Categories
Population

We Cause our Drought

“Instead of speaking of a shortage of supply we could just as truly say that there is a longage of demand.”

Biologist Garrett Hardin

Our rain and snow come from the sky, however much of the water gets up there by transpiration from plants and trees. So many people appreciate Colorado that they move here, causing the built space (housed, roads etc.) displaces fields and trees. Therefore, there is less water making it up to the sky to form clouds.

However, that’s probably a minor reason for the 25+ year drought affecting western North America. This dearth of water isn’t only the worst drought of this century; it is the worst drought in 1200 years! No wonder it is called a megadrought. Furthermore, it’s not just affecting southwestern Colorado, but much of western North America and has expanded to cover much of the US.

Yes, there are periodic climatic variations that cause dry years, then wet years. El niño/la niña is one such variation, but it has been overwhelmed by another factor—climate heating.

Climate chaos has already caused many weird weather patterns in southwest Colorado this year. First we had summer in March, then we experienced winter in April. However, one thing is constant—it has been dry. In early March of this year the snowpack was at historic lows. Then record high temperatures later that month melted much of the snow that remained. If you look west to the La Plata Mountains, their silver plate has been worn off.

How much of this drought is due to climate chaos? Scientists have estimated that about half is anthropogenic. An article published in 2020 found that 46% of the megadrought could be accounted for by climactic heating. It has become hotter since then, so perhaps more than half is due to anthropogenic heating. My understanding is that the other half is due to the normal variation in precipitation.

There is less water is coming from the sky and less  water on the surface—which is how a drought is usually defined. What about under the ground? There the water supply is hidden and more difficult to measure, of course. However, we know that some aquifers have been almost sucked dry. The Ogallala aquifer, for instance, has been tapped by so many wells for crop irrigation that in some places the water level has dropped 300 feet!

Satellite measurements have shown that the Earth’s surface has fallen many feet in areas such as southern Florida, largely because the underground water has been removed. Although we think of the Amazon as being the ultimate of wetness and high humidity, some trees are suffering from dryness, leading to overheating and their death. Amazonia has been called “the lungs of the Earth”, but if the drought worsens, those lungs may stop breathing.

The term “water crisis” has been used so often that readers are jaded. Furthermore, a “crisis” implies resolution is possible, but in some areas the drought is so severe that resolution seems impossible. Thus, a new term has been coined for these dire situations, “water bankruptcy”. It is defined as: “…human-water systems whose water use persistently exceeds hydrological carrying capacity [so] damages are irreparable….” Examples include parts of Mexico, Egypt and India.

Human activities have decreased precipitation, especially in the North American Southwest. In addition, excess numbers of people have exceeded the carrying capacity of fresh water supplies. One group of humanity is causing this drought by using fossil fuels, and another group of humanity is suffering from water bankruptcy. Fewer people would help with both problems.

© Richard Grossman MD, 2026

Categories
Abortion Population Reproductive Health

Keeping Abortion Access Safe

Image courtesy of Plan C

Michael McLachlan walked up the steps of the US Supreme Court Building alone, with his mind set for the trial, while his family watched from the oval plaza outside. McLachlan was the Colorado Solicitor General in 2000, and was intent on keeping abortion access safe.

Colorado’s “safe access zone (SAZ)” law was at stake. It says that no one could approach closer than 8 feet of a patient without the patient’s permission. This applies when the patient is inside a 100 foot zone, based on the door of a clinic. This law, enacted in 1993, did not limit speech—it only limited unwarranted approach. The law was contested as interfering with the First Amendment right to free speech but was supported by the Colorado courts. 

When I asked Barbara McLachlan, Michael’s widow, about the actual trial with the Supremes, she told me about one question asked by Judge Scalia:

“Why is the limit 8 feet?”

McLachlan was always sharp and ready for anything, so replied “Because that is the maximum distance a person can spit.” And Scalia laughed!

Colorado has been very supportive of access to abortion care. It was one of the first states to legalize abortion (1967), before access became legal nation-wide (1973). Although there have been several attempts to decrease this access, we recently provided protection to this right by passing an amendment to the Colorado constitution. It prohibits state and local governments from denying, impeding, or discriminating against that right to abortion. It also repeals the prohibition against using public funds for abortion services.

Unfortunately, many other states have limited access to abortion or completely prohibited this vital part of medical care. Many women are coming to Colorado for abortions. In addition, women are also receiving abortion pills by mail from Colorado-based telemedicine.

Some of the states that forbid abortion care try to keep their women from having abortions. Some laws try to forbid a pregnant woman to leave her state to go to a more liberal state. Nevertheless, abortion providers in Colorado and New Mexico see a lot of patients from Oklahoma and Texas.

Pills have caused a revolution in abortion care. Pills can be mailed to a pregnant person living in a restrictive state; organizations have been started for just that purpose. Plan C (www.plancpills.org) is one of the organizations started to inform women about the availability of abortion care by telemedicine. When contacted by someone who is pregnant and who desires an abortion, Plan C will ask them to fill out a form about their medical history, then (if they qualify) refer them to a site where they can purchase pills for an abortion. This system can be used by anyone in any state in the union, but people in restrictive states are most likely to use it. 

The people who actually supply the medication are at risk of retaliation by authorities in restrictive states. Perhaps the worst example is Texas. It has an malevolent law the purpose of which is to intimidate non-Texans who provide medication abortion pills to Texan women. The law would levy a fine of at least $100,000 to someone who prescribes or mails abortion pills to a woman in Texas. This law encourages Texans to spy on each other and relies on fear. The differences of abortion laws in different states has incited interjurisdictional abortion wars.

Coloradans who prescribe abortion pills to people in restrictive states risk being indicted for breaking the law in the other state. Last spring the Colorado legislature voted for a law to offer them protection. The name of the prescriber must be left off the medication. In addition, The new Colorado law shields abortion patients and providers from actions initiated by other states.

©Richard Grossman MD, 2026