Westlands District farmers negotiating sweet water deal (edited)
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 31, 2007 at 4:30 pmHere’s an interesting article from the San Jose Mercury News about the negotiations going on between the Westlands Irrigation District and federal regulators that involves settlement of a lawsuit filed by the district against the federal government. The feds are trying to make a deal to settle the lawsuit, one that could involves millions of gallons of water with priority rights. Here’s the story from the San Jose Mercury News:
The U.S. government appears poised to turn over the rights to billions of gallons of water to a politically connected group of farmers, even as residents across the West are being asked let their lawns go brown and adopt other emergency measures to conserve water.
Under a proposed settlement federal regulators are likely to present Wednesday in Washington, landowners in the Westlands Water District would gain the rights to 1 million acre feet of water, or 15 percent of the federally controlled water in California. That would make it the largest grant to irrigators since the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation was created in 1903, agency officials said.
If drought-like conditions persist, the deal would guarantee the farmers’ irrigation pumps will flow, even if that means some cities in the San Francisco Bay area will get less drinking water. That prospect has alarmed environmentalists and others seeking to preserve the state’s water supply for cities and an estuary inhabited by an imperiled species of fish.
“This new proposal appears to increase the opportunity for water diversions to the biggest farms of all,” said Hal Candee, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council who is participating in the negotiations. “Can a proposal that appears to put a small group of farm operations ahead of the taxpayers and our fish and wildlife resources be justified because it may help one federal agency deal with a specific drainage problem?”
To read the full text of this article from the San Jose Mercury News, click here.
It is important to point out that, according to the DWR, 80% of developed water goes to agricultural uses. The California Farm Water Coalition puts this percentage at 43% agricultural and 46% for the environment.
Here is more on this from Indybay.org:
Last Friday, the Planning and Conservation League released an action alert regarding a draft memorandum of understanding between the Westlands Water District and the Bureau of Reclamation. The “idea” behind this proposal, according to its negotiators, is to find a way to clean up lands that have been contaminated by improper drainage, resulting from the government’s failure to follow through on installing an agricultural drain as promised with the Central Valley Water Project. Because a significant portion of Delta fresh water is exported to the Westlands Water District and other San Luis Reservoir Contractors, Restore the Delta agrees with PCL’s alarm over a number of items covered in this memorandum of understanding.
In this proposal:
The State would reassign Westlands Water District a direct water right (No. 12860) for 1 million acre feet of water; (Water that Restore the Delta maintains should remain within the Delta.)
The Bureau would grant Westlands Water District and other San Luis Contractors the title to and operational control of the San Luis Reservoir in coordination with DWR; Transferring a public asset to a small group of special interests to work hand-in-hand with a state agency that has failed grossly to protect the California Delta.
The United States would forgive the Westlands and other San Luis Contractors of their Central Valley Project capitol debt, and; (Gifting public property to a small group of special interests.)
Westlands Water District and other San Luis Contractors would assume responsibility for the drainage obligation. (The Federal Government has failed to meet this obligation. What assurances and recourse would citizens have if this obligation continues to not be met?)
The letter below asks Senator Dianne Feinstein to reject this fatally flawed proposal because it inappropriately transfers public assets to a small group of special interests and undermines water supply reliability, water quality, and habitat conditions in the Bay-Delta ecosystem and its watershed. We are asking her to, instead, consider an alternative drainage solution that would include more extensive retirement of drainage impaired lands, enhanced water supply reliability for California, and dedicated water resources for Bay-Delta needs.
To read this article from IndyBay.org, click here.
Here’s an article that was posted last month on an online website called Estuary, that explains more:
The latest chapter in the long-running effort to solve drainage issues in the San Luis Unit has the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation considering handing over ownership of a large section of the Central Valley Project to farmers and water districts.
A 20-page proposal, “Concepts for Collaboration Drainage Resolution,” proposed by Westlands, suggests that Westlands and other water districts on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley assume responsibility for developing a way to collect and dispose of the salty, selenium- laced water that drains off the land after irrigation. In exchange, Westlands would receive less water-1 million acre-feet instead of 1.4 million acre-feet per year. Westlands would be assigned a permit for a water right instead of a contract-the water right would no longer need review and renewal every 25 years unlike the water contract.
This change from a contract to a water right is one issue that concerns many CVP watchdogs. The California Water Impact Network’s Tom Stokely says that by attaining a water right-vs. a contract-Westlands and the other San Luis water districts don’t face the prospect of having deliveries of water cut to as little as zero-as agricultural service contractors do-in the event of a bad drought. In other words, says Stokely, they’re becoming exchange contractors with higher water rights-and that poses a big problem for the Delta. “If [Westlands] gets a water right, are they then not responsible for Delta water quality?” asks Stokely.
To read the full text of the article from Estuary, click here.
And I thought it was a slow water news day ….!!
Slow water news day ….
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 31, 2007 at 11:00 amIt sure is quiet on the water news today. My news readers found nothing of interest overnight, and DWR’s top story today is about levees in Marysville. So here are some tidbits that have been sitting on my desktop:
Imperial Irrigation District: Charles Hoskens, fired two weeks ago from the IID, outlines the challenges facing IID in this article from the Imperial Valley Press Online. Says Hoskens:
… he wants to see IID thrive into the future but there are challenges. For one, Hosken said the district needs to continue efforts to implement the 75-year quantification settlement agreement, a pact meant to end water wars over the use of the Colorado River. But, he said it will not be easy. “We have to conserve over 400,000 acre-feet a year of water,” he said. “It will be a challenge based on budget constraints.”
He also said the district has to work on improving its flow of information. He said managers and the board need to make decisions on what he called “actionable information” from IID’s computer system. But, Hosken said, what the district computer systems are providing is data that is difficult to utilize for reaching informed decisions. Also, Hosken said the district needs to do better planning as to the future of its energy service.
To read the full text of the article from the Imperial Valley Press Online, click here.
Paul Strickland makes the case for desert landscaping instead of synthetic grass in this tongue-in-cheek commentary written for The Californian and posted on the North County Times website - click here to read.
Las Vegas has been very aggressive about getting residents to give up their thirsty lawns, even paying them $2 a square foot to do so. Recently, an overhead survey was conducted to determine which neighborhoods had the most grass. While many neighborhoods that have a lot of grass are older areas, there were a few newer areas which had a substantial amount:
Bob Fulkerson, state director of the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada, considers that reckless, especially in light of the water authority’s $2 billion plan to pipe groundwater to Las Vegas from across Eastern Nevada. “I think it’s unconscionable that people are using potable water on grass at the same time they’re considering taking scarce water from ranchers, farmers and wildlife whose lives depend on it,” Fulkerson said. “Before Las Vegas decides to sacrifice rural Nevada for some growth, Las Vegas needs to get rid of its lawns. This isn’t Massachusetts.”
To read the full text of this story from the Las Vegas Review-Journal, click here.
Old water issues revisited: Here’s an interesting trip back in history from jfleck at Inkstain:
I recently scored a fascinating volume at the used bookstore: “The Value of Water in Alternative Uses, With Special Application to Water Use in the San Juan and Rio Grande Basins of New Mexico.” Published in 1962, it’s the result of a study of the economics of various ways of allocating New Mexico’s water.Given that I’ve been writing about this of late, I was intrigued see what people were saying about it 45 years ago. The answer? Pretty much exactly what we’re saying today.
Click here to read the rest of jfleck’s Inkstain blog. This reminded me of issues here in California - especially the Delta smelt. I purchased a transcript of a 1992 interview with six of the state’s leading water development officials, and I was surprised that even then - fifteen years ago - they mentioned the possibility of having to turn off the pumps to preserve the Delta smelt.
And on that note, Aqua Blog Maven is going to take a little time off the the blog, but I will be sure to post anything interesting that comes up later on today … Enjoy!
Money keeps adding up for the Salton Sea
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 31, 2007 at 10:20 amIn times of tight budgets, good news for those following the Salton Sea restoration: the pot of money for the restoration project keeps growing.
From the Imperial Valley Press Online:
The latest proposal now pushes the amount of state and federal dollars to more than $100 million, the most that has ever been spent on the sea. U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., is the latest politician to join the list of those announcing more money to pay for restoration of the largest land-locked body of water in California. The Democratic chairwoman of the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee announced Friday there is $30 million available for restoration through the Water Resources Development Act.
That sum comes on top of a proposed $47 million in a bill sponsored by state Sen. Denise Moreno Ducheny, D-San Diego. Add in another $12.5 million that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is proposing, $13 million proposed by state lawmakers, plus $2 million from U.S. Rep. Bob Filner, D-Chula Vista, and the grand total being proposed at the state and federal levels amounts to $104.5 million.
“We’re on the cusp of exciting times,” said Rick Daniels, executive director of the Salton Sea Authority, one of the leading umbrella organizations pushing hard for the restoration to commence.
For the full text of the story from the Imperial Valley Press Online, click here.
TOP STORY: No. California water agencies want all their water ahead of So. California
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 30, 2007 at 11:47 amHere’s a story that is my top story of the day. With water shortages likely next year, Northern California water agencies are asserting they have a right to their full entitlements, ahead of any allocations to Southern California agencies. Here’s the story from the Antelope Valley Press:
Ripples have occurred among California water agencies after Northern California officials asserted they have a right to a higher percentage of their annual entitlement of water flowing down the California Aqueduct than do water agencies south of them, because the water comes from their area.
Several Northern California members of State Water Contractors Inc., along with members from Yuba City and Butte County, have claimed “rights of origin” to the surface water that furnishes much of the state, including the Antelope Valley, said Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency General Manager Russ Fuller.
The Northern California agencies want the state Department of Water Resources to grant them 100% of their entitlement - the amount of water an agency is entitled to buy from the State Water Project every year - regardless of rainfall and other water conditions that cause agencies like AVEK, the Palmdale Water District and the Littlerock Creek Irrigation District to receive only a fraction of their entitlements.
In an October 2006 letter to the Department of Water Resources’ chief counsel, Solano Water Agency General Manager David Okita said Article 18 (a) of the State Water Project Water Supply Contract for the State Water Contractors in the Area of Origin establishes certain rights for water contractors in “an Area of Origin” - the point from which the water begins in Northern California. The “Area of Origin” statute, Okita said, precludes “a reduction in deliveries to such contractor.”
Okita added that the only situation that would alter that clause is if water supplies are “so limited that export contractors (such as AVEK, Palmdale and Littlerock) are allocated no supply and there is not enough” water to meet the Area of Origin agencies’ 100% entitlement.
To read the full text of this story from the Antelope Valley Press, click here.
Aqua Blog Maven thinks next year there is going to be water shortages in the southland - unless it is an unusually wet season, which does not look likely. Meterologists see a La Nina weather pattern - cooler ocean temperatures off the coast of South America, which is generally associated with less precipitation for our area. On top of that, a hearing is scheduled for August 21st for the interim pumping plans for water exports from the Delta, and both plans filed by the DWR and by environmentalists suggest reducing water exports by 1 to 1.5 million acre-feet, virtually guaranteeing that there will be less water from the State Water Project, no matter what. If the Northern California water agencies prevail and receive their full entitlement, it will mean even less water for Southern California.
This is the first I have heard of this story - I will be researching and posting more on this as I find it.
Opinion: State has better options than more dams
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 30, 2007 at 11:34 amHere is an article from Redding Searchlight, written by Mark Franco of the Winneman Wintu Tribe. Here is an excerpt:
There is a growing need for water. Maybe the “world famous agriculture” should be tuned to fit the environment: Watermelons grown in the desert do not make sense to me. Maybe developers should invest in programs that run all gray water to filtration systems that can then replenish the groundwater instead of running in the gutters to the sea. They could follow the governor’s vision and design “greener,” environmentally friendly communities, invest in planning for what is good for the developed land.
This is a great state. We should all be proud of it, but we should also look at water as a gift: We may not have it long if the water miners of the new “blue gold rush” keep taking it and selling it to make a profit and polluting the rest.
To read the full text of the article on Redding Searchlight, click here.
Delta pollution and toxic agricultural runoff
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 30, 2007 at 11:27 amStockton’s Record.Net has a story this morning about the study regarding pollution in the Bay Delta area:
A new assessment of pollution in Central Valley waterways shows that pesticides, heavy metals, salt and bacteria remain widespread problems. The study is the first of its kind since farmers were made exempt in 2003 from individually reporting the quantities of pollution released from their lands.
That controversial program allows farmers to join coalitions that sample agricultural runoff and release the numbers to the state. This data, collected over a four-year period, is one basis for the state’s study, released earlier this month. A Stockton environmentalist who analyzed the numbers called them an “astonishing and depressing mosaic” affirming that farms should be regulated in the same way as any business or city that discharges pollutants.
“This report puts to rest the repeated claims by farmers that agricultural pollution is not a problem in the Central Valley,” said Bill Jennings, whose California Sportfishing Protection Alliance targeted the ag waiver in a lawsuit filed last month.
Besides water exports, toxins and invasive species are also suspected to be a factor in the decline of the Delta smelt.
To read the full text of the article from Stockton’s Record.Net, click here.
Here’s the same story as covered by the Central Valley Business Times, which features a link to a video of an interview with Bill Jennings of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance.
Who will manage the Salton Sea restoration?
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 30, 2007 at 10:37 amAs the $47 million restoration bill moves through the legislature, there is concern over what group or agency will manage the restoration effort, projected to cost as much as 8.9 billion over the next 75 years. From MyDesert.com:
A proposed amendment to the bill would put project governance in the hands of a 19-member conservancy board, including “eight or 10 senior department heads” of state agencies such as the departments of Water Resources, Fish and Game, and Parks and Recreation, Salton Sea Authority executive director Rick Daniels said Friday.
Some members of the La Quinta-based Authority raised concerns the conservancy board as proposed would give Sacramento too much influence on the project, and minimize local interests. Authority members such as Riverside and Imperial county supervisors, the Imperial Irrigation District, the Coachella Valley Water District and the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians would get only five of 19 votes.
“I think that is intolerable and arrogant and outrageous,” said Patricia “Corky” Larson, a Coachella Valley Water District board of directors and Salton Sea Authority member, Friday. “The Salton Sea is here, in our area,” added Imperial County Supervisor Gary Wyatt. “We have all of the impacts, but they want all of the control. I, for one, will not participate in that model.”
To read the full text of the story from MyDesert.com, click here.
SF Chronicle Opinion: Dams and Levees can increase flood risk
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 30, 2007 at 5:23 amThe San Francisco Chronicle ran an opinion article this weekend about the effectiveness of dams and levees for flood control. Floods are one of the most destructive natural disasters and are becoming more frequent. This article points out that the dams and levees we have engineered to deal with them can sometimes exacerbate flooding when it occurs. From the San Francisco Chronicle:
Flood damages have soared around the world in recent decades for a variety of reasons. Global warming is worsening storms; we’ve deforested and paved over watersheds; and more people are living and working on floodplains (there are few better examples of this than the fast-sprawling cities of California’s Central Valley). But a key factor behind the spiraling flood damages is the very flood-control measures supposed to protect us. Flood damages soar when engineering projects reduce the capacity of river channels, block natural drainage, increase the speed of floodwaters and cause the subsidence of deltas and coastal erosion. In addition, “hard path” flood control based on dams and levees can ruin the ecological health of rivers and estuaries.
Dams and levees are not fail-proof, and when they do fail, they do so spectacularly and sometimes catastrophically. Worse, they provide a false sense of security that encourages risky development on vulnerable floodplains. When New Orleans was devastated in 2005, the primary cause was not Hurricane Katrina, but the failure of the city’s poorly conceived and maintained flood defenses. Sacramento lies at the confluence of the Sacramento and American rivers behind a network of aging levees. California’s capital is widely regarded as second only to New Orleans among major U.S. cities in the risk it faces from major flooding.
To read the full text of the article from the San Francisco Chronicle, click here.
Roses: the surprising drought-tolerant plant for your Southern California landscape!
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 29, 2007 at 2:29 pm
Here’s proof that drought-tolerant plants don’t always mean cacti and succulents.
A trip to the Castaic Lake Conservatory Garden in Santa Clarita found many varieties of roses blooming even in these hot days of summer. The garden featured many different varieties of both full-size and miniature roses which are bred for our hot and dry climate. (You can click on any of these pictures to see an enlarged version.)
Here are some pictures of the roses at the garden:
Once established, a rose needs very little water to survive. The key to making any plant more drought-tolerant is to get the roots to go down deep into the soil. This is done by watering the plant deeply but infrequently.
I particularly liked these “Orange Honey” miniature roses. 
To find out more about the drought-tolerant rose, click here to visit Learn2grow website, and read up on the “Good Old Rose”.
We have roses around our house which survive on very little water. Ideally, we should be watering them once a week, deeply, but in reality, they get far less than that - sometimes as little as once a month. We don’t water them at all in the winter. They bloom all year round, albeit more so in the spring and fall, especially after pruning.
Here is a link to the roses page at High Country Gardens - although there are many more varieties that will do well in Southern California then are listed on this page. I especially like the Waterwise Rose & Pernennial Garden - 25 flowering drought tolerant plants with a garden plan for $137.35. I may have to try out that package for myself.
So, if you’re looking for a drought-tolerant plant, think about a rose!!!
I’ll be sharing more pictures from my trip to the conservatory garden and information about drought-tolerant plants in the upcoming week.
Want to see for yourself? Visit a conservatory garden near you. Here’s a list from BeWaterwise.com.
For more information on Southern California drought tolerant landscapes, click here.
Good article on both sides of the major water issues from the Contra Costa County Times
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 29, 2007 at 11:02 amHere’s a recommended read from the Contra Costa County Times on the current water issues. It does a good job of giving all sides of the equation:
California’s vexing water crisis is getting the attention it deserves. And that’s a good thing because, for the first time in a decade, the state’s water policy is about to be revamped — although this time not everyone will be a winner.
California’s water policy has rested for at least a decade on the conviction that all factions — be they Delta farmers, urban residents, corporate farmers, salmon fishers or the environment itself — could be served. It is now apparent that they can’t. Farmers could lose access to water. Anglers could lose sportfish. The water supply for a half-million Contra Costa residents might be threatened. Delta farmers could find a higher risk of flooding. And the tiny Delta smelt, a distinctively unsympathetic little fish, could pay the ultimate price — extinction.
The article outlines the specific situations facing the Delta today, and has this to say regarding the proposed dams:
In the governor’s view, much of the problem could be solved with more dams to store water in wet years for use in dry ones and to serve the growing population. His $5.9 billion plan features a pair of major new state reservoirs. But what the governor neglects to mention is that a lot of water storage capacity has been added in recent years.
Increasingly, water is being stored underground. And some water agencies are building their own reservoirs. The Contra Costa Water District completed Los Vaqueros Reservoir in 1997, and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California finished Diamond Valley Reservoir a few years later. In both cases, the water districts committed money from their own ratepayers to build the dams themselves.
For urban water districts, it sometimes makes sense to undertake a project like a dam without a government subsidy if they can afford it. But that’s harder to do in sprawling agricultural districts, which helps explain why the strongest support for the governor’s plan comes from the San Joaquin Valley.
The article discusses the peripheral canal:
The original canal, which voters rejected in 1982, would have diverted Sacramento River water around the Delta to the pumps at Tracy, diverting fresh water away from the Delta and sending it more directly to the urban and agricultural systems across the state. Had it been built, the canal would have been large enough to carry the entire flow of the Sacramento River this summer. An alliance that included Northern Californians, environmentalists, anglers, Delta farmers and Contra Costa residents whose water comes straight out of the Delta defeated the plan.
The canal was seen as a Southern California water grab that would allow unfettered growth and continued inefficient use of water. It also threatened Delta water quality, which could have damaged Delta fisheries and the water supply for Contra Costa. But the idea has re-emerged. An influential study released in February by the Public Policy Institute of California and UC Davis researchers made a strong case that California should reconsider building a canal or something like it.
The best hope for restoring the Delta’s health, the study said, would be to take fresh drinking water upstream from the Delta. But the study assumed the Delta was historically a saltier environment, an assumption that has been contradicted by the Contra Costa Water District. And concerns linger that depriving the Delta of freshwater inflows from upstream could cause the estuary to fill up with polluted farm runoff and stagnate, jeopardizing fisheries and the Contra Costa Water District’s supply.
Delta farmers also worry the Delta levees will crumble as a result of neglect and poor funding when the state no longer depends on them to channel water to the pumps.
Still, evidence is growing that the Delta will not survive if nothing changes.
To read the full text of this comprehensive article from the Contra Costa County Times, click here. Recommended reading!
Releases from Folsom dam spawn fish concerns
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 29, 2007 at 10:20 amThe Bureau of Reclamation has been releasing water at a faster rate from Folsom Dam this summer, sending the water downstream to refill the San Luis Reservoir, which was severely drawn down during the pump shutdown earlier this summer, as well as make up for the shortfall of water deliveries to agricultural users. However, some are concerned that releases of water will deplete the cold water needed for the salmon and steelhead fish in the fall, resulting in a large fish kill of these endangered species.
From the Sacramento Bee:
Tim Horner, a geology professor at California State University, Sacramento, who studies the river, said the conflict highlights a perennial struggle for water between the environment and thirsty farms and cities — one that worsens in dry years. “I can almost guarantee we will have a large fish kill this fall,” he said. “We’re going to kill a bunch of fish before they spawn, and maybe we’ll finally realize we’ve got to do things differently. We can’t deliver all the (water) contracts and still have enough water for fish.”
The Bureau of Reclamation plans to cut releases from the dam to 2,500 cfs in mid-August. This strategy will leave enough cold water in the lake for fall releases, when the fish need it, McCracken said. “We’re going to ensure we meet all of our requirements in the American River for all our fishery needs,” he said. “That’s part of our operation just as it is to deliver water to the people who pay for it.”
To read the full text of this story from the Sacramento Bee, click here.
Another agency signs on to buy water from Poseidon’s Carlsbad Desalination Plant
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 29, 2007 at 9:54 amThe Rainbow Municipal Water District has agreed to purchase 7,500 acre-feet of water from the proposed Carlsbad desalination plant, bringing the total amount of water contracted for from the proposed plant up to 80%. Poseidon has most of the permits it needs, but faces a Coastal Commission hearing in November.
From the San Diego Union Tribune:
Poseidon Senior Vice President Peter MacLaggan said he believes the fact that the plant has lined up five water agencies – and likely will have others by the time of the hearing – will help it get a coastal permit.
“It’s a factor in that (the Coastal Commission staff has) been asking us to demonstrate there’s a need for the product and the amount we propose,” MacLaggan said. “It confirms what we’ve been telling them, that there’s a critical need for this.”
The capacity of the proposed plant is about 56,000 acre-feet a year, or enough to supply 112,000 households for a year.
MacLaggan has been stressing desalinated ocean water’s major virtue – that it is drought-proof – as he builds a case for the plant’s approval.
The state is dealing with a meager Sierra snowpack from last winter, a drought on the Colorado River and legal questions regarding the use of water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
Last month, state officials shut down the delta pumps that send water south in an effort to protect an endangered fish called smelt. To deal with impending shortages, the San Diego County Water Authority has asked all local residents to cut consumption by 20 gallons a month.
In addition, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger visited the Sweetwater Reservoir in Spring Valley on Tuesday to stump for a $5.9 billion bond measure to build more reservoirs, create a new north-to-south aqueduct and develop other water infrastructure projects.
“Add all those things up and we’re in a dire situation with respect to water this year,” MacLaggan said. “The desalinated water is essentially viewed as a drought-proof source considering the Pacific Ocean is never going to dry out.”
To read the rest of this story from the San Diego Union Tribune, click here.
Here is an article from the Surfrider Foundation about desalination.
Smart growth and water conservation
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 29, 2007 at 7:23 amHere’s an article from Tapan Munroe in the Contra Costa County Times about California’s projected population growth and how water conservation can be integrated into that growth:
It is no surprise to any of us that California has a huge water problem. We are right now in the midst of one the driest years in more than a decade, and there is a hint of panic in the air. Policy wonks are proposing billions of dollars worth of public works schemes that include more dams, more canals and more water infrastructure. Although many of these projects may be necessary, we really ought to focus one more time on the age-old strategy that we know does work: conservation.
Let us just consider the problems associated with rising water demand relating to housing growth in California and see how conservation combined with “smart growth” helps.
Ellen Hanak and Matthew Davis, in a recent study published by the Public Policy Institute of California, foresee large increases in urban water demand in California in the coming years as the state population grows by nearly 11 million residents in the next quarter-century. Nearly half of this growth is expected to be in hotter, inland regions of the state.
A substantial part of the increase in water demand will be for outdoors uses because, amazingly enough, half of residential water uses are for landscape enhancement. Our beloved manicured lawns and gardens suck up at least as much water as our five-minute hot showers, the silent dishwasher and the super clothes washer.
As most of the growth will be in hotter Central Valley, residential water consumption will be higher. The problem will be further exacerbated in these places because they will have more single-family homes with larger lots, more “ranchettes” with one- to 20-acre lots. That means a whole lot more landscape-related water use than we have seen in the past.
So how does “smart growth” and conservation help in alleviating a significant part of California’s water problem?
To read the rest of this article from the Contra Costa County Times, click here.
Munroe, an international economist, writes a bi-weekly column for the Contra Costa County Times. Here is a link to his previous column on the global water disparity, and here is a link to an archive of his newspaper columns.
All-American Canal safety issues still debated
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 29, 2007 at 7:23 amSafety issues take center stage in the continuing debate over the All-American canal lining project in this story from the Imperial Valley Press Online:
Already the safety issue has been a subject of legal battles at the state and federal court levels even as the work to build the canal has started this summer. Congressman Duncan Hunter, R-Alpine, who used to represent the Imperial Valley before redistricting — and who is now a presidential candidate — sent a letter to IID June 13 questioning what he considers a lack of safety measures built into the new canal project.
Just days ago IID responded to Hunter. In the letter signed by IID board President Stella Mendoza, she says: “It is my belief that safety measures incorporated into the existing design specifications adequately address the need to provide for the public’s health and welfare.”
The original project called for escape ridges to be built into the side of the canal, but the Bureau of Reclamation, which is responsible for the canal, determined the ridges would make the canal structurally unsound, and so removed them from the plan:
IID officials say the decision on whether to include escape ridges rests with the bureau. It is not a decision IID, which operates the canal and is construction manager over the canal-lining project, could make on its own, district officials say.
The one safety measure in the project involves the placement of “escape” ladders that will be positioned 375 feet a part. IID officials have said they believe the ladders are an adequate safety measure. Hunter, whose brother John Hunter has been a leading voice in the Valley for immigrant safety — doesn’t think the ladders are sufficient. Duncan Hunter, like his brother, says IID should add other safety measures. “These measures include fencing, rope and buoy systems, tapered concrete sides as well as more frequent ladders,” Hunter says in his letter to the district.
To read the full text of the article from the Imperial Valley Press Online, click here.
Drought: A farmers perspective
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 29, 2007 at 7:23 amFrom the New York Times opinion page:
THERE is no better year for farming in California than the first year of a drought. The lakes and reservoirs still hold ample water from the year before, and the farmer can go about his chores without inconvenient rains confounding his schedule. Sunlight pours down from a cloudless sky. The crops prosper. Life is good.
That’s our situation in the Sacramento Valley at the moment. We’ve had an unusually dry year, and I had to start irrigating in January — ordinarily our rainiest month — and I’ve kept at it all through the spring and summer.
Even if I were housebound and someone else was doing the irrigating, I would know from one glance at the electric bill. It takes a lot of power to move that water around, and it’s the single biggest expense on my farm. Some of my neighbors, who farm on a bigger scale than I do, have electric bills in the summer of $8,000 a month.
To read the rest of this article from the New York Times, click here.
The pros & cons of artificial turf
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 29, 2007 at 7:22 amFrom Health News Digest.com:
The use of artificial turf for residential lawns is a growing trend across America, notably in regions where water supplies have a tough time keeping up with demand. Advocates of artificial turf point out, for example, that a whopping 56,000 gallons of water are applied each year to the average residential lawn.
Statistics also show that the mowing, watering and fertilizing of natural grass contribute as much as two percent to U.S. overall fossil fuel consumption. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, lawn care activities also account for about 10 percent of hazardous air pollution coast-to-coast. And studies on Long Island in New York State have shown that up to 60 percent of the synthetic nitrogen applied to lawns there ends up contaminating local ground water supplies.
Is synthetic grass the answer? Click here to read the rest of the article.
Environmentalists respond to Schwarzenegger’s water tour
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 28, 2007 at 1:00 pmCalling the Governor “Arnold the Fish Terminator”, Dan Bacher has posted this article on IndyBay.org in opposition of the Governors water plan:
Governor Schwarzenegger went on tour over the past two weeks to preach his “gospel” of building more dams and the Delta peripheral canal. If he is allowed to succeed in his mad campaign, the ultimate result will be the destruction of the West Coast’s most important estuary, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.
… Schwarzenegger ramped up his campaign to build a peripheral canal and more water storage facilities with four major press conferences at San Luis Reservoir on July 16, Twitchell Island in the Delta on July 17, Long Beach on July 23 and San Diego on July 24.
His proposal for the canal – and more “research” on Delta smelt - drew intense criticism from Restore the Delta and fishing groups now battling to stop the collapse of Delta smelt and other fish populations, the result of increasing water exports in the past several years.
After taking a Delta tour with Department of Water Resources (DWR) officials and others in the Twitchell Island area, the Governor directed DWR to “take immediate action steps” to “improve conditions” in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, to help restore its natural habitat and “protect” the Delta smelt and other species.
“Today, I am calling for actions to help restore the Delta, the largest estuary on the West Coast and home to hundreds of native plant and animal species,” exhorted the Governor, trying to add a green veneer to his latest call for the canal and more water storage facilities. “The Delta is also one of the most vulnerable areas of our state. It faces dangers of contamination from a natural disaster or rising sea levels. And, we saw an example of its vulnerability when we had to shut off the pumps for nine days to protect the threatened Delta smelt.”
In response to the directives the Governor ordered for interim actions on the Delta, a spokeswoman for Restore the Delta had this to say:
“While several of these items including emergency preparedness and levee maintenance are endeavors that Restore the Delta supports,” said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Restore the Delta coordinator, “our supporters are stunned that the Governor, who recently said that water projects have been studied to death, is simply calling for more research on the Delta Smelt without taking more decisive action to save the fish from extinction.”
She said that first and foremost, fish screens need to be installed on the State Water Project pumps as mandated in the CalFed record of decision. “While installing fish screens on state agricultural projects, as called for in the Governor’s directive, may help to protect some fish, Sherman and Twitchell Islands are not where the majority of Delta Smelt are being killed by pumping,” she pointed out. “While restoring natural habitat and improving Central Delta water flow patterns are productive steps, they will not bring about true restoration for the Delta without a reduction in water exports.”
She and other Delta residents also blasted the Governor for failing to back down from his mad drive to build a canal, even after having receiving intense criticism from a broad coalition of fishermen, farmers, Indian Tribes, conservationists and Delta residents that the building of the canal would mean the final destruction of a Delta ecosystem now in collapse.
“When one considers the environmental effects of diverting the last major source of fresh water from the Delta via a peripheral canal, it makes us wonder if these stated environmental mandates are nothing more than a smoke screen for the Governor’s special interest water plan,” she said.
To read the full text of the article from IndyBay.org, click here.
Check out the Water Resources Center Archives website
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 28, 2007 at 12:20 pmHere’s a great resource for water issues on the Internet. It’s the Water Resources Center Archives at the University of California at Berkeley. They cover water issues throughout the west, and everyday they post links to newspaper articles regarding water issues from all over the state. They also cover significant water-related research articles, events, and publications.
Here’s an interesting link regarding the removal of Marmot Dam in Oregon. There’s a link to a page where you can play a video of the explosion or see time-lapse photography of the process. Check it out by clicking here.
To visit the main page of the Water Resources Center Archives page, click here.
Memories of the last drought …
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 28, 2007 at 12:02 pmHere’s an editorial article from the Pasadena Star, remembering the last big drought in Southern California:
It’s human nature to forget the bad times that came before: the lawn-watering police in Azusa; the “top 500″ water gluttons in La Verne whose names were released to the public like some cities do johns at a busted brothel; the drought patrol in Pasadena; the brown lawns. Ah, let’s not forget those double and triple water surcharges for families that did not meet conservation mandates of 10 percent to 20 percent. Some paid through the nose.
Commentary: No more ‘business as usual’ in regards to water issues
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 28, 2007 at 11:52 amHere is an interesting editorial article, which is posted on a community journalism site, ePluribus Media, which discusses media coverage of water issues. One of the reasons that I started this blog is because I think there is so little news of water issues covered in Los Angeles. Proving my point, Governor Schwarzenegger made a stop at Long Beach to promote his water plan, and this was not covered by the LA Times or the Daily News at all.
This article is a repost of an editorial printed in the Morgan Hill Times:
I don’t think that the public is well served by most media coverage, dictated mostly by events. We are undeniably in a year of extreme water shortage, especially in Southern California, where the wettest year on record has been followed by the driest year on record and that has the potential for catastrophic consequences.