[Water_news] 2. DWR'S CALIFORNIA WATER NEWS: SUPPLY - 9/28/07

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment 

 

September 28, 2007

 

2. Supply

 

AG ISSUES:

Conserve or discount gone, farmers told - North County Times

 

Growers warned of water cutbacks; Scenario is bleak at industry forum - San Diego Union Tribune

 

WATER TRANSFERS:

Water Authority entering talks with NorCal farmers - North County Times

 

 

AG ISSUES:

Conserve or discount gone, farmers told

North County Times – 9/28/07

By Quinn Eastman, staff writer

 

ESCONDIDO ---- Farmers must abide by drastic water cuts next year or risk losing their discount forever, San Diego County Farm Bureau representatives told them Thursday.

More than 60 farmers and water officials gathered at the California Center for the Arts, Escondido, to discuss the region's water woes Thursday afternoon. Signs of coming tensions between town and country appeared when one grower suggested a countywide moratorium on new water hookups for "houses and golf courses," sparking applause.

 

Local water officials say they are ready to impose month-by-month caps on agricultural customers' water use and penalties for exceeding the caps starting in January.

 

The caps would limit farmers to 70 percent of the water they used from July 2006 to June 2007. Farmers must face the cuts first, before other customers, because they get a discount compared to the standard domestic rate ---- about 33 percent in North County's most agriculture-heavy areas.

Water agencies that represent more urbanized areas in the Metropolitan Water District, the water provider for most of Southern California, may push to eliminate the agricultural discount if farmers can't restrict their consumption, said Ed Means, a consultant for the California Avocado Commission.

"This is going to be a very painful period," he said. "But if we can't demonstrate the conservation value, then the program will be at risk."

>From poinsettias on the coast to avocados inland, San Diego County's $1.46 billion in agricultural products ranked as the fifth-largest sector of the region's economy last year.

Water can be one of the largest expenses for an avocado or orange grower. Some North County operations have yearly bills of several hundred thousand dollars.

The discount was worth more than $13 million to avocado growers last year, Means said.

Water officials say the caps are necessary because of a record dry year in California, a Colorado River drought and a recent federal court decision to limit pumping in the Sacramento-San Joaquin river delta to protect an endangered fish.

And farmers can't just pray for rain because it won't help restore the delta, Means said. The period of deprivation may last for several years, he said.

Eric Larson, executive director of the Farm Bureau, said growers should remind their nonfarming neighbors to do their part to conserve.

Larson said he regularly passes by a puddle in a neighbor's lawn and that he's "not convinced the public has accepted the need.

"If voluntary conservation by the general public fails, it will mean more (residential and commercial) cuts and the agricultural cuts will become deeper," he said.

Most of San Diego County's water agencies will allow customers to carry over water savings from one month toward the next month, but they won't permit them to transfer water allotments among their properties or to sell their allotments to someone else, he said.

Local water agencies face penalties if they use too much water, and so do their individual customers ---- more than double the normal rate.

Beyond that, the Valley Center water district's policy, for example, says it will forcibly cut customers' flow by half if they exceed their caps for three consecutive months.

Although a host of irrigation equipment firms at the arts center Thursday offered ways to tightly control water usage and monitor moisture content of the soil, the Farm Bureau says the drought of the early 1990s had already pushed local growers to become more efficient. Now, less water means less production.

Avocado, citrus and ornamental tree growers said they're already planning to remove trees to reduce water needs.

Valley Center avocado grove manager Al Stehly said he was deciding which trees will disappear after the fruit is picked this winter.

"As soon as I can pick those trees, they're history," he said.

Gary Broomell, a citrus grower with property in Pauma Valley and Valley Center, said he gets his water mostly from wells, but the drought means he will be more dependent on imported water. Broomell is also president of the Valley Center Municipal Water District's board.

While many of his fellow growers are "facing reality," not many seem to be getting out of the business, he said. "We haven't shut any meters off in Valley Center, to my knowledge."

In response to the suggestion for restrictions on new hookups, Means noted that some agencies, such as the Fallbrook Public Utility District, are taking a dim view of annexing new properties.

In 2001, the state Legislature passed a bill that prohibits planners from approving a subdivision of more than 500 houses unless the local water district certifies there will be enough water for the development for 20 years ---- but the measure has not been invoked in the San Diego region. #

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/09/28/news/top_stories/21_03_389_27_07.txt

 

 

Growers warned of water cutbacks; Scenario is bleak at industry forum

San Diego Union Tribune – 9/28/07

By Elena Gaona, staff writer

 

ESCONDIDO – From letting flowering plants die to reducing production of milk, oranges and avocados, county farmers are bracing for a potentially disastrous cutback of water supplies.

 

Nearly 500 farmers, ranchers and nursery owners attended two talks on the subject in Escondido yesterday, many expecting to face mandatory 30 percent reductions in water supplies starting Jan. 1.

 

Growers said it will hurt production, sales and possibly cause layoffs. If the water cutbacks get worse, some said they could go out of business.

 

“It's going to be a very painful program,” Ed Means, a water consultant with the California Avocado Commission, told farmers.

 

“That's to be clear.”

 

Unofficially since 1981, and officially since 1994, most growers in the county have participated in the voluntary Interruptable Agricultural Water Program. It has been good to agriculture, Means said, saving the industry $200 million since 1994 through discounted water rates.

 

Under the program, however, growers must agree to be the first to face mandatory cutbacks during droughts or other water shortages.

 

That time is here, Means said.

 

The Los Angeles-based Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which supplies imported water to the county, has proposed the 30 percent cuts in agricultural supplies to prevent shortages for residential and industrial users, and to make sure there is enough water for next year. An official order is expected in November.

 

In addition to hot, dry weather, water supplies are threatened because the Colorado River is in the midst of an eight-year drought, and because a U.S. District Court judge ruled last month that pumps sending water south from Northern California must be turned off from December to June to protect the Delta smelt, an endangered fish.

 

“Without water, you're dead,” said Janet Gallup, who owns a 3-acre grove in Valley Center with her husband, Don. “I didn't know about the cuts. It could be kind of disastrous.”

 

The San Diego County Farm Bureau, California Avocado Commission and San Diego County Flower and Plant Association sponsored yesterday's talks at the California Center for the Arts, Escondido. Farmers listened solemnly, and several asked why households weren't doing more to save water.

 

They later walked around a trade show-style setup, gathering information from water agencies about how much water they will be allocated during the cutbacks, which would be indefinite.

 

Sellers of drip irrigation systems, mulch suppliers and other companies handed out information about water conservation.

But water-saving methods will not help farmers much during this crisis, said Kevin Grangetto, who owns farm and garden supply stores in North County.

 

“The farming community is already well aware of its water usage,” he said, adding that his business will be affected once his customers start scaling back production.

 

“We've already put a lot of attention into water conservation,” said Mike Mellano, vice president of production with Mellano & Co., a large outdoor grower near Fallbrook that uses computerized irrigation systems.

 

Mellano said he will look into purchasing recycled water, but ultimately the plan will include cutting out plants. “There is no fallback,” he said.

 

Eric Larson, the farm bureau's executive director, said local water agencies must meet their 30 percent goal. If they don't, he said, the agricultural water program could be in jeopardy. Farmers who surpass allocations will suffer penalties and flow restrictions.

 

“This is open-ended,” Larson warned. “Let's not believe this will be over in a year or that it will be over in 18 months.”  #

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/northcounty/20070928-9999-1mi28percent.html

 

 

WATER TRANSFERS:

Water Authority entering talks with NorCal farmers

North County Times – 9/27/07

By Gig Conaughton, staff writer

 

SAN DIEGO ---- Hoping to find new water supplies because of looming statewide cuts, the San Diego County Water Authority voted Thursday to enter talks with Northern California farmers to buy enough water to sustain 60,000 households.

Water Authority board members voted to have their staff start negotiating with the Butte Water District ---- a district north of Sacramento that serves mostly farmers in that county.

 

The Water Authority hopes to reach a deal to buy up to 30,000 acre-feet of water from Butte in 2008 just in case the state is forced to cut Southern California's northern water supplies next year because of a court ruling.

 

Water Authority officials, who have already asked the public to cut back water use, say the Butte deal could help the county avoid mandatory cuts.

In August, a federal judge ruled that the pumps that send water to Southern California through the Sacramento-San Joaquin delta would have to be cut back in 2008 in order to protect an endangered fish, the delta smelt.

The delta, commonly referred to as the bay delta because it flows into the San Francisco Bay, is the heart of the massive State Water Project, a 600-mile series of dams, reservoirs, pumps and pipelines that send rainfall and snowmelt from Northern California south.

The Metropolitan Water District, Southern California's main water supplier, has said the cutback in pumping could cause the region to lose 30 percent of its northern water supplies. Those supplies made up two-thirds of Southern California's imported water this year.

San Diego County residents, through the Water Authority, are Metropolitan's biggest customers.

Any new Butte deal could also be affected by the court case brought on by the smelt. Because Butte is north of the bay delta it would be affected by the same pumping cutbacks, perhaps even more so.

Water Authority officials said when the state had the chance to pump water from the bay delta, it would want to pump its own water deliveries, rather than private transfers such as the Butte deal.

"That's going to be a critical factor," Water Authority board member Keith Lewinger said. "Because you can't move water when the pumps are shut down and once the pumps come back on, the State Water Project's going to want to push all its water through."

Gordon Hess, the Water Authority's director of water resources, said the Butte deal was still worth pursuing as a hedge against reduced water supplies.

Hess said if the current drought conditions in Northern California persisted this winter, which would further reduce Southern California's supplies, there would be less water in the bay delta.

That would allow more room to move water transfer deals such as the Butte deal.

Because of that, Hess said, the Water Authority would try to work a deal with Butte that would give it options on whether it had to take the water.

Hess and others also said the Water Authority could store the water from the Butte deal in a groundwater storage "bank," where it could be pulled out later.

Though he was reluctant to talk about how much the water in the Butte deal would cost, Hess said the deal would probably be more expensive than the water from the historic ---- and much larger ---- deal the Water Authority signed in 2003 to buy water from Imperial Valley farmers.

In that deal, farmers agreed to sell San Diego residents up to 200,000 acre-feet of water a year, enough to sustain 400,000 households annually, for 45 to 75 years. The current cost of the water in that deal is roughly $300 per acre-foot without figuring in the cost of delivering it.

Water Authority staff members said they would come back to the agency's board with a proposed deal in December. #

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/09/28/news/top_stories/21_04_169_27_07.txt

####