Department of Water Resources
California Water News
A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment
August 24, 2009
2. Supply –
California has plenty of water right now; we just don't capture and manage this blessing very well
Sacramento Bee
Climate Change Requires Better Water Management, say experts
Voice of America
Water use flows into ‘gray’ area
Santa Clarita Valley Signal
More water woes for Buzztail residents
Chico Enterprise-Record
Reports reflect 59 percent drop in water use since ‘99
Calistoga reported different levels to different agencies
Weekly Calistogan
Arguments about Snake Valley water turn to dust under local scrutiny
Salt Lake Tribune
25 years out, no end in sight to water pipeline fight
Las Vegas Sun
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
California has plenty of water right now; we just don't capture and manage this blessing very well
Sacramento Bee-8/23/09
By Sen. Dave Cogdill
Opinion
This has been a long, ongoing battle but there isn't anything more important to the people of this state, or our economy or our place in the world, and quite frankly the security of the United States, in my opinion, than a safe and secure, clean and abundant water supply for California and the businesses that rely on it.
It's something that we have been working for an awful long time. And many of you are painfully aware of the problems that we have in the existing system, where it lacks in its ability to meet our needs on an ongoing basis, certainly through a sustained drought, like we are facing now.
The goal is to see to it that we don't get back to this situation again. That it would take a much, much longer drought than what we've gone through to put us in the same peril we are in today. And we can do that by improving our infrastructure.
There is a lot of air being blown in the(Capitol), in discussions about a plan for the Delta and new governance for the Delta. But we don't need more bureaucracy on this issue, we need more water! And we have it.
We in this state are blessed,and historically have been blessed,with the amount of precipitation that falls naturally on this state on a average annual basis. But we don't manage it properly. We let over 65 percent of it run into the ocean each and every year. In heavy years that's water that if we had the right kind of infrastructure in place we could hold it back,we could regulate into the groundwater basin, we could have available not only for the people but for the environment- what we are supposed to be caring about.
It's very, very, very frustrating. It would be one thing if we didn't have this natural blessing that we do as Californians. But unfortunately we have chosen to follow Mark Twain's adage to the letter when he said: "Whiskey is for drinking and water is for fighting over."And we've decided that's what we have to do in this state. And the frustration for me and for many has been the fact that in reality we don't have to fight over water.
We can provide what we need for the people of this state and this economy, and do it in a responsible way to protect the Delta and the environment that relies on it. But you've got to be about that work and that has to be the shared goal.My concern is that is not the shared goal in the Capitol right now.
The people are at the epicenter of this problem: Third year of a drought, you're out of work, the crops are going fallow, permanent crops are dying. That should be unacceptable in a state where our largest economy is agriculture and where the world relies on us.
I see the signs today that say if you like foreign oil you'll love relying on foreign folks to provide us with our water and our agriculture. How true is that? It's a national security issue, and one we should all be concerned about. And again, the water problem is solvable, we could have fixed the infrastructure decades ago.
We have to improve the infrastructure in this state and that would allow us to manage wet-year flows, and we can do that.#
http://www.sacbee.com/740/story/2130220.html
Climate Change Requires Better Water Management, say experts
Voice of America-8/21/09
By Joe DeCapua
Severe drought is one of the expected consequence in Africa of climate change
In Stockholm, Sweden, the annual World Water Week conference ended Friday with a strong call for protection of water resources.
Participants endorsed a statement saying water must play a central role in UN climate change negotiations, known as COP-15, scheduled for Copenhagen in December.
Cecelia Martinsen, director of World Water Week, says the conference is usually a platform for delegates to exchange experiences and ideas. Normally, a final communiqué is not issued. But this year is different.
"This year with the climate change negotiations…we felt as water professionals that we needed to send a clear message to those negotiations in order to make sure that water is considered when it comes to the climate change adaptation and mitigations," she says.
Getting more, getting less
The effects of climate change can be felt directly through water. Some regions get more, such as floods, others less, as in droughts.
She says delegates don't want the December meeting to consider water management a separate issue, a "separate vector," but rather an integral part of climate change.
"Water cannot be considered as a sector as such. Water is needed in all sectors, in all parts of society for us to survive. It's vital for human health…. It's vital for production when it comes to industries. It's vital for agriculture," she says.
Thinking differently about water
"We have to look at the agriculture sector…who's actually the user of 70 percent of our fresh
A woman fixes the door of to her semi-submerged house in central Mozambique after floods took place in three river basin, 15 Jan 2008
water. Usually when we talk (about) water, you think about drinking water or the water that you use at a household level," she says.
Drinking water and household use, she says, account for only 10 percent of usage.
"If in certain areas it becomes drier, of course we have to irrigate crops. So we have to be much, much more careful on that way that we use and…spend our water," she says.
Martinsen says perhaps drought resistant crops that need less water could replace what's currently being grown.
"It's a change of mindset that we need to really take into consideration as institutions, as governments, but also as individuals," she says.
Despite drought stricken regions, globally, Martinsen says, there's not a lack of water.
"It's really the mismanagement, the misuse of water that is our biggest problem. That's why if we do tighten up the way that we use water, make it more efficient in agriculture…but also in the big cities, we will not see this crisis," she says.#
http://www.voanews.com/english/Africa/2009-08-21-voa40.cfm
Water use flows into ‘gray’ area
Santa Clarita Valley Signal-8/22/09
By Brian Charles
While a controversial method for recycling water was approved this month for use by Californians, Santa Clarita Valley water officials said Friday they’re concerned the graywater could hurt local groundwater supplies.
“We want to make sure whatever is implemented isn’t detrimental to our groundwater supply,” Dan Masnada, general manager of the Castaic Lake Water Agency, said of re-using graywater — untreated waste water from homes.
“Unlike industrial water recycling, this is done in people’s homes,” he said. “The water is not treated or disinfected.”
The state Building Standards Commission approved the use of graywater beginning this month.
Graywater advocates tout the practice as a way to save money, water and the environment.
“You can save money and fresh water, and it encourages the use of healthy products like ecologically friendly soaps,” said Laura Allen, co-founder of the Greywater Guerillas water conservation advocacy group.
The easing of restrictions on graywater is more than a year in the making, Allen said.
California lawmakers passed a law in 2008 that cleared the way for legalizing what many environmentalist called a logical solution for California’s water crisis.
“There were already 1.2 million illegal greywater systems operating in the state” before the practice was approved and regulated, she said.
When the topic of graywater bubbles to the surface, Masnada’s main concern is the prospect of homeowners dumping contaminant-loaded liquid into the ground.
Current graywater law does not include a permitting process, but it does set basic requirements for each system. Graywater users need to install a system that can easily be switched back to the sewer or septic connection. Water from kitchen sinks, toilets or water that has come in contact with dirty diapers or oily rags cannot be used as graywater.
Despite his concerns, Masnada acknowledged graywater’s benefits.
“The biggest benefit from graywater is that we can recycle water without building any infrastructure,” Masnada said. “The water recycling happens in the home.”#
http://www.the-signal.com/news/article/17084/
More water woes for Buzztail residents
Chico Enterprise-Record-8/23/09
There's been more water trouble for the Buzztail Community Service District.
The three dozen homes in this foothill community between Chico and Forest Ranch rely on one nearly 40-year-old well.
Last week, the pump gave out, and residents were without water for several days, said Jared Hancock, manager of the tiny district.
A new pump was purchased and installed. That's the third pump the district has put in over the last 10 years, he said, adding a pump should last 10 to 15 years.
The problem is the well is failing, he said. Sediment keeps getting into the pumps.
The solution is drilling a new well — an expensive project. The district's directors hoped they might get federal stimulus money for a new well, but that didn't happen.
Hancock said he's received applications for state grants. These will be examined in the hope the district might qualify for one.#
Reports reflect 59 percent drop in water use since ‘99
Calistoga reported different levels to different agencies
Weekly Calistogan-8/21/09
By John Waters Jr.
A series of required reports to the state seem to indicate that the City of Calistoga has managed a miracle in water conservation in a drought-ridden state: reducing its level of water use while its population has grown.
The reports are part of an arsenal being rolled out by the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by Grant Reynolds of San Diego against the city. The suit started as a claim against the city in December 2008, filed on behalf of Calistoga resident Debbie O’Gorman, claiming the city has been violating its 1939 water use contract recorded between the city and her grandfather, Chapin F. Tubbs, since the early 1950s.
In January, Reynolds purchased the right to collect any damages resulting from the claim he originally filed for O’Gorman. While Grant could not represent O’Gorman in a lawsuit because he is not a lawyer, as owner of the rights for damages he can legally represent himself.
The tri-annual reports, filed every three years by the City of Calistoga to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), appear to paint an uncertain picture of how the city reports water taken from its main local source, according to Reynolds.
But according to City Water Department Supervisor Warren Schenstrom, the figures report information in a way that can appear confusing on the surface.
In 1996, for example, the City of Calistoga purchased 244 acre-feet of water from the state water project, and by 2007 that amount had more than doubled while local water use reportedly dropped from 1,377 acre-feet to 559 acre-feet — a drop of 59.4 percent, according to a series of reports filed by the city to the SWRCB.
At the same time the local population grew from an estimated 4,800 in 1996 to 5,300 in 2007, or by about 500 residents.
Schenstrom, however, said that the figures reported to the state until 1999 were simply “incorrect.”
“There is a logical explanation, but it isn’t always easy to understand,” Schenstrom said.
The Kimball reservoir water use is allowed under a pair of licenses and one permit. One license allows the city to store up to 90 acre-feet a year in the reservoir. A second license allows it to store 315 acre-feet annually and divert about .74 cubic feet per minute for municipal use.
“The amount reported to the state board is water that has been diverted only — they’re not interested in water that has been moved to storage,” Schenstrom said.
In addition to reporting Kimball reservoir water usage to the SWRCB, the city is also required to report to the Department of Health and the Napa County Irrigation and Flood Control District. The amounts reported to those agencies has varied little from 1996 to 2007.
The amounts reported to the SWRCB, on the other hand, have dropped drastically since, with no water reportedly being taken under the 90 acre-feet license. Compared to pre-1999 reports, by 2007 water used under the larger second license was about one-fifth of what was permitted.
“The reason for that is that water from storage was used to supplement the water supply, and the state does not require reporting of the amounts of water in storage,” Schenstrom said. “So, water from storage was used to meet the city’s total needs.”
In 2007, the city reported to the SWRCB it had used only 65 acre-feet under the larger permit, which allows 315 acre-feet. But it reported to the other two departments that it had stored near or above the amount licensed dating back to 1999, while more water was being purchased from the state water project.
The city’s own reports show that before 1999 Calistoga’s water use varied wildly from year to year.
“Two questions come to mind,” said Reynolds after filing an amended lawsuit late last week. “Why is the City of Calistoga under-reporting its water usage to the state and where is the water that’s not being reported going? I believe it’s going to the wineries in violation of the city’s licenses and permit.”
But, according to Schenstrom, in 2000 a state water board audit of the Calistoga water system faulted the city for not filling out its water reports correctly.
“They showed the city how to do the reports correctly since,” he said. “The reason the Health and Flood department numbers are different is that they ask for figures that are combined diversion amounts and water used from storage, so they will always be different, usually lower, than the numbers we report to the water board.”
Late last week Reynolds filed an amended suit against the city after a July 31 ruling by Napa County Superior Court Judge Ray Guadagni said Reynolds’ case could continue.
“I fully expect the city to file a demurrer on this new suit,” Reynolds said.
The city has denied wrongdoing, saying it is in compliance with state water laws.
Reynolds had considered naming the SWRCB as a co-defendant in his amended suit, but decided against doing so because the city failed to provide a copy of the 1939 Tubbs agreements to the SWRCB, hence he does not believe the state should be held liable for what the City had never given them a copy of, he said.
Instead, Reynolds said he will be putting the SWRCB and the governor on notice that they may face legal action if the board does not issue a cease and desist order to the city that halts the sale of water for agricultural use pending compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and preparation of an environmental impact report that considers the effect of such sales on the Napa River steelhead population.
Reynolds contends that the SWRCB was either “ ... misled into believing that the city was obliged to sell agricultural water,” or simply “looked the other way.” But by allowing the city to sell water for agricultural use in violation of their licenses the board itself may be in breach of its responsibility to protect the public trust, Reynolds argues.#
http://www.weeklycalistogan.com/articles/2009/08/21/news/local/doc4a8c9f337cac8303785558.txt
Arguments about Snake Valley water turn to dust under local scrutiny
Salt Lake Tribune-8/23/09
By Peg McEntee, Columnist
If you make the four-hour drive to the Snake Valley to meet cowman Cecil Garland, he'll invite you to lunch on the screened porch of his century-old house on Cattle Drive.
On Friday, it's meatloaf made from his own beef, corn on the cob, tomatoes and summer squash from his garden, straight-from-the-cow sweet milk and unsweetened butter churned right here.
It's just about the most delicious meal I can remember. But lunch is just prelude: We're here to talk about water.
Garland, a tall, handsome man of 83, has spent the past four years fighting Nevada's plan to pump water from the Snake Valley aquifer to thirsty Las Vegas, and he's unrelenting.
At stake is Utah's share of the water beneath the 100-mile-long valley, which straddles the state line with Nevada. But there's more -- an environmental catastrophe that could transform an arid place into a dust bowl that would send huge amounts of airborne particles all the way to the already polluted Wasatch Front.
Garland was in Las Vegas on Thursday for a monthly meeting of the Southern Nevada Water Authority, which ended with a vote to pursue its plan for a 285-mile pipeline, which could cost billions of dollars, and which Garland thinks is utter folly.
"There's a big rush to get this agreement done," Garland said. "I think they can see the fire coming over the hill on this thing. Even in Las Vegas, the sentiment against this is growing rather rapidly."
Problem is, the water that Nevada wants just isn't there, Garland said. "We're one of the driest valleys in the driest area of the United States. The springs are drying up or have dried up, the artesian wells have dried up or already have dried up, the water table is falling and the vegetation is already under stress and suffering.
"Now, somewhere those folks down there have got to pick up the thread of reason."
And, to prove his point, Garland took a Tribune photographer and me on a field trip.
The three of us crowded in his Dodge pickup, Garland takes us out to a field he'd recently swapped with another rancher to show us a swimming hole that had dried up, collapsed in on itself and now is just a reed-filled depression. We bumped through another field to check out the greasewood, a native species that serves as a monitor for the land's condition. Here, there's dead wood among the living plants.
Garland tells us he grew up in the Great Smoky Mountains, and served as an aircraft mechanic in the Army Air Force in England during World War II. As a kid, he had dreamed of living in the West, and after the war, he landed in Las Vegas ("I was a shill at a gambling house for $6 a day") and then Montana. In 1973, he came to Callao, population 40.
Once, Garland tells us, Lake Bonneville covered this valley, and the soil -- made up of "decayed vegetable matter and bird poop" -- is true peat that can burn for months if accidentally ignited.
To the west is the Deep Creek Range, with peaks of up to 12,000 feet; and its melting snow pack -- Garland calls it new water -- feeds the aquifer under Callao. But there also is old water, a relic of the Ice Age, Garland says, and the pressure between the two is what produces springs.
"It's a beautiful system," he says. "The only thing about it is you start tearing one piece of it apart, and it's like raveling out a sweater, it just keeps coming apart, and that's what we're talking about."
Bottom line, Garland said, the notion that Nevada can take this water, pump it to Las Vegas, and leave enough for the Snake Valley ranchers is nonsense.
Finally, he takes us to see his cattle grazing on a green field that produced the huge stack of hay bales near the fence. The cows are sturdy Red Angus, with auburn hides and faces that seem to have a quizzical look.
When I ask how many head he has, Garland gently tells me it's impolite to ask. "To a cowman, it's like asking how much money he's got," he said, but he forgives me.
So we stand in the late afternoon light and take in Deep Creek's granite flanks and peaks. The air is clean and dry, and there are bird songs in the wind.
"I'm only thankful the Lord let me live long enough to see this," Garland says. "Ain't that a deal?"
I think back to what he was telling me before, that the science isn't there to justify Nevada's water grab that could spell the end of the Snake Valley ranches. "They simply look at the small number of people here and say they just don't count."
Well, I've been to Las Vegas, seen the ugly sprawl now foundering in the recession, and now I've seen the Snake Valley.
Fold your cards, Nevada. The valley wins.#
http://www.sltrib.com/News/ci_13185090
25 years out, no end in sight to water pipeline fight
Las Vegas Sun-8/22/09
By Stephanie Tavares
If water wars were still fought with bullets, the Southern Nevada Water Authority would have just unsnapped its holsters.
Facing scores of angry eastern Nevadans saying their way of life was being placed in jeopardy, the water authority’s board of directors instructed its staff on Thursday to continue working on permits to build a 300-plus-mile pipeline so water from the Great Basin can be drawn south.
The vote and the four-hour hearing that accompanied it were unnecessary. But it was a public demonstration that the water authority’s general manager, Pat Mulroy, had gathered a formidable posse — one with the political clout and financial backing to counter the mounting opposition to her proposed pipeline from White Pine County.
“The rhetoric (of opponents) has been that the new board doesn’t support us and this move,” Mulroy said after the vote. “It’s important to take this position to continue the process because we still have millions to spend in this permitting process.”
As in a scene from an old John Wayne movie, adversaries had queued up on each side of a line drawn in sand.
A cadre of developers and business advocates voiced their support of the pipeline, countering the arguments of environmentalists, national parks advocates, American Indians, and residents who say their livelihoods would be threatened by plans to pump 50,000 acre-feet of water from their rural Snake Valley basin to Las Vegas.
The mood was tense, but participants were polite in the main meeting room where about 100 people found seats or space along the walls. Another 170 filled a second room in the Molasky Corporate Center and a room at the county Government Center down the street where live feeds were provided.
At least for the crowd in the water authority boardroom, it was wedding-style seating: split down the middle. Dozens of union workers, their hard hats beneath their seats, filled the back rows for the first two hours, drinking coffee and answering cell phones. They were there to show support for the pipeline, which they believe will put hundreds of their peers to work.
In the front of the room sat dozens of nervous and angry Snake Valley residents who endured a six-hour bus rides across the state to be at the meeting. Some of them brought their grandchildren; others called on the water authority to think of its political legacy. A woman cried because she would have no where to go if the project’s worst projections come true and the valley is sucked dry.
None of the arguments were new. But both sides wanted to weigh in one more time to show they have not lost their passion over the project that’s been in the works for a quarter century.
The Bureau of Land Management, the agency that will decide whether the pipeline gets built if the water authority can acquire water rights in Snake Valley, expects to release its environmental impact statement on the project early next year for public comment.
The water authority has acquired or purchased water rights in four out of five basins from which it has requested water. Much of the opposition comes from the fifth: Snake Valley, a high desert enclave of farmers and ranchers who live on the Utah-Nevada border in the shadow of Great Basin National Park. A recently proposed agreement between Utah and Nevada over use of water in the basin would require the Southern Nevada Water Authority to not pursue water rights in Snake Valley for 10 years.
And that’s OK with Mulroy, because she says the pipeline may not be built for 10 years anyway.
With growth in the Las Vegas Valley stunted by the recession, demand for water to fuel growth is on hold. But because of the continuing drought along the Colorado River basin, the water authority says water from eastern Nevada may eventually be needed to sustain Las Vegas.
With Thursday’s vote, the water authority will keep spending millions of dollars to pay for the environmental studies ordered by the BLM to assess the effects of the pipeline and how to offset them. Had the board voted no, years of work by Mulroy’s staff to find water and secure the water rights in other parts of Nevada for taps in Southern Nevada would have been for naught and she would have had to go back to the drawing board.
Mulroy says the project won’t be built unless it’s “absolutely necessary,” but even that’s a changing concept.
“This ground water project has been around for a long time,” Mulroy said at the meeting. “It has changed character and purpose many times over.”
Two years ago, Mulroy said the pipeline was needed to support Las Vegas’ growth. Then the development bubble burst, taking thousands of Las Vegas families down with it. Today, the developers still say they need the water for future development, but Mulroy says the pipeline is the valley’s guarantee of a stable water supply.
The water level at Lake Mead, source of 90 percent of our water, has dropped 100 feet in the past decade, and global warming models predict continued and worsening drought conditions along the Colorado River over the next 50 to 100 years. Anticipating that, the water authority is building a third and deeper intake, or straw, to pump water from the lake. But if lake levels drop to the point where that intake is needed, Nevada’s rationed share of the lake’s water could be cut, leading to more severe conservation measures and rationing.
Conservationists say the city can grow without more water. Basic water saving measures such as the water authority’s popular cash-for-turf program have significantly cut water use. Mandating pool cover use, providing rebates for installing low-flow toilets and faucets or requiring water conserving technology in new developments would be cheaper, easier and have a greater effect, said Scott Rutledge, executive director of the Nevada Conservation League.
But the pipeline has 25 years of momentum behind it, and the water authority seems intent on building it whether Las Vegas needs it or not, opponents said.
“This phrase ‘absolutely necessary’ keeps coming up, but no one wants to define what that really means,” said pipeline foe Launce Rake, spokesman for the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada. “For some developers who want to build half a dozen golf courses, absolutely necessary was yesterday. But I don’t think your average Las Vegan shares that definition.”#
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2009/aug/22/25-years-out-no-end-sight-pipeline-fight/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DWR’s California Water News is distributed to California Department of Water Resources management and staff, for information purposes, by the DWR Public Affairs Office. For reader’s services, including new subscriptions, temporary cancellations and address changes, please use the online page: http://listhost2.water.ca.gov/mailman/listinfo/water_news . DWR operates and maintains the State Water Project, provides dam safety and flood control and inspection services, assists local water districts in water management and water conservation planning, and plans for future statewide water needs. Inclusion of materials is not to be construed as an endorsement of any programs, projects, or viewpoints by the Department or the State of California.
No comments:
Post a Comment