My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD02180
CWCB
>
Chatfield Mitigation
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
BOARD02180
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:13:10 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:12:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
1/22/2003
Description
WSP Section - Colorado River Issues
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Memo
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br />... =. . . <br /> <br />.~ <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />WIIK TO THE E&E ','IE8. SITES <br />'iE,~E [lPdLY <br />, G~1~E'EN'Jt,'Nf~E <br />. L.ll:WJ LEYTEH <br />I :S,S,'E; Pl;l:lBUShlt;iC :Horlj'~E. <br /> <br />Tuesday, January 7,2003 <br /> <br />WATER <br /> <br />SoCal may not need Colo. River surplus, L.A. agency says <br /> <br />In a surprise announcement yesterday, the water agency serving 17 million people in Southern California said It can <br />get by without surplus flows from the Colorado River and does not need water from Imperial County farmers. <br /> <br />The Los AngeleS-based Metropolitan Water District of Southern California said plans for other water transfers, <br />desalination, Increased storage and conservation could compensClte for losing surplus flows from the ColorCldo River <br />for 20 years (Tony Perry, Los Anae/as Times). . <br /> <br />The Interior Department reduced California's take of Colorado River wClter to 4.4 million acre-feet annually from 5.2 <br />million acre-feet after the Imperial Irrigation District and other water agenCies failed to agree on a pClCt to transfer <br />200,000 acre-feet of water annually from ImperlClI County farmersito urban users In San Diego and the Coachella <br />Valley (Greenwlre, Jan. 6). <br /> <br />"It Is desirable to have," MWD President Ronald Gastelum said of; the transfer deal and surplus gUClrantees. "Is it <br />absolutely essential? No. We have other options available to us" (AP/San Francisco Chron/c/e online). <br /> <br />Dennis Cushman, Clsslstant general manager of the San Diego County Water Authority, was skeptical of MWD's plans, <br />which would be more expensive than pClylng Imperial County for water. "That kind of rosy scenario assumes an awful <br />lot of things go Met's wClY ClII at once, and everything comes to frUition," Cushman said (Dale Kasler, Sacramento Bee). <br /> <br />But 110 board member Andy Horne, who opposes the water transfer, welcomed MWD's announcement. "If Metropolitan <br />has decided they could meet their water supply needs without tr~nsfers, I'd say hip, hip hooray," Horne said (Michael <br />Gardner, Copley/San Dieoo Union-Tribune). (All cites Jan. 7.).. DHB <br /> <br />ENVIRONMENT &. ENERGY DAILY * GREENWIRE. * LAND LETTER * E&E PUBLISHINGF LLC <br /> <br />l~~ 1'(IBLlSfll:\(;, LLI, <br /> <br />122 C. SI. NW, Ste. 722 Washington, D.C. 20001 <br /> <br />E-mail:pubs@e.news.nal >I< ~hon.: 202.628-6500 <br />All contents @ 2003 E&E FUbliShlng, LLC. <br /> <br />'-. "'-"'... 11'\1 rV'''7t'\':I!-1 '1 t..~....... <br /> <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />1/'7/(\'" <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.