Contemporary Issues Related to California's Water

Adapted in part from "California's Water Crisis" at http://www.aquafornia.com/californias-water-crisis/

WHAT ARE THE MAJOR ISSUES FACING CALIFORNIA'S WATER SUPPLY?

• Population Growth. Most of the precipitation and snowmelt runoff occurs in northern California, but the majority of the population lives in the drier central and southern portions of the state. This imbalance is not expected to change. According to population estimates issued by California's Department of Finance, four of the five Southern California counties will add more than 10 million people between now and 2050, an increase of 65% over year 2000 census numbers.

Six central California counties are projected to grow by over 200%. Los Angeles is expected to remain the most populated county in California, followed by Riverside County, San Diego County, Orange County and San Bernardino County. Overall, the state's total population will increase to 60 million people by the year 2050, an increase of over 56% from the 2000 census numbers.

• Drought. Historical precipitation records have shown the California's climate has always been highly variable, and periods of droughts are certainly not unusual. In 2005, after nearly breaking the all-time precipitation record, just two years later, Southern California then experienced its driest year on record. Things weren't any better up in Northern California where the snowpack in the Sierra Nevada mountain range was only 27% of normal. Things looked better initially for the winter of 2007-2008, with snowpack being above 100% in much of the mountains at the end of February. But a record-breaking dry March and April reduced the snowpack to just 67% of normal by the end of the season.

Department of Water Resources director Lester Snow testified at a congressional hearing in July 2008 that Lake Oroville, the main reservoir of the State Water Project, was at 40% capacity, and expected to dip as low as 20% of capacity by December. Lake Shasta, main reservoir of the Central Valley Project, was only at 48% of capacity at the time. Water has dipped so low in most reservoirs that officials say it would take more than one wet season to improve conditions. However, things aren't looking much better for the future: climatologists see no El Nino or La Nina condition forming, and have no expectations for unusually wet winters. The Colorado River Basin has also been experiencing drought conditions for the last 8 years. However, last year, snowpack was as high as 122% of normal. This did improve conditions somewhat at Lake Powell and Lake Mead; however, after many years of drought conditions, it will take several years of above-average conditions to improve conditions at these reservoirs. The map to the right shows areas of the US in the 21st Century that are experiencing moderate (yellow), severe (red), and extreme (purple) drought.

• The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. As the warm sun melts the snow in the Sierra Nevada in the spring time, the water rushes down the streams and creeks, eventually making its way to one of the five rivers which converge in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Much of the state's runoff drains here in the 738,000-acre network of levees, waterways, farms and islands that comprise the Delta. At the southern end, large pumps draw the fresh water through the Delta and ship it south to irrigate farms and quench the thirst of urban populations. Over two-thirds of the state's population receives a portion of their drinking water from the Delta. The Delta is also home to a multitude of fish, wildlife and migratory waterfowl. It is the largest estuary on the west coast, and an important stop on the Pacific Flyway.

However, water project operations have impacted native fish populations, and the Delta smelt, once the most populous fish in the estuary, is now on the brink of extinction. In August of 2007, Judge Wanger, a federal court judge, ruled both the State Water Project and Central Valley Project were operating in violation of the Endangered Species Act, and ordered reductions in the amount of water exported from the Delta. He ruled again in August 2008 that project operations were jeopardizing the salmon. He did not order any further adjustments at the time, and the effect of this ruling has yet to be determined.

Besides being the hub of California's water supply, the Delta serves many other uses. The Delta is home to a large and growing human population; hosts a great deal of water traffic for both business and recreational purposes; connects the Bay Area to the Central Valley via three state highways that cross the Delta; has power lines, oil and gas transmission lines, and railroads running throughout the area; and contains more than a half a million acres of incredibly productive farmland. All of this property and infrastructure is protected by an extensive network of aging levees. Much of the network of levees through the Delta has been built only to 100-year flood standards, and levees have failed 162 times in the past 100 years. A major levee failure would allow the salt water to mix with the fresh water, cutting off water deliveries for at least a year and costing the state billions of dollars.

Solving Delta issues has always been a challenge. Water agencies, farmers, environmentalists, recreational interests, residents and other Delta users have many competing objectives and desires for the Delta, which has resulted in continued studies and legislative paralysis with nothing ever really being accomplished. Most plans in the past have attempted to satisfy all stakeholders, with the end result that nobody is satisfied.

• Climate Change. According to climatologists, warmer temperatures will cause more precipitation to fall as rain, increasing the chances of flooding downstream. The increased flood flows, along with rising sea levels, will put more pressure on the aging Delta levees, as well as cause more flooding in the central part of the state. The warmer temperatures mean bad news for the snowpack as well; scientists have projected that by 2050, the average snowpack in the Sierra's will decrease by 25%. Some experts have even predicted the Sierra snowpack will be virtually gone by the end of the century. Snow in the mountains in the wintertime provides runoff that feeds the streams and rivers in the drier summer months. Weather patterns are already becoming more variable, causing more flooding in the winter and spring, and longer, drier droughts.

• Colorado River Basin. Increasing population in southern California and throughout the southwest has put increasing pressure on the diminishing supply of the Colorado River. More water has been allocated to water rights holders than the river is capable of providing, and California has been ordered to reduce its overuse of Colorado River water. This has resulted in a reduction of Metropolitan Water District's imported supplies by nearly a quarter. The Colorado River basin has also been experiencing drought conditions for the last eight years. Experts conducting studies of tree ring data have determined that severe and prolonged droughts lasting up to 60 years or more have occurred in the past, and could likely occur again. As population continues to grow throughout the dry, desert southwest, the water levels at Lake Powell and Lake Mead continue to drop, with each reservoir only about half-full. Some experts predict they may never be full again.

• Indian Water Rights. Native Americans were promised water from the federal government when they were given reservations in the Southwest; these rights were affirmed in 1908 when the U.S. Supreme Court officially recognized Indian water rights as established at the time the reservations were created. These rights were established and reserved for the tribes regardless of whether they were actually using the water or not. The Supreme Court decision also determined that these rights must be satisfied by the state in which the reservation is located. In 1922, when drawing up the Colorado River Compact, most Native Americans at the time didn't even speak the language, did not understand the "white man's ways" and so didn't participate in the negotiations. Thus, the 1922 Colorado River Compact did not include any provision for Indian Water Rights. Instead, it only gave a token acknowledgment by saying, "Nothing in this compact shall be construed as affecting the obligations of the United States of America to Indian Tribes." By including that phrase, the writers of the compact effectively punted the issue into modern day. Since water rights are considered established when the reservation was created, Indian water rights are considered "present-perfected", which means they would have the right to their full apportionment of water before those with junior water rights, which includes all seven of the Colorado Basin states, as well as the Metropolitan Water District.

Indian water rights must be quantified either by litigation or by congressional action before they can be used. Some tribes have already had their water rights settled. The complexity of this issue is demonstrated in the case study showing how the issue of Indian water rights has played out on the Klamath River.

• Environmental Mitigation in the Owens Valley. From the day William Mulholland stood at the top of the aqueduct in 1913 and gave the signal to turn the knob and send Owens Valley water cascading down into the San Fernando Valley, Los Angeles has depended upon Owens Valley water to fuel its growth. However, this growth has come at the expense of the residents and the environment of the Owens Valley. Once a productive agricultural area, the community was decimated as one by one, the owners finally sold to the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and moved on. Owens Lake was dry by the 1930s as streams, springs, and the Lower Owens River feeding into it were dried up. Excessive groundwater pumping in the 1970s dropped the water table further, killing the native vegetation and turning much of the region into a dry, dusty desert.

These issues have been the subject of years of litigation, and as a result, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power has had to spend millions of dollars in restoration and mitigation projects. These mandated projects have also reduced the amount of water DWP has been able to export to Los Angeles. Due to court-ordered restoration of Mono Lake, and the Lower Owens River, as well as continuing dust mitigation on the dry Owens Lake bed, more water has stayed in the Owens Valley for "in-valley" use than was exported to Los Angeles. This was the first time this has occurred since the aqueduct was completed. According to the DWP, the Owens Valley supplied just 17% of the water for DWP customers in 2007, considerably less than the previous year, when the valley supplied 62% of DWP's needs.

• Environmental problems due to the dams and reservoirs built in conjunction with both the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project.
  • The dams and reservoirs blocked access for salmon and steelhead to their native spawning grounds.
  • The impoundment and diversion of water and the conversion of new land for farming made possible by the new supplies of project water resulted in the loss of more than half of the Central Valley's remaining freshwater wetlands.
  • The loss of the Central Valley's natural wetlands - while necessary to expand farming - had the unintended consequence of reducing habitat for migratory birds, fish, and terrestrial species and eliminating most of the system's natural flood control capability.
  • As this map indicates, water quality is a major environmental problem today. The accumulation of excess nutrients including nitrogen and phosphorus has led to a proliferation of plant life, especially algae blooms, in lakes and sections of streams. Sediment as well as algae growth from nutrients has reduced the clarity of lakes, as with Lake Tahoe. By-products of fertilizers and pesticides have accumulated in aquifers and streams. In many rural areas, the accumulation of nitrates in groundwater has become a serious concern and a problem for local drinking water users. As a result of groundwater overdraft, some coastal aquifers suffer from seawater intrusion.
  • California must also contend with the legacies of toxic chemicals introduced by mining activities long ago, such as mercury

WHAT ARE THE AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVES?

• Urban water conservation. Many studies have shown that California's water needs could be met by increased conservation and efficiency efforts. The Pacific Institute's Report, "Waste Not, Want Not: The Potential for Urban Water Conservation in California", concluded that "California's urban water needs can be met into the foreseeable future by reducing water waste through cost-effective water saving technologies, revised economic policies, appropriate state and local regulations, and public education." The Pacific Institute report studied residential water use, and estimated that 12% of indoor water use in California can be attributed to leaks. Since toilets use the most water indoors, replacing inefficient older toilets with newer, high-efficiency models would result in significant water savings. The report concluded that indoor water use could be reduced by 40% if everyone would fix their leaks, replace showerheads and inefficient toilets, washing machines and dishwashers.

1. The majority of residential water use is used outdoors for landscaping. The typical California lawn requires several times more water than native plants. Inefficient irrigation systems compound the problem by overwatering lawns, creating excess spillage. Besides wasting water, overwatering generates more polluted runoff, which damages the rivers, lakes, and beaches. The Pacific Institute determined that outdoor water use could be reduced by at least 32% by using better irrigation schedules, "smart" irrigation controllers, and drip irrigation systems. Further significant reductions could be made by the use of drought-tolerant or California native plants for landscaping. Many municipalities are beginning to consider landscape ordinances, restricting the amount of grass and type of landscaping for new developments. Water districts have also implemented rebate programs to encourage homeowners to change their outdoor landscaping to artificial turf or other drought-tolerant landscaping. Both the Pacific Institute & PPIC reports determined that water pricing could be adjusted to encourage conservation. When water is not properly priced, it is frequently wasted. Flat rates and uniform pricing policies do not encourage conservation or efficiency investments. Pricing at appropriate levels can be an important conservation tool.

One way to deal with urban water conservation was announced by Governor Brown in 2015 - mandatory cuts. Brown has ordered cities and towns to cut their water use by 25 percent. But this approach does nothing to address agriculture, which consumes four times as much water as urban areas do.

• Agricultural Water Conservation. In 2008, the Pacific Institute determined that by changing to less thirsty crops and utilizing more efficient irrigation systems, the agricultural industry could save billions of gallons of water per year - enough to fill 3 to 20 dams. The researchers said policy changes were needed to help the process, including tax exemptions and rebates for farmers, applying water rights "more rationally and reasonably", rigorous water measurement and monitoring, and by eliminating subsides that encourage water wastage. The agricultural industry responded by saying efficient irrigation techniques were already being used, and that choosing crops solely based on water needs oversimplifies agricultural economics.

• Increase surface storage by building dams and reservoirs. The primary benefit of a dam or a reservoir is to store water for urban, industrial, and agricultural use. Dams also provide flood control by capturing high flows, protecting downstream areas, as well as provide hydroelectric power generation. But dams are not without their drawbacks. In-stream dams which interrupt the flow of rivers can be devastating to native fisheries by blocking access to spawning areas and by altering the temperature of the water. Even with fish ladders, fish populations can be impacted. Dams also trap sediment carried in the river, and while this improves downstream water quality, it results in progressive loss of reservoir capacity. Sediment from rivers is also a main source of beach sand, causing deteriorating beaches at the coastline.
• Off-stream reservoirs, such as Metropolitan Water District's Diamond Valley Lake, are less destructive to the environment. Completed in 2000, Diamond Valley Lake is one of California's newest reservoirs. The reservoir has nearly doubled Metropolitan Water District's storage capacity, and is capable of storing a six-month supply of water, which can be delivered by gravity to most of Metropolitan's service area.

While other water agencies have completed local surface storage projects, no major infrastructure or surface-storage improvements have been made to the State Water Project facilities since construction was completed in 1973, despite the addition of 20 million new residents. Funding for dams has been a sticking point in getting a water bond measure passed, with the Department of Water Resources favoring new surface storage to capture more runoff. The new dams have met with opposition from Democrats and environmentalists, who argue that dams are too expensive and would benefit only a few, and that the money would be better spent on improving conservation and other projects to increase regional self-sufficiency.

• Dam Removal. Conversely, rather than building more dams and reservoirs, dam removal is another strategy to alleviate the growing environmental problems related to water control. Roughly 600 dams have been removed across the United States over the past 20 years, and California has been a national leader in the number of dams removed. The dams being removed have been small - mill dams on streams in the eastern states or sediment-filled diversion dams in the west, such as Seltzer Dam on Clear Creek in Shasta County - and typically have little or no value for water supply, hydropower production, or flood control but have large effects from blocked fish passage.. Large dams also are being considered for removal because of the potential to contribute to recovery of endangered fish populations. While small dams are relatively inexpensive to remove, large dam removals are controversial because of the high costs of dismantling these structures, loss of hydropower and water supply, and uncertain benefits to fish.

• We must solve the Delta issues. The continued deterioration of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is of major concern to water officials, researchers, farmers, and environmentalists. The Delta supplies nearly two-thirds of Californians with at least a portion of their drinking water, and irrigates millions of acres of prime agricultural land. It is also home to a diverse array of fish and wildlife, and is the largest estuary on the West Coast. However, a crashing ecosystem, concerns for the fragile and aging levees and recent court decisions cast serious doubt on the future of the Delta as both an estuary and the hub of California's water system.

Recently, there has been much debate given to an old idea : the peripheral canal. The peripheral canal would route water around the Delta instead of through it. The idea of a peripheral canal has been highly controversial ever since it was defeated by voters in 1982 in a divisive ballot initiative battle which pitted Northern Californians against Southern Californians. The canal was seen as a Southern California water grab by the northerners, who feared the Delta would be "sucked dry" in order to water the lawns and fill the swimming pools of Southern California. Many Northern Californians today still believe that if such a canal were to be built, it would remove too much freshwater from the Delta, ruining the water quality and rendering it useless for farming and recreational purposes. They also fear that if the Delta was no longer needed by the state, funding for needed levee repairs and ecosystem improvements would dry up. For more information about the ongoing four-decade struggle over what should be done about the Delta's water management, see http://users.humboldt.edu/ogayle/hist383/DebateBay-DeltaEcosystem.html

• Water Recycling. Water recycling is reusing treated wastewater for landscape and agricultural irrigation, industrial processes, and toilet flushing. Recycled water has the potential to meet the household demands of 30 to 50 percent of the growing population by 2030, but more investment in infrastructure will be needed. The most controversial aspect of recycled water is using it to replenish groundwater basins or to augment reservoirs, sometimes referred to as "toilet to tap". Most often, recycled water is delivered in separate purple-colored pipes to major water users and newer developments for use in non-potable applications.The amount and type of treatment needed for processing of recycled water depends primarily on the potential for human exposure, and the water quality required beyond health considerations. Most recycled water that has undergone secondary treatment is used for nonpotable purposes, such as landscape irrigation of parks, golf courses and freeway medians, cooling water for power plants and oil refineries, industrial process water, toilet flushing, concrete mixing, and construction activities. Recycled water can undergo further treatment, called "tertiary treatment". This treatment produces water that exceeds drinking water quality standards. This ultra purified water is then allowed to percolate into an aquifer to replenish it, or potentially could be added to a reservoir.

Due to water recycling's unpopularity, major cities, such as San Diego and Los Angeles, allow their treated wastewater to flow to the ocean, unused. However, Orange County recently completed its Groundwater Replenishment System, a state-of-the-art wastewater treatment plant that utilizes filtering, screening, chemical processing and ultraviolet radiation to ultra-purify wastewater. Half of this water is then injected into the coastal aquifers to prevent sea water intrusion, and the other half is allowed to sink into the ground and replenish the groundwater basin. Orange County officials have overcome the obstacle of public opinion in part by an aggressive public education program.

• Clean up and protect groundwater resources. Groundwater already plays an important role in California's water supply and will likely play a much larger role in future water supply planning. Groundwater resources account for about 30% of California's water supply needs, more so in drier years. Some regions are more dependent on groundwater than others. But when more water is pumped out than is replenished, overdraft occurs which can result in increased pumping costs, land subsidence (sinking land), and degraded water quality. The San Fernando Valley, San Gabriel Valley and Orange County all sit atop productive groundwater basins, although some parts of the aquifers have become polluted from industrial manufacturing processes in earlier years. Metropolitan Water District and local water agencies are working to secure funding for cleanup programs. These programs have the potential to add significantly to Southern California water supplies.

Groundwater banking refers to the process of actively recharging aquifers with the intent to withdraw the water at a later time. Aquifers which have been previously overdrafted can easily provide the underground storage space. Many groundwater banks are operating in the southern San Joaquin Valley, and several southern California water agencies have water stored there. Groundwater banking projects are easier to implement than surface storage projects, do not suffer losses from evaporation, and are generally considered more environmentally-friendly. However, there are still potential issues to be resolved. There are those who might be concerned with environmental impacts, the effects of having standing water around, or whether groundwater withdrawals will affect neighboring wells. Groundwater storage is destined to be a part of future water planning, and might be most effective when combined with new surface water supplies.

• Agricultural to Urban Water Transfers. California's $33 billion agricultural industry remains by far the largest user of the state's developed water supply. In recent years, water markets have developed where those with water rights, mainly farmers, transfer the water to other users willing to pay for it, generally urban water agencies. In anticipation of another dry year, many Southern California water agencies have already purchased options from some irrigation districts for water transfers. Water is obtained for transfer in numerous ways: farmers may agree to fallow or idle land, shift to crops that consume less water, or to utilize groundwater pumping for irrigation. However, water transfers are not without controversy. The farmers who purchase water from federal agencies purchase the water at rates which are heavily subsidized by the taxpayers, and at much lower rates than urban water agencies pay. There are those that do not feel farmers should be making a profit off of selling their taxpayer subsidized water. The reduction can also impact the small community whose main economic focus is farming. When farmers do not plant, the local economy can suffer a loss of jobs, related economic activity, and tax revenues. Some California counties have passed ordinances restricting such transfers.

• Desalination. With over 21 desalination plants proposed for the California coast, many are looking to the ocean as the ultimate drought-proof water source for California. However, producing desalinated water on the scale needed to support a large population would take many more facilities than are currently being planned. According to the Pacific Institute, if the eight desalination plants for Southern California were to be built as proposed, they would only supply 7% of the region's water needs. Even with today's technology, desalination remains an energy-intensive process. Energy costs comprise nearly half of the product cost, making it vulnerable to rising energy prices. In addition, the use of large amounts of electricity contributes to global warming and statewide energy shortages. Desalination facilities have environmental impacts as well. There is concern about the ocean water intakes, which trap and kill small fish and microscopic organisms. The byproduct of the process is salty brine, which contains not only the concentrated salt, but also the dead aquatic life that passed through the screens and the concentrated contaminants from urban runoff. The brine also contains the chemicals used in the desalination process. This brine is released back into the ocean environment; potentially impacting aquatic life and the environment in ways that have not been fully studied.

• Capture and retain stormwater and urban runoff. Municipal codes in the past have directed that developed areas direct stormwater and urban runoff into storm drains. These drains are designed to drain areas quickly and prevent flooding by directing the runoff to the nearest stream or river and eventually the ocean. Water directed into these drains picks up trash, pesticides, fertilizers, heavy metals, bacteria and construction waste on its way downstream to the ocean. Polluted urban runoff is now the singled largest pollution source in many cases, contaminating local waterways and closing beaches in its wake. Studies have shown that in an undeveloped area, half of the rainfall will seep into aquifers with as little as 10 percent making its way to local waterways. However, as more impervious surface is added by development, about 55% of the water will end up in local waterways, while the amount that percolates into the aquifer to replenish it is reduced to as little as 5%. Just one inch of rain falling over a paved area one acre in size produces 27,000 gallons of water.
• It is estimated that in Southern California, over 500,000 acre-feet per year of rain water and urban runoff flows out to the ocean. By finding ways to retain this water and allow it to infiltrate into local aquifers, a "new" source of water can be developed and utilized. "Low Impact Development" methods work to infiltrate, filter and store storm water by creating bioretention facilities: areas of soil, grasses, shrubs and small trees where runoff from impervious surfaces is collected and allowed to undergo natural treatment. This also creates an opportunity to create wildlife habitats while preventing downstream pollution of waterways and beaches. Permeable pavement, cisterns, green roofs, and vegetated swales can also be used to reduce urban runoff.

The Tujunga Wash Greenway ProjectEven though much of Southern California is intensely developed, with nearly all the storm drains and rivers now paved concrete conduits flowing straight to the ocean, innovative projects such as the Augustus Hawkins Nature Park and the Tujunga Wash Greenway project are redirecting storm water and urban runoff into created natural areas that recharge local aquifers and reduce the amount of water dumped into local waterways. They also serve as valuable wildlife habitat as well as creating park-like areas the local communities can enjoy.

WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE?

While little agreement currently exists among all stakeholders involved in California's water disputes, the Public Policy Institute of California has proposed "Goals for a modern California water policy" listed below:

WHAT CAN YOU DO?

Easy. Conserve water. Fix your leaks, replace old toilets and appliances, and consider drought tolerant landscaping. Truth is, there is no magic silver bullet that's going to allow us to continue using our water as we please, growing grass in the desert where it clearly doesn't belong. Our water supply is not going to increase; we have tapped it out as much as we can. There is the very real possibility there is going to be less water in the future. More population means less per capita resources, so whether we build more dams or not, conservation has to be part of our future.

California faces challenges in providing a reliable water supply for current and future residents, but we are not without options. Finding the right combination that provides some real solutions while simultaneously satisfying all stakeholders will be the biggest challenge. The path we are on now is not sustainable, and trade-offs will be likely, perhaps even inevitable. However, to do nothing is to sit back and watch California's future literally dry up.