Local calls for water cutbacks here to stay

By: GIG CONAUGHTON - Staff Writer
Solutions to federal judge's ruling to take time, officials say | Monday, October 1, 2007 11:28 PM PDT ∞

SAN DIEGO -- Water officials say local residents can expect to be called on to cut water use for at least the next few years because of statewide water-shortage worries.

San Diego County Water Authority officials said last week that early projections suggest county residents should have all the water they need in 2008 -- and maybe even a little left over to store away -- if the state has "normal" rain and snow this winter.

Even so, local residents and Southern Californians are going to be asked to cut their water use because of uncertainty surrounding Northern California supplies, officials said.

"We really need to conserve," Water Authority Water Resources Manager Ken Weinberg said Monday. "It's going to take several years to fix the plumbing in the bay delta."

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 called the bay delta because it is connected to the San Francisco Bay area, is the heart of the State Water Project, a 600-mile series of dams, reservoirs, pumps and pipelines.

The court ruling prompted Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to convene an ongoing special legislative session to try to forge a bond measure to fix water supply problems.

Southern California's main water supplier, the Metropolitan Water District, says the cuts in pumping from the delta could slash its Northern California supplies by 30 percent. Those supplies made up two-thirds of Southern California's imported water this year.

Metropolitan and Water Authority officials say the only way to fix the delta is to a canal around or through the delta to separate endangered fish from Southern California's now-threatened water supplies.

The idea is controversial in Northern California, and a canal would take a decade to build even if it were approved. State voters overwhelmingly rejected a canal proposal in 1982.

Weinberg said that no matter what the state decides to do, it could be several years before water flows freely from Northern California or before the Water Authority can increase other supplies. Therefore local water users should conserve if they want to avoid mandatory cutbacks, he said.

The Water Authority started marketing a "20-gallon challenge" campaign after the August court ruling to try to get people to cut back their water use voluntarily. The campaign aims to get people to cut their use by 10 percent.

Last week, Weinberg told Water Authority board members at their monthly meeting that the agency needed to continue to push the conservation campaign.

"The 20-gallon challenge is in place," Weinberg said. "We need to do that no matter what. That's one of the conclusions we've drawn from our analysis. What we've been telling the public is, 'if we can save water now, we can store it for the following year when we need it.' "

State Department of Water Resources officials operate the State Water Project, recently released very early projections of how much water they think they could move to customers of Metropolitan and other contractors next year in two scenarios: a winter with average rain and snow, and a winter with poor precipitation.

Weinberg said in an average year, Metropolitan would probably be able to make up for some Northern California supply shortfalls by taking some water out of storage and deliver 560,000 acre feet of water to San Diego County residents. One acre foot of water is enough to sustain two households for a year.

Combined with deliveries from the Water Authority's deal to buy water from Imperial Valley farmers, and storage and other projects from local water agencies, the Metropolitan supplies would satisfy the county's projected 700,000 acre foot demand, and give it 56,000 to store in local reservoirs, Weinberg said.

On the other hand, Weinberg said the "bad-year" scenario could force the Water Authority to leave the county 29,000 acre feet short. He said that could prompt the agencies to push the public to voluntarily cut back even more, or lead to mandatory cuts.

-- Contact staff writer Gig Conaughton at (760) 739-6696 or gconaughton@nctimes.com.

Next Previous

More Stories

Tags:

Bookmark and Share

Ads by Yahoo!

Advertisement

Pre-Registration Comments[-]Go to Top

This is stupid wrote on Oct 2, 2007 5:29 AM:So millions of us in SoCal will suffer water cutbacks becuase some stupid 3 inch fish swims into the pumps up north. There has been no public outcry yet becuase no one has yet been effected. Just like the blackouts, no one cares about them until it happens to them. Well, next year when water rationing takes place, the fish will hit the fan.-

Jane wrote on Oct 2, 2007 5:50 AM:Same old stuff. You need to conserve while we build another 30,000 6,000 sf homes in Carlsbad with plush lawns. I will converve once the County Board of Supervisors and City Councils adopt a building moritorium. People are the largest users of water. Why encourage more people and urban sprawl? I think S.CA has too many people. Its time to start clearing some out!-

There is NO wrote on Oct 2, 2007 6:24 AM:Water shortage. It's all a tree hugger plot to keep us from watering our lawns.-

Mike wrote on Oct 2, 2007 6:47 AM:Call all you want. Until the same politicians who keep on handing out development permits to builders for more housing stop and lead by example, no one will take them seriously.-

Starting in wrong place wrote on Oct 2, 2007 6:48 AM:The County Board of Supervisors and all of the City Councils should put a moratorium on all new building permits (new water meters) until each builder builds a zero-deficit home that conserves and recycles its grey water for the landscaping. Also the cities had better take a closer look at the requirement for the Water Runoff program (storm water) This water needs to be retained. We cannot just dump all of our water and expect a neverending supply.-

Management needed wrote on Oct 2, 2007 7:46 AM:As in any other business our water managers need to be held accountable and replaced. They have known about this for many years. Rather than promoting other resources for water, i.e. desalination, wells etc. they sit on their backsides blaming voters, the courts anyone except their incompetance. They are paid, very well to insure we have plenty of water. They have failed. If a public company had a needed product, no competition yet couldn't supply enough the CEO would be fired on the spot. We are not some third world country. Demand change and new management who can manage and provide a much needed resource for all of us.-

Coastal Eddy wrote on Oct 2, 2007 8:49 AM:Is it possible that the government would need to file an environmental impact report before they could force me to stop watering my lawn? The lawn is part of the delicate eco-system that absorbs carbon dioxide and gives off oxygen. Without all of our lawns, carbon dioxide would build up in the air to dangerous levels.-

Dwindling Resources wrote on Oct 2, 2007 9:15 AM:This is yet one more piece of evidence that over development is out pacing resources. Jane & Starting in the wrong place both point out that building moritoriums are necessary but should have been in place before we got to this point. If it takes one acre foot to sustain 2 homes, the new developments in Escondido alone should have never been built. It is hard for people to take the call for conservation seriously when new homes are springing up like weeds because the thought is that we conserve so they can have!-

AResident wrote on Oct 2, 2007 9:47 AM:I think that the city needs to stop building. Period. We also need to limit the number of people that live here...That's a lot of water usage... No more building. Start building the saltwater plant that has been talked about for 20 years. Put the people that are in charge of our water supply out of a job. REMEMBER ONE VERY IMPROTANT THING HERE. The less you use, the more you will be charged. They have done this for years. PAY ATTENTION. THEY DON'T NEED TO RAISE RATES DUE TO LESS CONSUMPION. START COMPLAINING TO THE MAYOR. DON'T RE-ELECT THEM IF NECESSARY.-

Escondeeter wrote on Oct 2, 2007 10:13 AM:What the judge fails to realize is that this is a zero-sum game. Once the water shortage has killed off all our agriculture, we'll go looking for another source of nutrition. Mmmm! Pan-fried delta smelt.-

AResident wrote on Oct 2, 2007 10:14 AM:Thank you NCT for editing my comment.................-

Crazytalk wrote on Oct 2, 2007 10:23 AM:A building moratorium is not the answer. Builders already pay exorbitant fees to build and people are still going to move here. If you stop building, then the price of homes will soar beyond what anyone, including our local children, can afford. Stop with the shortsighted whining by blaming development for the problem. The problem is with the environmental whackos who created the water problem we have now.

Boater wrote on Oct 2, 2007 10:52 AM:An what about the water plant in ENCINITAS? Here we have a way to make water and the coastal commission thinks it might be a bad idea. When do the people start to matter?

Roy wrote on Oct 2, 2007 10:54 AM:There is no shortage. There is just a misallocation of resources. There is no need to stop building. Just stop growing alfalfa and cotton in arid parts of California using the flooded field irrigation technique and the water available to cities would double. Do some research and check out how much water is wasted on these two very low value/high water use crops.

Stop growth crowd wrote on Oct 2, 2007 11:25 AM:need to wake up. Everyone tries to stop and blame growth. We need growth to expand our economy. We need growth to pay taxes to fund our infrastructure over a larger base. It is not going away. We need responsible people in management positions that build to match our growth whether it be water, energy or freeways. Water needs, energy needs and freeway needs were all predicted. Very simple find a way to meet the demand as in any business. Problem is no competition, no accountability and blame game breeds incompetance. "Experts" and "managers" have known this was coming for years yet they continue to blame voters, judges etc. Quit giving them the Growth excuse. We need competant people to manage our resources now!! By the way, anybody heard from our wonderful flip flop governor during our water crisis? He received a lot of votes from this area. Then again now that he has become a Democrat what can you expect.

DeSal - Reclaim wrote on Oct 2, 2007 12:20 PM:SoCal is always going to have wet and dry cycles in their weather. Time to invest in DeSal, Reclaim, Water Storage, so during dry periods, water will still be available, even if at a higher price. Depending on outside sources to maintain all of SoCals needs and not have adequate backup plans is dumb. New growth should adhere to desert type landscaping, and existing business, homes, government water users should begin to adapt to desert type landscaping. What is important is that there is enough water, not how green your grass is.

Concerned-1 wrote on Oct 2, 2007 1:39 PM:What's that old saying? Cut of your nose to spite your face? That's what you're doing when you talk about a building moratorium. Roy and Stop Growth are on point. Now, the Delta Smelt is just the tip of the iceberg for the San Joaquin Delta. The area is a disaster waiting to happen. The smelt is an inconvenience for now, when the levies break we will be in real trouble. The solution lies in building the Peripheral Canal. That's the one we didn't vote for in the 1980s. Anyway, we need a much improved delivery systems and, of course, we need to conserve on water consumption.

GFN wrote on Oct 2, 2007 2:02 PM:Until we get competent people in water authority positions, STOP THE GROWTH. The-housing prices will go through the roof-argument doesn't "hold water" because they will go through the roof anyway. Fewer people; less water used. We are not blaming development, but if we have fewer houses, we have less water used and government officials begin to pay attention and do something. The LESS water we use; the MORE we pay!!!.

I am not conserving wrote on Oct 2, 2007 2:07 PM:not when I drive through beverly hills and the sprinklers are going on during the day to keep their mansion lawns green. Go soak your head!

As long wrote on Oct 2, 2007 5:02 PM:As there is water at the end of the pipe our solid Americans will deny the problem. It's a matter of funds. Those who can afford water will have it. So, it's pay or die. What is the problem?

JayDee wrote on Oct 2, 2007 7:00 PM:Well if we need to cut back on our water when is city going to stop selling water permits.. 1 house of 4 will use 325,714 gallons of water a year. That is 1 acre foot of water. So if we don't have it maybe the city should take a look at itself and stop selling water permits for a while.

Registered Comments[-]Go to Top

Advertisement

Videos