This is a site mirroring the emails of California Water News emailed by the California Department of Water Resources

[Water_news] 2. DWR'S CALIFORNIA WATER NEWS: SUPPLY - 4/13/07

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment 

 

April 13, 2007

 

2. Supply

 

BAY AREA WATER SUPPLY CONDITIONS:

Berryessa's bounty; Bay Area water shy; Solano OK - Vacaville Reporter

 

County may face water woes; Water agency urges immediate conservation efforts - Sonoma Index Tribune

 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA WATER SUPPLY:

Lake may be nearly empty by fall - Ukiah Daily Journal

 

WATER CONSERVATION:

Editorial: Rates rising faster than supplies - North County Times

 

WESTERN WATER ISSUES:

A Flaming Gorge pipeline?; Project would pump water to Denver area - Desert News (Utah)

 

 

BAY AREA WATER SUPPLY CONDITIONS:

Berryessa's bounty; Bay Area water shy; Solano OK

Vacaville Reporter – 4/13/07

By Jennifer Gentile and Danny Bernardini, staff writers

 

 

For the first time in 15 years, the Bay Area has entered into a drought, according to an assessment released Thursday by national climate experts.

 

But the announcement isn't causing panic in Solano County, where local authorities say there is plenty of water to meet local needs.

 

Thursday's assessment looks at the spread and severity of the dry spell affecting the Southwest. In it, drought experts say most of California is experiencing at least "moderate" drought conditions.

 

And a wide swath of southern California is being plagued by a "severe" drought and could face major crop losses, and widespread water shortages or restrictions.

 

Despite Wednesday's stormy weather, rainfall totals across the Bay Area remain at about half what they should be, and the Sierra Nevada snowpack - the source of much of California's tap water - is faring even worse.

 

Still, most state officials are avoiding the "D" word, for now.

 

Even as some local cities and water districts begin to call for conservation, we are nowhere near a crisis point, said experts with the state's Department of Water Resources.

 

"We call it a dry year at this point. Not that some people won't be short" on water, said Maury Roos, the agency's chief hydrologist.

 

State officials use a different yardstick from the national experts to determine whether a drought is present, placing much more stock in the levels of the state's biggest reservoirs. Thanks to an unusually wet winter one year ago, the reservoirs are still reasonably full. Which is why the rainfall picture is nothing to panic about, the state says. "One bad year," Roos said, "is not really going to make it a drought."

 

That was the sentiment echoed Thursday by Solano County officials, though some said problems could arise if this is just the start of a long dry spell.

 

Solano Irrigation District General Manager Suzanne Butterfield said that although the water supply is adequate for this year, water conservation always should be practiced.

 

"The efficient use of water is a top priority. We never know if we're entering year one of a drought," Butterfield said. "Water users should treat every year as year one of a multi-year drought."

 

Still, she noted that 95 percent of the district's water supply comes from Lake Berryessa. The lake, which is a water source for Vacaville, Fairfield, Vallejo and Suisun City, is currently at 93 percent capacity and holds enough water to withstand a seven-year drought, according to Butterfield.

 

The last time the SID had to enforce restrictions on water use was 1991, something she doesn't expect to be necessary this year.

"Berryessa is at a nice, high level," she said. "We've all got to take this very seriously, but this year we're fine."

 

Also relying on the water supply from Lake Berryessa is the Solano County Water Agency. General Manager David Okita said the agency is receiving only 60 percent of the water designated in a contract with the State Water Project and the rest is supplemented by the lake.

 

Like Butterfield, Okita said there would be problems if the dry spell were to drag on for years.

 

"Since this is the first dry year, it won't result in rationing or cutbacks," he said. "A single dry year is no big deal. When you have four or five dry years, you have a problem."

 

He said areas that may suffer are those not in water districts, such as the Montezuma Hills near Rio Vista. Areas like these that depend on wells or precipitation will suffer without rain, he said.

 

In Vacaville, Assistant Public Works Director Dave Tompkins said the city draws its water from multiple sources, including the State Water Project; the Solano Project; which taps into Lake Berryessa; and from groundwater. Like other agencies, Vacaville's entitlement from the state project has been cut back to 60 percent, but he said the city's water supply remains very healthy.

 

"When you look at all of the sources, we have more than enough to meet demand," Tompkins said.

 

He said that one acre-foot of water is roughly the annual consumption of two four-person households. He said the city is expecting a demand of about 18,000 acre feet and, accounting for the state cutback, a supply of about 30,000 acre feet.

 

Even in the event of a protracted drought, he said, "I don't see it (being a problem) in the next few years. Our supply of water is pretty well stocked."

 

Elsewhere in the Bay Area, water districts have grown increasingly anxious about the dearth of rainfall this year saying if they don't ration water now, they might regret it later on.

 

Wednesday, more than 2 million Bay Area residents were being asked to cut their water use by 10 percent by June - or face mandatory water restrictions. That order affects customers of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, which serves 2.4 million customers from North San Jose to San Francisco.

 

Santa Cruz residents also will feel a pinch, no longer being allowed to water their lawns between the hours of 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. as of May 1.

 

And officials at the East Bay Municipal Utility District say they are considering requesting voluntary cutbacks, with a decision expected in the next two weeks.  #

http://www.thereporter.com/news/ci_5659391

 

 

County may face water woes; Water agency urges immediate conservation efforts

Sonoma Index Tribune – 4/13/07

By Sandi Hansen, staff writer

 

The Sonoma County Water Agency has announced projections that water sources used by portions of Sonoma, Mendocino and Marin counties are in danger of reaching historically low levels as early as the beginning of this fall if no significant rainfall comes soon and people don't start seriously conserving water usage.

 

According to agency officials, water levels in Lake Mendocino could drop to approximately 10,000 acre-feet, which is the level the lake reached during the 1976-77 drought. (One acre-foot equals about 325,850 gallons of water.)

 

Lake Mendocino plays an important role in providing drinking water to about 750,000 residents in the three counties, including Sonoma Valley. The Russian River is fed, in part, by water from the Eel River, and in turn feeds into Lake Mendocino. The Russian River is a major source of water supply that the water agency sells to water contractors including the Valley of the Moon Water District and the City of Sonoma.

 

The water agency wants to educate the public and agricultural community about the low water supply projections, according to Agency Director and Sonoma County Supervisor Tim Smith.

 

"Now is the time for everyone to step up water conservation efforts," Smith said at a news conference Thursday on Memorial Beach at the Russian River in Healdsburg.

 

"The projections are alarming to us," said Pam Jeane, the water agency's deputy chief engineer of operations. "We have looked at a similar type of climate year in 2002 and taken information on Lake Mendocino levels and applied it to this year using existing storage levels. Our projection is showing we could be well below what is comfortable in the fall."

 

"The unusually dry springs we have experienced in recent years have made it difficult to fill Lake Mendocino to capacity and may be due to global warming," said Chris Murray, the water agency's principal engineer.

 

Rainfall in the agency's service area is about 60 percent of normal this year. There has also been a reduction in water flows from PG&E's Potter Valley Project on the Eel River and an increased demand for water from the area's agricultural industry.

 

Sonoma Valley is currently faring better than the northern part of the county, according to Murray. "We have to appreciate that the agricultural community uses very little water per acre of crop grown, and that most of the agriculture being targeted is along the Russian River north to Ukiah, not so much in the southern Valley," Murray added.

 

Protecting the chinook salmon is also a major priority of the agency. In 2006, nearly 4,500 chinook were in the upper Russian River during the same time the current projection indicates low water levels in Lake Mendocino this year. "Due to the low level of water released in the upper Russian River, migration and spawning of the salmon will be carefully monitored to avoid any negative impacts," said Sean White, the water agency's principal environmental specialist.

 

Regardless of where one lives in Sonoma County or what the overall water usage has been in the past, county officials are asking everyone to make an effort to conserve between 10 and 15 percent beginning immediately. "While cutting back 15 percent may seem small, it is significant at the end of the season, and it's a lot better than having nothing left," said White.

 

County officials think people are generally listening more to the message of water conservation. Murray said most of the conservation measures the agency wants implemented won't drastically change people's everyday lives. "We're not asking them to change their lifestyles ... we want them to be able to flush toilets, water their lawn, wash their car ... but in changing their thinking maybe they will realize they don't need to do some particular thing."

 

Meanwhile, the City of Sonoma and Valley of the Moon Water District have already been asking people to conserve water for some time. Al Bandur, Sonoma public works administrator, said every summer the city asks residents to voluntarily reduce 15 percent of their water use through efficient landscaping, fixing leaks, purchasing low-flow toilets and front-load washing machines and taking advantage of free low-flow shower heads.

 

In its recent renovation of the Plaza duck pond, Bandur said that part of the rehabilitation program was installing recirculating water in both the City Hall fish fountain and the duck pond. "We're saving 876,000 gallons a year with these new systems," said Bandur.

 

He added that a typical Sonoma Valley household uses 115,000 gallons of water a year.

 

Valley of the Moon Water District General Manager Krishna Kumar said he thinks that people should be keeping conservation in their minds no matter what the season. "Water conservation is a prudent policy at all times." The district has a list of 30 smart ways to save on summer water bills if any customers are interested. It also has a list of five ongoing water conservation tips that will save water, money and energy immediately. Kumar added. "These ideas are painless to implement and require some minor changes to our water-use habits." #

http://www.sonomanews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1868&Itemid=2

 

 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA WATER SUPPLY:

Lake may be nearly empty by fall

Ukiah Daily Journal – 4/13/07

By Ben Brown, staff writer

 

Water levels in Lake Mendocino will drop to 8,000 acre feet by fall if customers do not start conserving, according to projections from the Sonoma County Water Agency.

 

"That's about 9 percent of capacity," said SCWA programs specialist Brad Sherwood. "It's never gotten that low."

 

"You will see the lake level drop much faster than in previous years," said Roland Sanford, general manager of the Mendocino County Water Agency.

 

The total storage of Lake Mendocino as of Wednesday was 69,208 acre/feet of water. Maximum storage is 122,500 acre/feet. Sanford said if the storage gets below 44,000 acre/feet, it will render the boat ramps unusable.

 

Sherwood said the SCWA is encouraging its customers to begin voluntarily conserving water.

 

"That's probably going to get ratcheted up as the year goes on," he said.

 

Sherwood said he was not sure if it will even be possible to draw water out of the lake if the level drops to 8,000 acre-feet.

 

Lower than average rainfall this year, combined with a decision by PG&E to reduce flows through the Potter Valley Project, which feeds into Lake Mendocino, by 33 percent, is being cited as the reason the lake level is expected to drop.

 

Sherwood said the reduced flows are translating into 400 acre/feet less water flowing into the lake every day.

 

"Those Potter Valley inflows are killing us," he said.

 

PG&E has said it is complying with its license as written by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

 

"This is the exact reason people around here who follow this are so concerned," Sanford said.

 

Sanford said low water levels in the lake will also have an impact on fish. Low water in the fall means there will be little cold water for the Chinook Salmon that swim up the Russian River to spawn.

 

In addition to the reduced flows, a statewide shortage of rain has reduced the water in the lake even further. The dry year also means more water will be required for irrigation.

 

"It's basically going to be a two-month longer irrigation season," Sherwood said.

 

The announcement comes following a report from the U.S. Forest Service that snow levels and water content in the Mendocino National Forest are less than half what they normally are this time of year.

 

Sherwood said there is still a month left in the rain year, but added it's unlikely a late storm will move in and fill the lake.

"We're not optimistic," he said. #

http://ukiahdailyjournal.com/ci_5659647

 

 

WATER CONSERVATION:

Editorial: Rates rising faster than supplies

North County Times – 4/13/07

 

Our view: Water, electricity price hikes are worth the cost if they spark conservation

California is a state of abundant natural resources. Unfortunately, water and energy aren't among them. Recent rate hikes for water and power are a reminder that we must do a better job of managing what we have.

 

This week the Metropolitan Water District, the agency that sells water to San Diego County, announced that it is raising wholesale rates. While no one likes to pay more for anything, we shouldn't overreact to price increases for a precious commodity that is often wasted because of its relative affordability.

 

 

The 5.8 percent increase in water rates will probably cost the average San Diego County ratepayer only between $1 to $1.50 a month. Admittedly, Metropolitan's rate raise will likely trigger increases by other agencies, including the San Diego County Water Authority, which in turn sells it to the 23 cities and water districts that directly supply county residents.

It doesn't help our wallets that the Olivenhain Municipal Water District, Vista Irrigation District, Valley Center Municipal Water District, the Rainbow Municipal Water District, and San Marcos' Vallecitos Water District have already either increased rates or are considering increases.

But let's put this in perspective.

The National Drought Mitigation Center reported Thursday that California is in the midst of a moderate drought. In Southern California and the Sierras, where snowmelt supplies much of our drinking water, that drought is "severe," according to most experts. Some Northern California communities are already being asked to voluntarily cut back water usage or face mandatory cutbacks. Meanwhile, the Colorado River basin is experiencing one of its worst droughts ever. The Colorado still supplies Southern California with about a third of its drinking water.

According to the Western Municipal Water District in Riverside, the average Southern California family uses about 450 gallons of water daily. In its 2005 annual report, the county water authority reports that residential and commercial landscaping accounts for half of that use. That's 225 gallons a day to grow roses and tropical plants and keep lawns green. In a desert.

The good news is that Southern Californians can cut their water use and costs without major lifestyle changes, just by being a little more sensible about what they plant in their yards. Good ideas are sprouting at the Water Conservation Garden, which you can see online at http://www.thegarden.org/ or in person at Cuyamaca College in El Cajon. Admission is free and they offer monthly classes advising how to plant water-wise yards and gardens.

Small, smart changes can also help us grapple with rising electricity costs. On Thursday, the state Public Utilities Commission gave permission to San Diego Gas & Electric Co. to install digital meters. These so-called "smart" meters will be able to communicate with appliances and users to provide tips on how to reduce electricity bills, including giving real-time information about demand and prices on the regional energy grid.

The new meters are expected to cost residential users between $1 and $1.50 a month, but SDG&E also has plans for rebates that will reward consumers who use less electricity during peak hours. Even without such incentives, the new technology should allow people to reduce their electricity bills by using power more efficiently.

Our region is also thirsting for ever-more energy. Californians conserved at record levels during the 2000-01 energy crisis, but our demand for electricity has since been surging. Meanwhile, SDG&E's controversial effort to build a Sunrise Powerlink through the desert and some North County communities, along with the news last month that the utility was shopping around for another major power plant, remind us that the region's struggles over energy generation won't go dim anytime soon.

Concerns over environmental impacts have made the creation and transmission of power ever more difficult. Water, too, has a murky future, especially if we take seriously climate change's threat to our water supply and the regulatory hurdles awaiting desalination of the salt water to the west. The most obvious answer in both cases is to reduce demand.

All of us should use the latest water hikes, and the pending electricity bump, as an opportunity to re-evaluate how we use water and electricity. #

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/04/13/opinion/editorials/18_14_554_12_07.txt

 

 

WESTERN WATER ISSUES:

A Flaming Gorge pipeline?; Project would pump water to Denver area

Desert News (Utah) – 4/13/07

By Joe Bauman, staff writer

 

A Colorado businessman is promoting a project under which 165,000 acre-feet of water would be pumped yearly from Flaming Gorge Reservoir and piped to the Denver area.

 

The idea of Aaron Million, Fort Collins, has received largely favorable reactions from several federal and state officials.

Flaming Gorge Reservoir, operated by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, sprawls across the Utah-Wyoming border, backed up behind the dam near Dutch John, Daggett County. Flaming George National Recreation Area encompasses more than 207,000 acres, about equally divided between the two states.

Currently, the dam holds back more than 3 million acre-feet of water from the Green River system, according to the bureau.

News reports from Colorado peg the project's cost at $4 billion, much of it for a 400-mile pipeline. Exact locations of the project's features have not been announced, with discussions continuing about the details.

At one point, project supporters said they were interested in more than 400,000 acre-feet from the reservoir, but the number has dropped. One official said the latest estimate is for 165,000 acre-feet.

"There's a significant need for water on the eastern slope of the Rocky Mountains from Fort Collins to Colorado Springs," said Don Ostler, executive director of the Upper Colorado River Commission, based in Salt Lake City.

Proposals to use Colorado's water allotment from the area have been around for years, he said. "There were lots of problems with all of them, very substantial problems, whether they be political problems or environmental problems." Depleting the Colorado River in the western slope is among the difficulties of these plans.

"Mr. Million has begun planning for a project that would apparently avoid much of that," he said. He "has come up with a proposal to take water out of the Green River essentially, out of Flaming Gorge. This seems to avoid a lot of environmental issues," Ostler said.

 

"It has its own set of issues that people are just beginning to look at, in terms of how the Upper Basin shares the water, where they take it, and what that means."

Million has been working with the Bureau of Reclamation to obtain a contract to use water stored in the reservoir. "And of course the water would be charged to the state of Colorado," which has an allotment under interstate compact.

The pipeline's water might be withdrawn from a site outside the state of Colorado, but Ostler said that is allowed under the Law of the River. If the pipeline runs through Wyoming, that state might be able to use some of the water, he said, and "that water would be charged to Wyoming."

"Right now this project is just in the feasibility stage," Ostler added.

It would be privately funded, which would make it unusual or unique among large Western water projects.

"It raises lots of political questions with regards to the people who would buy the water," he said. "And there are just a lot of angles and twists that need to be looked at."

The project's latest proposal, about 165,000 acre-feet, might be the most Flaming Gorge could provide, "given all the other uses the reservoir has to support," he added.

Other concerns are whether drawing down the reservoir would impact the operation of the dam, including power generation. But Ostler does not believe the project would have dire environmental impacts such as killing endangered fish of the Green River.

One of the reservoir's purposes is to "provide storage so people could use the water." It also needs to supply water for endangered fish and generate power, he added.

Jerry Olds, Utah's state engineer, said the project is only a proposal so far and that its backers have not yet filed applications for water.

What would Utah's reaction be if the project does move forward? "It depends on the approach that they decide to take," he said.

If the water were diverted in Utah, the project would need a Utah water right and the state would go through a review. If it's taken out elsewhere, the state's permission may not be needed.

"Each state is entitled to use their (water) apportionment under the Colorado River Compact," he said.

The project potentially could affect Utah's water interests, however. As Colorado developed part of its entitlement, "it would impact us," he said.

"But, again, I think we would try and work" with Colorado officials. The states of Utah, Wyoming and Colorado are committed to the recovery of endangered fish, he said.

"It will be a very expensive project," Olds said. "I think there's some uncertainty at this point just as to the size of the project, the amount of water, and I think they're trying to work with those issues."

Dennis J. Strong, director of the Utah Division of Water Resources, said he has met a couple of times with Million and his supporters. "I think they're going about it appropriately," contacting people to discuss the ideas, he said.

The plan is to be discussed at the meeting of the Upper Colorado River Commission in June, according to Strong.

Meanwhile, Utah officials have asked the Bureau of Reclamation to examine potential impacts of the project.

"We're concerned with what happens under a full-development scenario, that's when Wyoming and Utah are using their full Colorado River allotment."

Flaming Gorge reservoir's level would drop, but the reservoir was built to allow managers to handle a fluctuating water supply. What Utah is concerned about, he said, is meeting the rights of the state's water users.

If the project won't impact Utah water users, Strong added, "we support Colorado." #

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,660211414,00.html

####

No comments:

Blog Archive