Developing Adaptive Capacity to Droughts: the Rationality of Locality

Abstract

ABSTRACT. The Bear River is driven by a highly variable, snow-driven montane ecosystem and flows through a droughtprone arid region of the western United States. It traverses three states, is diverted to store water in an ecologically unique natural lake, Bear Lake, and empties into the Great Salt Lake at the Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge (BRMBR). People in the Bear River Basin have come to anticipate droughts, building a legal, institutional, and engineered infrastructure to adapt to the watershed's hydrologic realities and historical legacies. Their ways of understanding linked vulnerabilities has led to what might appear as paradoxical outcomes: farmers with the most legally secure water rights are the most vulnerable to severe drought; managers at the federal Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge engage in wetland farming and make unlikely political alliances; and, increased agricultural irrigation efficiency in the Bear River Basin actually threatens the water supply of some wetlands. The rationality of locality is the key to understanding how people in the Bear River Basin have increased their adaptive capacity to droughts by recognizing their interdependencies. As the effects of climate change unfold, understanding social-ecological system linkages will be important for guiding future adaptations and enhancing resilience in ways that appropriately integrate localized ecosystem capacity and human needs.

Adaptive wetland management in an uncertain and changing arid environment

“…The wetland nexus is dynamic and shifts according to annual hydrological patterns, policy changes, technological advances in water use, and changing population demographics. Thus, management of wetlands requires an understanding of regional social and ecological dynamics and the linkages within SESs (Welsh et al 2013). From a functional point of view, wetland boundaries are dynamic and often unclear, especially when management of migratory (wildlife) and flowing (water) resources is considered.…”

“…This has been the case for BRMBR, where managers have acquired water rights and constructed infrastructure based around irrigation season demands and return flow in ways that make habitat production mimic crop production Endter-Wada 2013, Welsh et al 2013). However, strategies that are well-adapted to agriculture-dominated rivers and landscapes may prove inadequate for hydrological changes predicted for arid-region SESs.…”

Groundwater Governance and the Growth of Center Pivot Irrigation in Cimarron County, OK and Union County, NM: Implications for Community Vulnerability to Drought

“…However, when water is no longer available, farmers often lack past non-irrigated drought experience or knowledge to adapt accordingly. Welsh and colleagues [14] (p. 3) argue that, "drought vulnerabilities are shaped not only by natural contexts, but social contexts as well." The social contexts of drought vulnerability include: political, institutional, geographic, economic, and social structures [15][16][17].…”

“…Welsh and colleagues [14] also use a governance framework to assess how farmers in the Bear River Region in Utah, who have the most legally secure water rights, are somehow also the most vulnerable to severe drought. During times of drought, these farmers are accustomed to having readily available irrigation water.…”

“…The social contexts of drought vulnerability include: political, institutional, geographic, economic, and social structures [15][16][17]. Institutions often create reactive policies that may actually increase vulnerability instead of being proactive to reduce or mitigate impacts due to drought [14]. Thus, it is important to understand what role governance plays in fostering communities and ecological systems that are less vulnerable.…”