor Yard also reconnects the surrounding community with the L.A. River and provides even more vital habitat for riparian birds like the vireo, but also osprey, and many other native species including side-blotched lizards, pacific chorus frogs, big brown bats and arroyo chub fish.

The one thing that stands between the present and this bright, green future is the land’s industrial past. After decades spent as a rail yard, part of the land is simply too toxic for biking, running and lounging. Lead and petroleum hydrocarbons at the site lie in shallow soil, meaning they’re easier to remove. But volatile organic compounds sink lower into the ground, and this creates complicated layers of pollution, which makes cleanup difficult and expensive. Brian Baldauf, chief of watershed planning for the MRCA, says the partnership is still working with the U.S. Department of Toxic Substances Control to get a cleaning plan approved.

“This was the active working heart of the rail yard,” Baldauf says. “When the city purchased it, one of the requirements of Union Pacific was that the city would be responsible for cleaning it up.”

He adds that the 100 Acre Partnership and the Department of Toxic Substances Control need to come up with a strategy for creating a safe site that can have new habitat over it. Once that strategy is in place, things can move quickly, according to Baldauf. If all goes according to plan, Taylor Yard will be a moving display for what the L.A. River could be—and just in time for the 2028 Games.

“The Olympics in Los Angeles is an important consideration for a lot of public work,” Baldauf says. “The city is going to be a showcase, and we want to have this project ready.”

A divided future

Today the L.A. River forms in Canoga Park in the San Fernando Valley and cuts around the eastern side of Griffith Park, before heading south through the soft-bottomed Glendale Narrows. Eventually, it makes its way through the Gateway Cities region before reaching Long Beach. In its course, the river passes through 17 cities, each with its own history and relationship to the river.

While environmental groups argue for a more natural river—one that can play host to humans and habitats alike—the river’s engineered role of moving massive amounts of water as quickly and safely as possible hasn’t changed, and that dichotomy has led to disagreement.

“We’ve inherited in the American West these hybrid systems—they are engineered and natural, and there is no rewinding the tape of history,” Christensen says. “What do we want out of these hybrid systems?”

Over the decades, various master plans—at the local and federal levels—have offered suggestions for addressing challenges found within these river communities. Some address green gentrification, which occurs when newly developed natural space brings in investment that eventually displaces the local community. A key example of this phenomenon, according to Christensen, is New York City’s High Line, an abandoned industrial train track renovated into an elevated park that sent nearby home prices skyrocketing. Other plans suggest searching for ways to introduce green space into park-poor areas, create arts and culture opportunities, and improve river access.

Taylor Yard is a rarity of sorts. Its 100 acres is unlike any other opportunity along the river basin—as most planned parks are well under 30 acres. And because Taylor Yard is designed to be an example of how to rehabilitate contaminated sites along the L.A. River, the project doesn’t feature some of the more controversial river restoration ideas that have percolated in recent years.

The most divisive example is the L.A. River Master Plan, originally commissioned by L.A. County, which outlines possible investments along the river. In 2015, the Los Angeles River Revitalization Corporation asked famous architect and longtime L.A. resident Frank Gehry to take the design reins for reimagining the L.A. River as part of the master plan. Some were excited by the idea of Gehry turning his attention to the river, but others worried the architect wasn’t a good fit.

“I would remind them that the last time there was a single idea for the entire river it involved 17,000 people pouring three million barrels of concrete,” MacAdams said back in 2016.

In 2022, environmental groups, including Friends of the L.A. River, East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice, the Nature Conservancy in California and Los Angeles Waterkeeper, pulled support for the L.A. River Master Plan, with the latter saying it “failed to treat the L.A. River as a natural and living river.”

A part of the dispute centered around the idea of “platform parks,” proposed by Frank Gehry Partners, that would effectively cap the river to provide green space. In other words, these parks create a concrete channel for water to pass under while the park on top remains undisturbed. The plan also includes new buildings, like the Southeast Los Angeles Cultural Center, to be constructed right along the river’s floodplain, and environmental groups argue that the plan doesn’t take out enough existing concrete. Los Angeles Waterkeeper and the Center for Biological Diversity swiftly sued Los Angeles County over its approved master plan.

Tensho Takemori, a partner at Frank Gehry Partners, acknowledges that a concrete-free river is the river everyone wants but says that when the firm looked at taking out all that concrete, they determined it just wasn’t possible if they wanted to also maintain the river’s flood management role.

“If you take out the concrete and put in grass or trees, it’s adding a significant amount of resistance … the water slows down, and it floods,” Takemori says. “To be honest, if we could have figured it out—and if that was scientifically possible—we would have proposed that.”

However, Harris and other activists believe that many ways remain to create a river that’s more natural than what’s currently proposed, including improved river management techniques upstream and expanded stormwater capture technologies. For years, L.A. has also invested millions transforming into a “sponge city” by replacing concrete with more permeable surfaces. During a particularly rainy stretch in early February this year, the city captured 8.6 billion gallons of water, which is enough to sustain 100,000 homes for a year.

“Now is the time to be ambitious and work toward those goals,” says Kelly Shannon McNeill, associate director of Los Angeles Waterkeeper. “We have unprecedented federal funding to invest in green resilient infrastructure, something we haven’t seen since the New Deal.”

Although conversations around the river’s fate are much more centered on revitalization than in the past, the debate about its future remains a contentious one.

A river runs through it

Standing on the Taylor Yard Bridge, completed in 2022, Baldauf looks at the slowly meandering L.A. River as it passes by what could become the crown jewel of the city’s restoration efforts. With the smoldering midafternoon sun overhead, egrets, cormorants and herons mingle in the river below as the swaying reeds are barely heard over passing traffic. With a swoop of its wings, a heron takes flight.

“This is why so many people fight for it. They’re inspired by it. They come here to contemplate,” Baldauf says. “The fact that there’s nature in the city and that we’re watching a great blue heron fly right over us.”

Naturalized Section of Los Angeles River
A naturalized section of the Los Angeles River just south of Taylor Yard Darren Orf

While the shape of the river’s future continues to be argued in the courts—of both law and public opinion—plans are not on hold. Major ecology efforts like the Los Angeles River Fish Passage and Habitat Structures Design Project are creating spaces to aid in the return of the steelhead trout. And thousands of volunteers every year participate in Friends of the L.A. River’s Great L.A. River Cleanup, the largest urban river cleanup event in the nation.

And while Taylor Yard remains the river’s largest restoration opportunity, other areas are becoming more and more wild. The Dominguez Gap Wetlands in Long Beach sustain local plant and animal habitat; a 30-acre passive park in South Gate called Urban Orchard has fruit trees growing at the river’s edge; the Tujunga Wash Greenway and Stream Restoration Project recharges the San Fernando Valley Groundwater Basin; and vegetated ditches called bioswales in Caballero Creek Park filter stormwater pollution.

Each improvement is a valuable opportunity for the river’s endemic residents, including the small-yet-resilient vireo, to return to the City of Angels.

“We are nature, and we live in nature—even the nature we’ve created for ourselves,” Serrano says. “We must be making some kind of change that is making it easier for all of our wildlife neighbors to be present in the spaces we’ve created.”

Get the latest Science stories in your inbox.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

A rare glimpse inside the mountain tunnel that carries water to Southern California

In the 1930s, workers bored a 13-mile tunnel beneath Mt. San Jacinto. Here's a look inside the engineering feat that carries Colorado River water to Southern California.

Thousands of feet below the snowy summit of Mt. San Jacinto, a formidable feat of engineering and grit makes life as we know it in Southern California possible. The 13-mile-long San Jacinto Tunnel was bored through the mountain in the 1930s by a crew of about 1,200 men who worked day and night for six years, blasting rock and digging with machinery. Completed in 1939, the tunnel was a cornerstone in the construction of the 242-mile Colorado River Aqueduct. It enabled the delivery of as much as 1 billion gallons of water per day.The tunnel is usually off-limits when it is filled and coursing with a massive stream of Colorado River water. But recently, while it was shut down for annual maintenance, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California opened the west end of the passage to give The Times and others a rare look inside. “It’s an engineering marvel,” said John Bednarski, an assistant general manager of MWD. “It’s pretty awe-inspiring.” The 16-foot-diameter San Jacinto Tunnel runs 13 miles through the mountain. While shut down for maintenance, the tunnel has a constant stream of water entering from the mountain. A group visits the west end of the San Jacinto Tunnel, where the mouth of the water tunnel enters a chamber. He wore a hard hat as he led a group to the gaping, horseshoe-shaped mouth of the tunnel. The passage’s concrete arch faded in the distance to pitch black.The tunnel wasn’t entirely empty. The sound of rushing water echoed from the walls as an ankle-deep stream flowed from the portal and cascaded into a churning pool beneath metal gates. Many in the tour group wore rubber boots as they stood on moist concrete in a chamber faintly lit by filtered sunlight, peering into the dark tunnel. This constant flow comes as groundwater seeps and gushes from springs that run through the heart of the mountain. In places deep in the tunnel, water shoots so forcefully from the floor or the wall that workers have affectionately named these soaking obstacles “the fire hose” and “the car wash.”Standing by the flowing stream, Bednarski called it “leakage water from the mountain itself.”Mt. San Jacinto rises 10,834 feet above sea level, making it the second-highest peak in Southern California after 11,503-foot Mt. San Gorgonio.As the tunnel passes beneath San Jacinto’s flank, as much as 2,500 feet of solid rock lies overhead, pierced only by two vertical ventilation shafts. Snow covers Mt. San Jacinto, as seen from Whitewater, in March. At the base of the mountain, the 13-mile San Jacinto Tunnel starts its journey. The tunnel transports Colorado River water to Southern California’s cities. During maintenance, workers roll through on a tractor equipped with a frame bearing metal bristles that scrape the tunnel walls, cleaning off algae and any growth of invasive mussels. Workers also inspect the tunnel by passing through on an open trailer, scanning for any cracks that require repairs.“It’s like a Disneyland ride,” said Bryan Raymond, an MWD conveyance team manager. “You’re sitting on this trailer, and there’s a bunch of other people on it too, and you’re just cruising through looking at the walls.” Aside from the spraying and trickling water, employee Michael Volpone said he has also heard faint creaking.“If you sit still and listen, you can kind of hear the earth move,” he said. “It’s a little eerie.”Standing at the mouth of the tunnel, the constant babble of cascading water dominates the senses. The air is moist but not musty. Put a hand to the clear flowing water, and it feels warm enough for a swim. On the concrete walls are stained lines that extend into the darkness, marking where the water often reaches when the aqueduct is running full. Many who have worked on the aqueduct say they are impressed by the system’s design and how engineers and workers built such a monumental system with the basic tools and technology available during the Great Depression.Pipelines and tunnelsThe search for a route to bring Colorado River water across the desert to Los Angeles began with the signing of a 1922 agreement that divided water among seven states. After the passage of a $2-million bond measure by Los Angeles voters in 1925, hundreds of surveyors fanned out across the largely roadless Mojave and Sonoran deserts to take measurements and study potential routes.The surveyors traveled mostly on horseback and on foot as they mapped the rugged terrain, enduring grueling days in desert camps where the heat sometimes topped 120 degrees.Planners studied and debated more than 100 potential paths before settling on one in 1931. The route began near Parker, Ariz., and took a curving path through desert valleys, around obstacles and, where there was no better option, through mountains.In one official report, a manager wrote that “to bore straight through the mountains is very expensive and to pump over them is likewise costly.” He said the planners carefully weighed these factors as they decided on a solution that would deliver water at the lowest cost. VIDEO | 02:45 A visit to the giant tunnel that brings Colorado River water to Southern California Share via Those in charge of the Metropolitan Water District, which had been created in 1928 to lead the effort, were focused on delivering water to 13 participating cities, including Los Angeles, Burbank and Anaheim. William Mulholland, Los Angeles’ chief water engineer, had led an early scouting party to map possible routes from the Colorado River to Southern California’s cities in 1923, a decade after he celebrated the completion of the 233-mile aqueduct from the Owens Valley to Los Angeles with the triumphant words, “There it is. Take it.”The aqueduct’s design matched the audaciousness of the giant dams the federal government was starting to build along the Colorado — Hoover Dam (originally called Boulder Dam) and Parker Dam, which formed the reservoir where the aqueduct would begin its journey.Five pumping plants would be built to lift water more than 1,600 feet along the route across the desert. Between those points, water would run by gravity through open canals, buried pipelines and 29 separate tunnels stretching 92 miles — the longest of which was a series of nine tunnels running 33.7 miles through hills bordering the Coachella Valley.To make it possible, voters in the district’s 13 cities overwhelmingly approved a $220-million bond in 1931, the equivalent of a $4.5-billion investment today, which enabled the hiring of 35,000 workers. Crews set up camps, excavated canals and began to blast open shafts through the desert’s rocky spines to make way for water.In 1933, workers started tearing into the San Jacinto Mountains at several locations, from the east and the west, as well as excavating shafts from above. Black-and-white photographs and films showed miners in hard hats and soiled uniforms as they stood smoking cigarettes, climbing into open rail cars and running machinery that scooped and loaded piles of rocks.Crews on another hulking piece of equipment, called a jumbo, used compressed-air drills to bore dozens of holes, which were packed with blasting power and detonated to pierce the rock. (Courtesy of Metropolitan Water District of Southern California) The work progressed slowly, growing complicated when the miners struck underground streams, which sent water gushing in.According to a 1991 history of the MWD titled “A Water Odyssey,” one flood in 1934 disabled two of three pumps that had been brought in to clear the tunnel. In another sudden flood, an engineer recalled that “the water came in with a big, mad rush and filled the shaft to the top. Miners scrambled up the 800-foot ladder to the surface, and the last man out made it with water swirling around his waist.”Death and delaysAccording to the MWD’s records, 13 workers died during the tunnel’s construction, including men who were struck by falling rocks, run over by equipment or electrocuted with a wire on one of the mining trolleys that rolled on railroad tracks. The Metropolitan Water District had originally hired Wenzel & Henoch Construction Co. to build the tunnel. But after less than two years, only about two miles of the tunnel had been excavated, and the contractor was fired by MWD general manager Frank Elwin “F.E.” Weymouth, who assigned the district’s engineers and workers to complete the project.Construction was delayed again in 1937 when workers went on strike for six weeks. But in 1939, the last wall of rock tumbled down, uniting the east and west tunnels, and the tunnel was finished. John Bednarski, assistant general manager of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, stands in a water tunnel near the end point of the larger San Jacinto Tunnel, which carries Colorado River water. The total cost was $23.5 million. But there also were other costs. As the construction work drained water, many nearby springs used by the Native Soboba people stopped flowing. The drying of springs and creeks left the tribe’s members without water and starved their farms, which led to decades of litigation by the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians and eventually a legal settlement in 2008 that resolved the tribe’s water rights claims.The ‘magic touch’ of waterBy the time the tunnel was completed, the Metropolitan Water District had released a 20-minute film that was shown in movie theaters and schools celebrating its conquest of the Colorado River and the desert. It called Mt. San Jacinto the “tallest and most forbidding barrier.”In a rich baritone, the narrator declared Southern California “a new empire made possible by the magic touch of water.” “Water required to support this growth and wealth could not be obtained from the local rainfall in this land of sunshine,” the narrator said as the camera showed newly built homes and streets filled with cars and buses. “The people therefore realized that a new and dependable water supply must be provided, and this new water supply has been found on the lofty western slopes of the Rocky Mountains, a wonderland of beauty, clad by nature in a white mantle of snow.”Water began to flow through the aqueduct in 1939 as the pumping plants were tested. At the Julian Hinds Pumping Plant, near the aqueduct’s halfway point, water was lifted 441 feet, surging through three pipelines up a desert mountain. March 2012 image of the 10-foot-diameter delivery lines carrying water 441 feet uphill from the Julian Hinds Pumping Plant. (Los Angeles Times) From there, the water flowed by gravity, moving at 3-6 mph as it traveled through pipelines, siphons and tunnels. It entered the San Jacinto Tunnel in Cabazon, passed under the mountain and emerged near the city of San Jacinto, then continued in pipelines to Lake Mathews reservoir in Riverside County. In 1941, Colorado River water started flowing to Pasadena, Beverly Hills, Compton and other cities. Within six years, another pipeline was built to transport water from the aqueduct south to San Diego.The influx of water fueled Southern California’s rapid growth during and after World War II.Over decades, the dams and increased diversions also took an environmental toll, drying up much of the once-vast wetlands in Mexico’s Colorado River Delta. John Bednarski, assistant general manager of the Metropolitan Water District, walks in a water tunnel near the end point of the larger San Jacinto Tunnel. An impressive designToday, 19 million people depend on water delivered by the MWD, which also imports supplies from Northern California through the aqueducts and pipelines of the State Water Project.In recent decades, the agency has continued boring tunnels where needed to move water. A $1.2-billion, 44-mile-long conveyance system called the Inland Feeder, completed in 2009, involved boring eight miles of tunnels through the San Bernardino Mountains and another 7.9-mile tunnel under the Badlands in Riverside County.The system enabled the district to increase its capacity and store more water during wet years in Diamond Valley Lake, Southern California’s largest reservoir, which can hold about 260 billion gallons of water. “Sometimes tunneling is actually the most effective way to get from point A to point B,” said Deven Upadhyay, the MWD’s general manager.Speaking hypothetically, Upadhyay said, if engineers had another shot at designing and building the aqueduct now using modern technology, it’s hard to say if they would end up choosing the same route through Mt. San Jacinto or a different route around it. But the focus on minimizing cost might yield a similar route, he said.“Even to this day, it’s a pretty impressive design,” Upadhyay said.When people drive past on the I-10 in Cabazon, few realize that a key piece of infrastructure lies hidden where the desert meets the base of the mountain. At the tunnel’s exit point near San Jacinto, the only visible signs of the infrastructure are several concrete structures resembling bunkers. When the aqueduct is running, those who enter the facility will hear the rumble of rushing water. The tunnel’s west end was opened to a group of visitors in March, when the district’s managers held an event to name the tunnel in honor of Randy Record, who served on the MWD board for two decades and was chair from 2014 to 2018. Speaking to an audience, Upadhyay reflected on the struggles the region now faces as the Colorado River is sapped by drought and global warming, and he drew a parallel to the challenges the tunnel’s builders overcame in the 1930s. “They found a path,” Upadhyay said. “This incredible engineering feat. And it required strength, courage and really an innovative spirit.” “When we now think about the challenges that we face today, dealing with wild swings in climate and the potential reductions that we might face, sharing dwindling supplies on our river systems with the growing Southwest, it’s going to require the same thing — strength, courage and a spirit of innovation,” he said. A steep steel staircase gives access to a water tunnel near the end point of the larger San Jacinto Tunnel, which carries Colorado River water to Southern California.

Officials to Test Water From Ohio Village Near Cold War-Era Weapons Plant After Newspaper Probe

Authorities in Ohio plan to test the water supply across a small village near a former weapons plant after a newspaper investigation published Friday found high levels of radioactivity in samples taken at a school, athletic field, library and other sites

LUCKEY, Ohio (AP) — Authorities in Ohio plan to test the groundwater supply across a village near a former weapons plant after a newspaper investigation published Friday found high levels of radioactivity in samples taken at a school, athletic field, library and other sites.However, The Blade in Toledo said its tests showed radioactivity levels 10 times higher than normal in water from a drinking fountain at Eastwood Middle School, 45 times higher than normal at the Luckey Library and 1,731 times higher than normal at a water pump near athletic fields.“We’ve got to get to the bottom of this,” said Lt. Col. Robert Burnham, commander of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Buffalo District, which oversees the cleanup.Nineteen of the 39 samples collected by the newspaper from well water across Luckey — at homes, businesses, and public places — showed radioactivity at least 10 times greater than what the federal government calls normal for the area, the newspaper said. The Blade hired an accredited private lab to conduct the testing.The radioactivity detected was primarily bismuth-214, which decays from the radioactive gas radon-222. Experts agree that high levels of bismuth-214 suggest high levels of radon are also present.Radon exposure is the leading cause of lung cancer in nonsmokers.The testing also found low levels of radioactive cobalt-60, a man-made isotope, in two wells. Experts called that finding extremely rare.Taehyun Roh, a Texas A&M University scientist who specializes in environmental exposures, said regulators should also conduct air and soil testing to assess the extent of the contamination and identify the source."Since this area likely has high radon levels, testing for radon in both air and water is advisable,” he wrote in an email. “A safe drinking water advisory should be issued, recommending the use of bottled water until further assessments and mitigation measures are in place.”The Corps of Engineers has long maintained that residential drinking water was not being contaminated by the removal work. Burnham and others said they still believe that to be true, citing thousands of their own soil samples.The state Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Health will lead the testing. In an email, Ohio EPA spokesperson Katie Boyer told the newspaper the contaminant levels in the public drinking water are still “within acceptable drinking water standards.” She said any concerns raised by the state testing would be addressed.The 44-acre industrial site — 22 miles (35 kilometers) south of Toledo — was long crucial to America’s nuclear weapons program. In the 1940s, farmland was replaced by a sprawling defense plant that produced magnesium metal for the Manhattan Project. In the 1950s, the plant became the government’s sole source of beryllium metal for nuclear bombs, Cold War missiles and Space Race products, including a heat shield for Project Mercury.“Things that happened generations ago are still affecting us,” said Karina Hahn-Claydon, a 50-year-old teacher whose family lives less than a mile from the site. “And that’s because the government didn’t take care of it.”Private drinking wells, unlike municipal systems, are not regulated, and responsibility for testing is left to owners. The Blade’s testing took place from April 2024 through January.Radioactivity has been linked to an increased risk of various cancers, including blood and thyroid cancers.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Feb. 2025

UK spending watchdog censures water firms and regulators over sewage failings

NAO finds regulatory gaps have enabled overspending on infrastructure building while not improving sewage worksWater companies have been getting away with failures to improve sewage works and overspending because of regulatory problems, a damning report by the government’s spending watchdog has found.Firms have overspent on infrastructure building, the National Audit Office (NAO) found, with some of these costs being added to consumers’ bills. The Guardian this week reported Ofwat and the independent water commission are investigating water firms for spending up to 10 times as much on their sewage works and piping as comparable countries. Continue reading...

Water companies have been getting away with failures to improve sewage works and overspending because of regulatory problems, a damning report by the government’s spending watchdog has found.Firms have overspent on infrastructure building, the National Audit Office (NAO) found, with some of these costs being added to consumers’ bills. The Guardian this week reported Ofwat and the independent water commission are investigating water firms for spending up to 10 times as much on their sewage works and piping as comparable countries.Bills in England and Wales are rising by £123 on average this year, and will go up further over the next five years, so that companies can fix ageing sewage infrastructure and stop spills of human waste from contaminating rivers and seas. Several water firms have complained to the Competition and Markets Authority because they want the regulator to allow them to increase bills even further.Only 1% of water companies’ actions to improve environmental performance, such as improving sewer overflows, have been inspected by the Environment Agency, the authors of the NAO report said. They also found there was no regulator responsible for proactively inspecting wastewater assets to prevent further environmental harm.The report, which audited the three water regulators, Ofwat, the Environment Agency, and the Drinking Water Inspectorate, as well as the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, also found the regulators did not have a good understanding of the condition of infrastructure assets such as leaking sewers and ageing sewage treatment facilities as they do not have a set of metrics to assess their condition.Gareth Davies, the head of the NAO, said: “Given the unprecedented situation facing the sector, Defra and the regulators need to act urgently to address industry performance and resilience to ensure the sector can meet government targets and achieve value for money over the long term for bill payers.”Despite the huge costs of infrastructure, the water companies have moved slowly meaning that at the current rate, it would take 700 years to replace the entire existing water network, the report found. Regulatory gaps and a lack of urgency about replacing old and malfunctioning infrastructure has caused a “rising tide of risk” in the sector, which is contributing to increasing bills for customers, the report warned.It also criticised the lack of a national plan for water supply and recommended that Defra must understand the costs and deliverability of its plans, alongside the impact they would have on customers’ bills.Several of the issues raised by the NAO, including concerns about weak infrastructure, have come to the fore in the debate over the future of Thames Water, the country’s largest water company with 16 million customers. Thames, which is under significant financial pressure with almost £20bn in debt, needs to secure fresh investment within months. Questions over the state of Thames’s infrastructure and regulatory punishment it could face for its failures have dogged the process of winning fresh funds. Meanwhile, Ofwat has also rejected its requests to raise bills by as much as 59%, instead allowing a 35% increase over the next five years.The government set up the independent water commission (IWC) last year to investigate how the water industry operated and whether regulation was fit for purpose.Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, the Tory chair of the Commons public accounts committee, said: “Today’s NAO report lays bare the scale of the challenges facing the water sector – not least the real prospect of water shortfall without urgent action.“The consequences of government’s failure to regulate this sector properly are now landing squarely on bill payers who are being left to pick up the tab. After years of under-investment, pollution incidents and water supply issues, it is no surprise that consumer trust is at an all-time low. Having not built any reservoirs in the last 30 years, we now need 10.skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Business TodayGet set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morningPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotion“Consumers rightly expect a water sector that is robust, resilient and fit for the future. Defra and the regulators must focus on rebuilding public confidence and ensure the sector can attract the long-term investment it desperately needs.”An Environment Agency spokesperson said: “We recognise the significant challenges facing the water industry. That is why we will be working with Defra and other water regulators to implement the report’s recommendations and update our frameworks to reflect its findings.”An Ofwat spokesperson added: “We agree with the NAO’s recommendations for Ofwat and we continue to progress our work in these areas, and to contribute to the IWC wider review of the regulatory framework. We also look forward to the IWC’s recommendations and to working with government and other regulators to better deliver for customers and the environment.”A Defra spokesperson said: “The government has taken urgent action to fix the water industry – but change will not happen overnight. We have put water companies under tough special measures through our landmark Water Act.”Water UK, which represents the water companies, has been contacted for comment.

Water firms admit sewage monitoring damaging public trust

The industry says powers to self-monitor water quality should be handed back to the regulator.

Water companies should no longer be allowed to monitor their own levels of sewage pollution, the industry body has told the BBC exclusively.Instead they are proposing a new, third-party monitoring system to build consumer trust.The recommendation is part of a submission made to the UK government's independent review into the water sector.Campaigners have long complained the companies' self-reporting has prevented the true scale of pollution in UK water being revealed.A third-party system could add more pressure to the regulators, which have also been criticised for not holding the companies to account. A report from the National Audit Office is expected to say on Friday that the Environment Agency does not currently have enough capacity to take on any new monitoring.David Henderson, CEO of industry body Water UK, told the BBC: "We absolutely accept that self-monitoring is not helping to instil trust and so we would like to see an end to it, and in place of it a more robust, third-party system." As part of their permitting arrangements water companies are expected to regularly sample water quality to identify potential pollution, and submit this data to the Environment Agency in an arrangement known as "operator self monitoring". But there have been incidents of misreporting by water companies in England and Wales uncovered by the regulators, who said some cases had been deliberate.Southern Water was previously issued fines totalling £213m by the industry regulator (Ofwat) and the environmental regulator (the Environment Agency) for manipulating sewage data.In that case, there was unreported pollution into numerous conservation sites which caused "major environmental harm" to wildlife.The company later admitted its actions "fell short".Henderson added that the industry never asked to self-monitor, but that it was introduced in 2009 by the then Labour government to "reduce the administrative burden" on the Environment Agency (EA). In 2023, the BBC reported that EA staff were concerned that, due to funding cuts, the Agency was increasingly relying on water companies to self-report rather than carrying out its own checks on pollution from sewage. The current environment minister, Steve Reed, has promised to review the system, calling it the equivalent of companies "mark[ing] their own homework".But the National Audit Office (NAO), which reviews government spending, questioned the ability of the EA to take on any new monitoring. "Regulators need to address the fact that they currently have limited oversight over whether water companies are carrying out their work as expected. It is hard to see how they will achieve this without increased overall capacity," said Anita Shah, NAO Director of Regulation.It is expected to publish a full review of the regulation of the water sector on Friday. A Defra spokesperson told the BBC: "We are committed to taking decisive action to fix the water industry. The Water Commission's recommendations will mark the next major step [to] restore public trust in the sector."The government launched an independent water commission in October to review the sector and the way it is regulated. The public consultation closed on Wednesday with the findings expected in July. Water UK submitted a 200-page document of recommendations, including this call to end self-monitoring.The industry body also requested that water meters be universal across England and Wales to make bills fairer. At present about 60% of the population have a meter."The meter is just to ensure that people are paying for what they use as opposed to a flat rate of system where you can use virtually no water and pay the same as someone filling up a pool three times in a summer," said Henderson."This doesn't properly reflect the value of water and encourage people to conserve it in the way that we need," he added.

Cambodia Canal's Impact on Mekong Questioned After China Signs Deal

By Francesco Guarascio(Reuters) -Cambodia should share a feasibility study on the impact of a planned China-backed canal that would divert water...

(Reuters) -Cambodia should share a feasibility study on the impact of a planned China-backed canal that would divert water from the rice-growing floodplains of Vietnam's Mekong Delta, said the body overseeing the transnational river.After months of uncertainty, Phnom Penh last week signed a deal with China to develop the Funan Techo Canal when President Xi Jinping visited Cambodia as part of a tour of Southeast Asia.It was Beijing's first explicit public commitment to the project, giving state-controlled construction giant China Communications Construction Company (CCCC) a 49% stake through a subsidiary, but also linking Chinese support to the "sustainability" of the project.The Secretariat of the intergovernmental Mekong River Commission (MRC) that coordinates the sustainable development of Southeast Asia's longest river said it had so far received from Cambodia only "basic information" on the project."We hope that further details, including the feasibility study report and other relevant reports, will be provided," the Commission said in a statement to Reuters this week.That would be needed "to ensure that any potential implications for the broader Mekong Basin are fully considered," it added.The canal has already created concern among environmentalists who say it could further harm the delicate ecology of the Mekong Delta, which is Vietnam's major rice growing region and is already facing problems of drought and salination as result of infrastructure projects upstream. Vietnam is also a leading exporter of rice.On Friday, the Cambodian government said the canal would have minimal environmental impact and "aligns with the 1995 Mekong Agreement" which governs cooperation among riverine countries in Southeast Asia.The Mekong River, fed by a series of tributaries, flows some 4,900 kilometres (3,045 miles) from its source in the Tibetan plateau through China, Myanmar, Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam to the sea."Whether the Funan Techo Canal violates the 1995 Mekong Agreement depends on several factors, including its connection to the Mekong mainstream," the Commission said, offering additional guidance to Phnom Penh and other member states "to ensure compliance".Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam are members of the MRC while China and Myanmar are dialogue partners.The Cambodian government did not respond to questions about whether it intended to share the requested documents.Vietnam's foreign ministry did not reply to a request for comment after the deal with China was signed, but the country has repeatedly asked Cambodia to share more information about the canal to assess its impact.Xi made no reference to the canal in his public statements in Phnom Penh but a joint communique issued at the end of his visit said China supported Cambodia in building the canal "in accordance with the principles of feasibility and sustainability".The deal signed by CCCC on Friday was for a 151.6 km (94.2 miles) canal costing $1.16 billion.However, the Cambodian government says on the canal's official website that the waterway would stretch 180 km and cost $1.7 billion at completion in 2028.The higher cost reflects a short section to be built by Cambodian firms as well as bridges and water conservation resources, the government told Reuters without clarifying who would pay for the bridges and water conservation.Cambodia's deputy prime minister said in May 2024 that China would cover the entire cost of the project, which was put at $1.7 billion.The canal is designed to link the Mekong Basin to the Gulf of Thailand in Cambodia's southern Kep province. Much of the Mekong's nutrient-rich sediment no longer reaches rice farms in the Delta because of multiple hydroelectric dams built by China upriver, a Reuters analysis showed in 2022.The project agreed with China is also different from the original plan as it is focusing on boosting irrigation rather than solely pursuing navigation purposes, said Brian Eyler, an expert on the Mekong region at U.S.-based think tank Stimson Center.The water diverted from the Mekong Delta "will be much more than previously described," said Eyler.(Reporting by Francesco Guarascio; additional reporting by Khanh Vu in Hanoi; Editing by Kate Mayberry)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.