WSP12998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

II I I 7- Ial California Nears Cutback in Colorado River Water :J . , By ANNA WaDE MATHEWS California faces an immediate federal cutback in the water it draws from the Colo- rado River, a major source of supply for the fast-growingpopulatlon oHts southern region, after state water agencies failed to agree on a pact to curtail use. . Attempting to meet a Jan. 1 deadline, the Imperial Irrigation District, represent- ing the rich agricultural region just north of the Mexican border, Tuesday agreed to a version ofa deal designed to gradually wean California off surplus Colorado River water. But the proposal included changes from a version that had earlier won support from three other Southern Cal- ifornia water agencies, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern CaIifornia, the San Diego County Water Authority and the Coachella Valley Water District. At least .-" - one of the agencies- the Metropolitan dis- trict-said provisions in the Imperial plan weren't acceptable. At the center of the conmct is Califor- nia's longstanding practice of taking more water than it is officially allotted from the Southwest's most important river. Based on a 1929 accord, the state gets 4.4 million . acre-feet of Colorado River water a year. But it has been using as much as 5.2 mil- lion acre-feet. An acre-foot represents enough water to cover one acre to a depth of one foot, or about 326,000 gallons. Other states that draw from the river want more. Making matters worse, drought has reduced the surplus water available during recent years. Working from a schedule developed under the ClIn- ton administration, the Bush team gave California until the end of 2002 to craft a plan to phase out Its use of the surplus wa- ~ ter. With such a deal, California would get a 15-year phaseout of the state's excess wa- ter, and receIve 5.1 million acre-feet for 2003. Withoutit, the state faced an immedi- ate cutback to 4.4 m1llion this year. In the absence of an agreement among the agencies, the fedeniI Interior Depart- ment said California hadn't yet met the re- quirements to avoid the immediate cut- back of its Colorado River surplus; a move that would potentially represent a loss of almost 14% of next year's allotment. California water officials have said a shutoff at the beginning of this year won't cause an immediate crisis. The Los Ange- les Metropolitan Water District, whicbsup- plies water to about 18 million people in six Southern california counties, says it has enough water banked to make up the loss for at least the next three years. But South- Please Turn to Page A5, Column I ~ California Faces Water Cutback ~;., Continued From Page A3 ern California's economic growth is closely tied to its supply of water and the . . reduction of Colorado River supply will '. likely push the region to move more ag- gressively toward building desalinization . plants and stepping up conservation mea- . sures, a direction the Metropolitan Water District says it is already taking. It will also ratchet up pressure on agri- cultural users in areas like the Imperial . Valley to transfer more of their water to the fast-growing urban regions of the . coast. Indeed, part of' the agreement passed Tuesday by Imperial Irrigation Dis- trictincluded a long-discussed water trans. fer to the San Diego County Water Author- ity, butitisn't expected to go into effect un- til the broader issues are resolved among all the agenCies and the federal govern- . ment. If the four agencies do agree, the In- . terior,Department could reverse the reduc- tion. Bennett Raley, assistant interior secre- tary for water and science, said Tuesday the issues among the agencies appeared unlikely to be resolved quickly: "ThIs isn't a matter of fine-tuning a couple of words. .. Southern California water agencies . previously had negotiated a tentative agreement. But Dec. 9 the board of the Im- .. perial Irrigation District voted to reject its . part in the pact. Despite the money it . would receive from selling water to San Di- ego, the district was concerned the deal . would leave too much farmland fallow. An- . other crucial worry for the Imperial dis. ! ... trict was the agreement didn't adequately protectitfrom the potential costof environ- mentallawsults if the agreement hurt the Salton Sea, a fetid water body in the South. ern California desert that serves as a ref- uge for wildlife and is fed largely byirrlga- tion runoff. The Imperial rejection left water offi- cials scrambling to patch together an agreement. The proposal approved Tues- day by the Imperial district's board, which includes the transfer to San Diego, "took care of things our board saw as barriers, .. a spokeswoman said, adding the district "has done its part to help the state meet Its water needs." The agreement calls for state money to deal with the Salton Sea problems, as well as a loan guarantee to back the district's water-conservation ef- forts if the deal doesn't work. But Adan Ortega Jr., an official with the Metropolitan Water District, said the Imperial plan was "radically different" from what his board had approved, and some of the provisions are unacceptable, partly because they add substantial costs. He said he was "hopeful we can come up with a solution in the next few months. .. In a statement, a Coachella Valley agency of- ficial said "it is not possible at this time to meet the requirements of the Imperial Irri- gation District's last minute proposals" but he would "remain optimistic that In the future an agreement can be reached. .. Dennis Cushman, assistant general manager of the San Diego County Water Authority, said his agency is "very hopeful the agencies will come together. .. ~ 'v[d.~.J~.,J~~~3 .; l:r;rt'. .... ~.~-; ~ ~