Chapter 11 LOS ANGELES AREA WATER SUPPLIES · Reservoirs/Lakes A large volume of surface water is...

The almost total development of the Los Angeles Area was made possibleonly because of three giant aqueduct systems, built at public expense, thatbring water from hundreds of miles away. The area continues to bedependent also on local rainwater and groundwater for about a third ofits water supply. This chapter quickly reviews local surface water, ground-water, and the three aqueduct systems that import water to the Los Ange-les Area, the reliability of each source, and the environmental and/orwater quality constraints that apply to each. These are the sources on whichthe Los Angeles Area depends for its drinking water supply.

LOCAL SURFACE WATER: RIVERS, STREAMS, LAKES, AND RESERVOIRS

Surface water in the Los Angeles Area comes from the skies, in the formof rain or snow. This is the water that runs off into rivers and creeks, evap-orates, is used by plants in their growing cycle, or infiltrates into the soil,replenishing our groundwater resources. The Los Angeles Area has two majorriver systems, the Los Angeles and San Gabriel rivers, and several large creeksystems, Ballona and Malibu creeks being the largest. These rivers and creeksrise in the local mountains, where rainfall is much heavier than on the coastalplain. The average rainfall at the Los Angeles Civic Center is inches a

1 4

Chapter 1 1 LOS ANGELES AREA WATER SUPPLIES

When the well is dry, we learn the worth of water.

, Poor Richard’s Almanac,

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM 4

year, whereas it rains as much as inches a year on some of the peaks ofthe San Gabriel Mountains.

The Storm Drain System

The single-purpose storm drain system was built to contain and pass a cap-ital storm. The system consists of an extensive network of undergroundstorm drains connected to an above-ground system of concrete-linedchannels that have replaced our native rivers and creeks. Reservoirs, checkdams, detention and debris basins, and other facilities are also part of thestorm drain system. They capture water for flood control purposes (hold-ing peak flows until after the storm passes), or they capture water for laterinfiltration into the groundwater basins. With peak flows captured, the watercan be released after the storm has passed and when there is more capac-ity in the storm channels. Then, water left in storage can be releasedslowly into spreading grounds or basins until it gradually percolates downinto the ground and into the groundwater.

A capital storm or flood is defined by the Los Angeles County Depart-ment of Public Works as runoff from a -year-frequency-design stormfalling on a saturated watershed over a four-day period. After it has rained

L O S A N G E L E S A R E A WAT E R S U P P L I E S 1 5

Figure . The hydrologic cycle.

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 15

for three days and the ground is fully saturated, the heavens open up anddump, in a -hour period, the amount of water that would be containedin a storm that could happen only once in years. For example, in thefoothills of the San Gabriel Mountains, where Pasadena, Azusa, and Glen-dora are located, the capital flood for which the storm drain system isdesigned would generate the following amounts of rainfall: . inches onthe first day, . inches on the second, . inches on the third, and . incheson the fourth. (For more definitions, see the Glossary.)

In the s, roughly % of the rain falling on Los Angeles either infil-trated into the ground or evaporated. Only % ran off to the sea. Today,with the extensive development and the paving over of our urban environ-ment (as much as % of the land is now covered with roofs, roads, park-ing lots, patios, etc.) and the construction of the massive storm channelsystem, about % of stormwater runs off in the Los Angeles Riverdrainage area, while % either infiltrates or evaporates. About % of theSan Gabriel River’s flow is captured for recharge into the groundwater sup-ply. On average, only about % of the upper Los Angeles River nativerunoff is captured, due to a lack of sufficient spreading capacity and theprevalence of clay soils.

The concrete-lined channels that cross the Los Angeles Area carry rain-water to the Santa Monica Bay, the Los Angeles/Long Beach Harbor, orSeal Beach. During dry months, the flow is composed of urban runoff (theexcess water that flows in our streets), effluent from water reclamation plants(sometimes called sewage treatment plants), and groundwater seepage. Dur-ing a heavy rainfall, these channels become dangerous torrents flushing largequantities of stormwater, trash, debris, and pollutants to the ocean. Theyaccomplish the single-purpose job they were designed to do well.

Spreading Basins

Spreading basins are large, shallow man-made pits or ponds where wateris slowly allowed to percolate into the soil in order to recharge or replen-ish the underlying groundwater basins. Spreading basins are filled withstormwater that has been diverted into the spreading basins or held in reser-voirs or lakes for future spreading. On average, nearly , acre-feetof water in Los Angeles County are returned to the groundwater supplyin the county each year through spreading operations. Like surface water,the quantity of water diverted to spreading basins each year is affected by

1 6 L O S A N G E L E S A R E A WAT E R S U P P L I E S

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 16

weather conditions. In water year –, a wet year, , acre-feetof water were spread. That number dropped to , acre-feet in wateryear –. Imported water and reclaimed water are also spread.

Reservoirs/Lakes

A large volume of surface water is held in reservoirs or lakes throughoutthe Los Angeles Area. Though the terms may be confused and inter-changeable, a reservoir is always associated with a dam. Lakes, on the otherhand, exist naturally, but many reservoirs have “lake” in their name. Allmajor lakes within the Los Angeles Area are actually reservoirs. The lakesand reservoirs listed in Table were created for a variety of purposes. Cap-tured stormwater is conserved for later release into spreading grounds, whereit percolates into the groundwater basin, increasing our drinking water sup-ply. Stormwater runoff is captured to avoid flooding, stored, and laterreleased to the ocean or to a spreading basin. Water imported from out-side the region may be conveyed into reservoirs for the purposes of stor-age and/or regulation of flow to accommodate variability of demand.And any number of recreational activities, including fishing, swimming,and boating, may occur.

Role of U.S. Forest Service Land: The Angeles National Forest

An estimated % of the Los Angeles Basin’s water supply comes fromNational Forest lands. The Angeles National Forest was among the firstnational forests established, and it was established with the prime purposeof protecting the water supply. The role that the forest plays as a major watersource and the need to protect this precious water supply were recognizedvery early.

Two-thirds of the land area of the forest is considered to be sensitive water-shed, due to land slopes that are greater than °, or steeper than the angleof repose. The mountains are so steep that rock and debris flows or mud-slides are prevalent whenever the land becomes saturated with rainwateror is shaken by an earthquake.

Rainfall in the mountains varies wildly with elevation and location. Itaverages about inches per year forestwide, with as much as inches ayear falling in the higher elevations. The trees and other vegetation in theforest use a significant portion of the total precipitation that falls on theforest. An estimated , acre-feet of water moves directly into the


014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 17

.

Maj

orR

eser

voir

san

dLa

kes

inLo

sA

ngel

esC

ount

y

Des

ign

Cap

acity

Nam

e(A

F)M

anag

emen

tPu

rpos

eW

ater

Sour

ceLo

catio

n

Big

Dal

ton

,

L

AC

ount

yFl

ood

cont

rol,

cons

erva

tion

Stor

mw

ater

Big

Dal

ton

Can

yon,

m

iles

nort

hof

Gle

ndor

a

Big

Tuju

nga

,

L

AC

ount

yFl

ood

cont

rol,

cons

erva

tion

Stor

mw

ater

Big

Tuju

nga

Can

yon,

m

iles

nort

heas

tof

Sunl

and

Bre

a,

U

.S.A

rmy

Floo

dco

ntro

lSt

orm

wat

er

Cog

swel

l

,

LA

Cou

nty

Floo

dco

ntro

l,co

nser

vati

onSt

orm

wat

er

mile

sno

rth

ofA

zusa

Dev

il’s

Gat

e,

L

AC

ount

yFl

ood

cont

rol,

cons

erva

tion

Stor

mw

ater

Arr

oyo

Seco

,nor

thea

stof

LaV

erne

Eat

onW

ash

LA

Cou

nty

Con

serv

atio

n,de

bris

stor

age

Stor

mw

ater

Nor

thea

stof

Pasa

dena

Enc

ino

,

L

AC

ity

Wat

ersu

pply

LA

Aqu

educ

tSa

nta

Mon

ica

Mou

ntai

ns

Fulle

rton

U.S

.Arm

yFl

ood

cont

rol

Stor

mw

ater

Han

sen

,

U

.S.A

rmy

Floo

dco

ntro

lSt

orm

wat

erE

ast

San

Fern

ando

Val

ley

Hol

lyw

ood

,

L

AC

ity

Wat

ersu

pply

LA

Aqu

educ

tH

olly

woo

dH

ills

Live

Oak

LA

Cou

nty

Floo

dco

ntro

l,co

nser

vati

onSt

orm

wat

er

mile

sno

rthe

ast

ofLa

Ver

ne

Lope

z

U

.S.A

rmy

Floo

dco

ntro

lSt

orm

wat

er

Los

Ang

eles

,

LA

Cit

yW

ater

supp

lyL

AA

qued

uct

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 18

Mor

ris

,

LA

Cou

nty

Con

serv

atio

nSt

orm

wat

erSa

nG

abri

elC

anyo

n,

mile

sno

rth

ofA

zusa

Paco

ima

,

LA

Cou

nty

Floo

dco

ntro

l,co

nser

vati

onSt

orm

wat

erPa

coim

aC

anyo

n,

mile

nort

heas

tof

San

Fern

ando

Pudd

ings

tone

,

L

AC

ount

yFl

ood

cont

rol,

flow

dive

rsio

n,St

orm

wat

er

mile

sout

hof

San

Dim

asre

crea

tion

Pudd

ings

tone

LA

Cou

nty

Floo

dco

ntro

l,co

nser

vati

onSt

orm

wat

er

mile

sno

rthe

ast

ofSa

nD

imas

Div

ersi

on

Sant

aA

nita

LA

Cou

nty

Floo

dco

ntro

l,co

nser

vati

onSt

orm

wat

er.

m

iles

nort

hof

Arc

adia

San

Dim

as,

LA

Cou

nty

Floo

dco

ntro

l,co

nser

vati

onSt

orm

wat

er

mile

sno

rthe

ast

ofSa

nD

imas

San

Gab

riel

,

L

AC

ount

yFl

ood

cont

rol,

cons

erva

tion

Stor

mw

ater

San

Gab

riel

Can

yon,

.

mile

sno

rth

ofA

zusa

Sant

aFe

,

U.S

.Arm

yFl

ood

Con

trol

Stor

mw

ater

Saw

pit

LA

Cou

nty

Floo

dco

ntro

l,co

nser

vati

onSt

orm

wat

er

mile

sno

rth

ofM

onro

via

Sepu

lved

a

,

U.S

.Arm

yFl

ood

cont

rol

Stor

mw

ater

Ston

eC

anyo

n

,

LA

Cit

yW

ater

supp

lyL

AA

qued

uct

Tho

mps

onC

reek

LA

Cou

nty

Floo

dco

ntro

l,co

nser

vati

onSt

orm

wat

er

mile

sno

rth

ofC

lare

mon

t

Wes

tlake

,

La

sV

irge

nes

Wat

ersu

pply

Col

orad

oR

iver

Aqu

educ

tor

Stat

eM

WW

ater

Proj

ect

Whi

ttie

rN

arro

ws

,

U.S

.Arm

yFl

ood

cont

rol

Stor

mw

ater

(con

tinue

d)

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 19

.

(con

tinue

d)

Des

ign

Cap

acity

Nam

e(A

F)M

anag

emen

tPu

rpos

eW

ater

Sour

ceLo

catio

n

Ech

oPa

rkC

ity

ofR

ecre

atio

nLo

calr

unof

fLo

sA

ngel

esan

dgr

ound

wat

er

ElD

orad

oC

ity

ofR

ecre

atio

nLo

calr

unof

f,Lo

ngB

each

grou

ndw

ater

and

recy

cled

wat

er

Har

bor

Park

Cit

yof

Rec

reat

ion

Loca

lrun

off

Los

Ang

eles

(mun

icip

alw

ater

adde

dw

hen

nece

ssar

y)

Mal

ibu

Lake

Priv

ate

Rec

reat

ion

Loca

lrun

off

Peck

Roa

dPa

rkL

AC

ount

yR

ecre

atio

nR

unof

ffr

omflo

odco

ntro

l,Sa

nG

abri

elco

nser

vati

onM

ount

ains

Wes

tlake

Priv

ate

Rec

reat

ion

Loca

lrun

off

and

grou

ndw

ater

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 20

groundwater through deep percolation in the upland areas and alongsmall ephemeral drainages. An additional , acre-feet of surfacerunoff is available on average for recharge downstream along the larger chan-nels. This adds up to , acre-feet of water for recharge.

Capturing More Stormwater Runoff on Site

In order to maximize our use of local water, there have been several ini-tiatives in recent years to increase the amount of stormwater infiltrated intothe ground, on site, at an individual home, development, or neighborhood.The Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board now requires thatnew construction (either new development or redevelopment) retain thefirst ? inch of storms within a -hour period on site or, minimally, thatit be filtered before release, for the purpose of improving the quality ofstormwater or urban runoff. About % of all local storms are of this size or smaller. Several local efforts have been launched to explore ways to


Figure . Photo of Big Dalton Dam and Reservoir. (: Los Angles Bureau ofSanitation.)

AU: Pleaseprovde fraction,not in ms.

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 21

capture more stormwater for recharge. See the “Watershed Management”section of Chapter .

Water Quality Concerns of Stormwater Retention

Due to concerns over possible contaminants found on city streets and inthe air, studies are under way to assess the potential negative impacts ofinfiltrating stormwater into the groundwater supply through on-site infil-tration. However, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has stated, “Researchon the topics of urban stormwater runoff quality and of groundwater infil-tration using the first three-quarters of an inch of a storm event indicatethat on-site biological natural treatment along with existing and emerg-ing technologies can keep the storm waters from polluting streams, bays,and estuaries while providing a useable water supply” (http://www.lc.usbr.gov/~scao/planpgm.htm).

The Los Angeles & San Gabriel Rivers Watershed Council’s WaterAugmentation Study, Phase II Final Report, concluded: “Data collectedto date indicate that there is no statistically significant degradation ofgroundwater quality from infiltration of stormwater-borne constituents.Groundwater quality has generally improved for most constituents at siteswith shallow groundwater” (www.lasgrwc.org).

GROUNDWATER

The Los Angeles Area sits atop a relatively large water supply contained ina number of huge groundwater basins. These massive basins of water, whichlie anywhere from a few feet to hundreds of feet below the surface, havebeen replenished for millions of years by the natural inflow of rainwater,which infiltrates the soil and percolates down to the groundwater table. TheSan Gabriel Valley and the eastern part of the San Fernando Valley are com-posed of sand and gravel that have washed off the mountains over the mil-lennia. This alluvium has many spaces between the sediments, called porespace, where water is stored; because of the porous nature of the soils, thesespaces can easily fill with water when it rains, and then it can be pumpedup as needed. The San Gabriel Valley Basin can hold . million acre-feetof water. Within the state, only Shasta and Oroville dams, in northern Cal-ifornia, hold more.


014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 22

For eons, the groundwater beneath the Los Angeles Area remaineduntapped. At first, groundwater was available to anyone who possessed themeans to access it. But as the population grew (and with it the demandfor water) overpumping began to affect the groundwater basins adversely.Older, shallow wells ceased being productive. The water that had flowedfrom , artesian wells ceased to flow, and, in the case of the coastalgroundwater basins, the associated decreasing pressure caused seawaterto intrude into the groundwater basin and degrade water quality. Nolonger could shallow wells meet the needs of agricultural and municipaldemands.

With the invention of the deep-well turbine pumps, groundwater becameeconomically accessible in quantities that could sustain new industries anda larger population. These huge new pumps also laid the groundwork foreven more water wars.

Today, the Los Angeles Area receives – % of its water supply fromthe ground. In , , acre-feet were produced for use in the LosAngeles Area. In , groundwater production was slightly higher, at, acre-feet, reflecting the variation in rainfall patterns.

Strategies for Managing Groundwater Basins

In response to the high demand placed on the groundwater basins as wellas the reduction in natural recharge caused by urbanization (paving overthe landscape), several strategies have evolved to maintain the integrity ofthe basins.

ADJUDICATION As the population of the Los Angeles Area grew and thegroundwater was drawn down, methods for protecting the groundwaterbasins from overdraft had to be developed. Under current law, landown-ers can extract as much groundwater from under their property as theycan put to beneficial use. The only way to deal with the conflicts thatresulted from this tragedy of the commons (where water belonged toeveryone and no one was in charge, and so everyone took without con-cern for the others) was to find a way to allocate not just the surfacewater, but the groundwater as well, to determine who has the right topump how much water and to put into place a mechanism for keepingeveryone honest. To manage groundwater better and to prevent further


014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 23

water quality problems, most of the groundwater basins in the Los Ange-les Area were adjudicated.

The courts defined which people or water agencies have rights to howmuch of the groundwater by allocating shares of ownership based on historic pumping records. Then a Watermaster is appointed to see that allthose with permission to pump do not exceed their annual allocation. Therole of the Watermaster can include such things as keeping track of waterextractions, ordering replacement water (often imported water), oversee-ing recharge activities, and assessing water quality.

Adjudication is a long and difficult process. The Raymond Basin was thefirst groundwater basin in the state to be adjudicated. Today, according tothe Association of Groundwater Agencies (AGWA), of the groundwa-ter basins that have been adjudicated, are located in Los Angeles County,and are located south of the Tehachapi Mountains.

SPREADING The Los Angeles County Department of Public Works managesmost of the spreading basins in the Los Angeles Area. The county enteredinto agreements with the Watermasters of the various groundwater basinsto spread specific amounts of water. For example, in the Main San GabrielBasin, the county signed a cooperative agreement with the Watermaster,in February , to accept and spread up to cubic feet per second (cfs)


Figure . Groundwater extractions from and rainfall in the Central Basin,–.

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 24

of supplemental imported water. Over time, as the San Gabriel Valley pop-ulation increased, the supplemental water deliveries have also increased. Thisimported water is directed into the same spreading basins into which thecounty also spreads captured storm water and reclaimed water. This requirescareful timing and management.

The Department of Public Works operates , acres of spreadinggrounds and soft-bottom channel spreading areas. It assists in the operation


Figure . Photo of Los Angeles County–operated spreading grounds.

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 25

and maintenance of acres owned by others. An additional acres arecontrolled and managed by other agencies. In addition to these facilities,a large portion of the San Gabriel River from Morris Dam to Whittier Nar-rows Dam has an unlined channel bottom that also infiltrates water intothe ground and therefore returns an additional estimated yearly average of, acre-feet to the groundwater supply (www.ladpw.org).

INJECTION As groundwater levels in the coastal basins were pumped downbelow sea level, salty ocean water began to infiltrate into the fresh ground-water supply. This process is called seawater intrusion. To protect drinkingwater quality, wells were drilled along the coast, and fresh potable watermixed with reclaimed water is injected into the ground to recharge thecoastal groundwater basins. The primary purpose of these injection wellsis to protect the groundwater quality by forming a freshwater barrier betweenthe intruding seawater and the groundwater supply. They also serve toreplenish the basins with freshwater. In conjunction with the injection wells, observation wells are installed to monitor the salt content of thegroundwater.

CONJUNCTIVE USE AND IN-LIEU REPLENISHMENT Conjunctive use is the practice ofusing surface water in conjunction with groundwater. In other words, whensurface water is plentiful (late winter and spring), it is delivered to consumers,in preference to groundwater, and spread or put underground to replen-ish underground aquifers. Imported water is used to augment local waterby replenishing the underground aquifers when surface water is plentiful.Then water stored underground can be pumped up for use when surfacewater is not available in the summer and fall. In other words, water is storedduring the wet season against need during the dry season. Some ground-water managers are now encouraging and implementing conjunctive useto store not just wet-season water against dry-season need, but wet-yearsurpluses against dry-year need.

In-lieu replenishment is another form of conjunctive use, where a ground-water producer elects to participate in the seasonal storage program of theMetropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) and purchasessurplus wet-season imported water at a cheaper rate in exchange for not taking a portion of its water rights for that year. This program


014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 26

is designed specifically to encourage conjunctive use—to store importedwater underground when it is plentiful against dry-season need. It encour-ages the use of local surface water supplies to meet local need while stor-ing imported water underground during winter and spring months. In theWest Basin and Central Coast Basins alone, a total of , acre-feet ofgroundwater were conserved in FY – through in-lieu replenishment.

In addition to maintaining water supplies underground, the program isdesigned to replenish depleted areas of a groundwater basin where conven-tional recharge has proved inadequate; to increase the effectiveness of sea-water-intrusion barriers by reducing nearby extractions; to reduce totalannual extractions from the basin; and to help even out the demand forimported water by creating a market when there normally would be lessdemand for imported water. Residents use more water during the summer,after the winter rains have ended.


WRD District Ma p

Upper Los Angeles River Area(S an Fernando Valley Basin)

Central

We st

RaymondBasin

Main San Gabriel Basin

Puente Basin

Basin

Basin

Coast

Pa c i Þ

c

Oc e

an

§¤ƒ405

§¤ƒ110

§¤ƒ105

§¤ƒ710 §¤ƒ605

§¤ƒ5

§¤ƒ10

§¤ƒ210

§¤ƒ5

§¤ƒ10

£⁄101

ˆ60

9̂1

1̂3 4

1̂7 0

£⁄101

§¤ƒ405

Orange County

Los Angeles

County

S an BernardinoCounty

§¤ƒ210

2̂2

§¤ƒ405

5̂7

VenturaCounty

‹0 4 8 Miles

Selected AdjudicatedGr oundwater Basins

in Los Angeles County

Figure . Map of adjudicated groundwater basins in Los Angeles County. (:Water Replenishment District of Southern California.)

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 27

Major Groundwater Basins

Figure is a map of the major groundwater basins in the Los Angeles Area.The State Department of Water Resources publishes Bulletin (updatedregularly), which reviews the groundwater resources of the state, based onthe reports from those who use groundwater (http://www.groundwater.water.ca.gov/bulletin/).

MAIN SAN GABRIEL BASIN This -square-mile basin lies beneath the SanGabriel Valley, with Alhambra on the west, Monterey Park and the Cityof Industry to the south, San Dimas to the east, and Monrovia and Glen-dora to the north. The basin is composed of coarse sand and gravel thathas washed off the mountains for millennia, creating an ideal conditionfor quick infiltration into the ground. In addition to natural percolationof rainwater and subsurface flow from smaller adjacent basins, the SanGabriel Basin is artificially recharged with an average of , acre-feetper year of stormwater that has been captured and put into spreadingbasins.

Water managers of the Main San Gabriel Basin seek to maintain the water level in the basin, as measured by the depth to water in the key welllocated in Baldwin Park, the middle of the basin. The optimal groundwa-ter level is between and feet below the surface. Above feet,imported water may not be spread, only local water, because otherwise therewould be local flooding and, besides, local water is free. This key well waterlevel can drop dramatically below feet during periods of extendeddrought.

Though no recycled water is returned to the basin, the Upper SanGabriel Valley Municipal Water District is currently developing the Recy-cled Water Demonstration Project in order to be able to use recycled waterfrom the San Jose Creek Water Reclamation Plant, operated by the countysanitation districts, as a future source of recharge for the basin. The stor-age capacity of the basin is estimated to be . million acre-feet.

Because much of the land overlying the Main San Gabriel Basin has been used for industrial purposes, especially during and immediately afterWorld War II, when environmental concerns were minimal if even pres-ent, some of the groundwater in this basin has become contaminatedwith industrial solvents and the chemicals used to make rocket fuel. As aresult, several Superfund sites are located in this basin.


014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 28

RAYMOND BASIN This -square-mile basin in the Pasadena area is made upof the Monk Hill, Pasadena, and Santa Anita subbasins. The Raymond Faultseparates the Raymond Basin from the Main San Gabriel Valley Basin tothe southeast. In addition to natural recharge, surface water from theArroyo Seco is diverted to spreading grounds in the basin. The first waterwas extracted in , and by it was learned that the basin had beenin overdraft since . In , this basin was the subject of the first bas-inwide adjudication of groundwater rights in California.

PUENTE BASIN This ,-acre (-square-mile) basin is tributary to the MainSan Gabriel Basin and is hydraulically connected to it, with no barriers togroundwater movement. It is bounded by the San Jose Hills to the northand the Puente Hills to the south. It is not, however, within the legal juris-diction of the Main San Gabriel Basin, though its management is reportedthrough the Main San Gabriel Basin Watermaster.

CENTRAL BASIN This -square-mile basin lies in the southeastern part ofLos Angeles County under the cities of Montebello, Cerritos, and Comp-ton, among others, south of the Whittier Narrows Dam. Because a layerof impermeable material separates the groundwater supply from the surface, little of the basin’s groundwater is replenished by the percola-tion of local rainfall. Most of the basin’s natural replenishment occurs from


Per

Capi

taW

ate

rU

sage

(gpc

d)

Per Capita Wa ter UsagePopulation

180

140

163155

100

120

140

160

180

200

1990 1995 2000 2005

Fiscal Ye ar

1.25

1.30

1.35

1.40

1.45

1.50

1.5 5

1.60

1.65

Figure . Central Basin per capita water use vs. total usage. (: CBMWDwater use database and MWD demographic data, .)

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 29

surface inflow through the Whittier Narrows and groundwater flow-ing down-gradient from the Main San Gabriel Basin. Aggressive spread-ing and injection wells artificially replenish the basin with both importedand reclaimed water from the San Jose Creek, Whittier Narrows, andPomona wastewater reclamation plants operated by the Los AngelesCounty Sanitation Districts.

Prior to , groundwater from the basin satisfied most of the local waterdemand, but today, in spite of efforts to recharge the basin, more than halfof the supply is met with imported water. In addition, a contaminationplume from the Main San Gabriel Basin is beginning to migrate into theCentral Basin through the Whittier Narrows.

WEST COAST BASIN This -square-mile basin lies to the west of the Cen-tral Basin. The two basins sit adjacent to one another, separated by the New-port-Inglewood Fault. Though no spreading occurs in the West Coast Basinbecause of the subsurface clay layers, substantial amounts of water spreadin the Central Basin recharge the West Coast Basin as well. Two seawater-intrusion projects, built to prevent seawater from intruding into theunderground drinking water supply, also return water to the basin throughinjection wells.


W ater U sage

Av g. Wa ter DemandPopulation

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 20041,250

1,300

1,350

1,400

1,450

1,500

1,550

1,600

1,650

Acr

e-Fe

et(T

hous

ands

)

Popu

latio

n(T

hous

ands

)

Years

Figure . Central Basin historical retail demand for water and populationgrowth. (: CBMWD water use database and MWD demographic data,.)

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 30

UPPER LOS ANGELES RIVER AREA The Upper Los Angeles River Area (ULARA) isdefined as the watershed of the upper Los Angeles River and its tributar-ies above the junction of the Los Angeles River and the Arroyo Seco. Itincludes the entire San Fernando Valley watershed. ULARA covers squaremiles, of which square miles are mountainous or hilly, with insignifi-cant groundwater supplies. The relatively flat valley, encompassing squaremiles, is underlain by four distinct groundwater basins.

. The San Fernando Basin ( square miles), the largest of the four,underlies most of the San Fernando Valley. The native safe wateryield from this basin has been determined to be , acre-feetper year. The cities of Los Angeles, Burbank, and Glendale have aright to extract imported return water from this basin averagingabout , acre-feet a year.

. The Sylmar Basin (. square miles) lies to the north. The safeyield is , acre-feet per year.

. The Verdugo Basin (. square miles) lies to the east. The prescrip-tive right of the pumpers is , acre-feet per year.

. The Eagle Rock Basin (. square miles), the smallest of the four,lies to the southeast. This basin has no significant native safe yieldbut can be replenished and drawn from.

Rainfall and surface runoff from the San Gabriel Mountains and theTujunga, Pacoima, and Verdugo washes replenish the San Fernando Valleybasins naturally. Stormwater runoff (and, perhaps soon, reclaimed water)is spread, contributing to their replenishment. The average annual amountof water spread to recharge the basins located below Hansen Dam in theTujunga Wash is , acre-feet, but in – only , acre-feet werespread because it was a dry year.

SANTA MONICA BASIN This -square-mile basin lies beneath the cities ofSanta Monica, Culver City, and Los Angeles (West Los Angeles) and is not adjudicated. No spreading and no injection activities occur. The basinis divided into three subbasins, separated by north–south faults: theCoastal Subbasin, the Crestal Subbasin, and the Charnock Subbasin.


014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 31

Total production from Santa Monica Basin wells was acre-feet in. This number is far below its historical production of up to , acre-feet per year, due to extensive MTBE contamination, to be discussed later.

HOLLYWOOD BASIN This -square-mile basin lies beneath the cities of LosAngeles, Beverly Hills, and West Hollywood. Because of poor water qual-ity and the small amount of water extracted from this basin each year, ithas not been necessary to adjudicate it. The Hollywood Basin is locatedbetween two branches of the Hollywood Fault and encompasses sixaquifers. The City of Beverly Hills pumped up to , acre-feet per yearfor years, until , when it closed down its wells and treatment facil-ity in favor of buying all of its water from MWD. It maintains water rightsto the basin, although it has no court-adjudicated rights. The city recentlycompleted an advanced water treatment plant, utilizing reverse osmosis tech-nology, to treat water extracted from the Hollywood Basin in order to reduceits dependence on imported supplies once again.


Figure . Map of San Fernando Valley groundwater basins.

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 32

Eric Reichard of the United States Geological Survey (USGS), in apersonal communication, considers the Central, West, Santa Monica, andHollywood basins as parts of one large interrelated system.

Water Quality Concerns

The groundwater in many places has become contaminated by septic sys-tems, agricultural chemicals, and industry. As a result, several Superfundsites are now located in the San Gabriel Valley and the eastern San FernandoValley. Many wells that had been producing drinking water for local res-idents have been closed, and a plume of contamination is migrating underthe Whittier Narrows Dam into the Central Basin. There are also concernsabout rainwater infiltrating through contaminated soils in industrial placesthat have been identified as brownfields. See Chapter , “Drinking WaterQuality,” for a more detailed discussion of these issues.

IMPORTED WATER

The Los Angeles Area has large basins of groundwater lying beneath it, yetextractions from those basins fall far short of meeting the water needs ofthe current population. Any demand that local groundwater or surface watercannot meet is made up with water imported from outside the region bythree major publicly financed aqueduct systems. These aqueducts are theLos Angeles Aqueducts, the Colorado River Aqueducts, and the Califor-nia Aqueduct, which is part of the State Water Project. Each aqueduct system is overcommitted, being asked to deliver more water than it can.Each system is facing difficult environmental constraints. The ColoradoRiver and State Water Project water also have water quality constraints.

Following a brief description of each system is a discussion of the reli-ability of each supply and the many pressures each is experiencing: envi-ronmental, water quality, and area of origin.

Los Angeles Aqueducts

Since its completion in , the aqueduct has been extended north to MonoLake as part of a second aqueduct. The second Los Angeles Aqueduct,roughly parallel to the first, was completed in the s, increasing the capac-ity to deliver water to the City of Los Angeles. The capacity of both


014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 33

barrels is , acre-feet a year. Three sources of water are sent to theCity of Los Angeles from this region: Mono Lake’s watershed, the OwensRiver, and Owens Valley groundwater.

The massive redistribution of water from the Owens and Mono basinsto the City of Los Angeles has had both environmental and social conse-quences. Most residents of these eastern Sierra Communities are gratefulto the city for purchasing most of the land in the region. There is very lit-tle development and no billboards on Highway . Others wish for morepeople and development.

Mono Lake is an ancient saline lake with no outlet. It supports a uniqueecosystem of brine flies and brine shrimp that are the sources of food foran amazing number of birds on the Pacific flyway. They eat and rest at thelake before flying on. Islands in the lake provide safe nesting sites for oneof the largest colonies of California seagulls. Four streams that fed MonoLake were diverted into the aqueduct, sending a yearly average of ,

acre-feet to Los Angeles. As a result, the water level of the lake dropped asfar as feet below the desired level of , feet above sea level.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES Diverting the streams and lowering the waterlevel increased the salinity of the lake, threatening its ecosystem andexposing a land bridge to one of the islands within the lake. Predators couldcross on the land bridge to attack nesting birds.

Law suits brought by the Audubon Society, the Mono Lake Com-mittee, and CalTrout forced the State Water Resources Control Board toadopt regulations in restricting Los Angeles’ diversion from the basinuntil Mono Lake water levels increased from approximately , to ,

feet above sea level. Even when such levels are reached, which is notexpected to occur before , the City of Los Angeles will be restrictedto a yearly diversion of , acre-feet per year, one-third its historicalaverage.

The diversion of the Owens River to both local farmers and Los Ange-les has dewatered the riverbed and the wetlands that were once a major fea-ture of the valley, and it has turned Owens Lake into a dry lakebed.Owens Lake was once plied by steamships carrying lead and silver fromthe mines in the White Mountains on the eastern side of the lake. Duststorms originating on the dry lakebed surface significantly degrade theregion’s air quality.


014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 34

Owens Valley groundwater has been pumped down, mined by both thecity and local residents. Lowering the water table below the root zones ofnative plants has caused changes in the entire ecosystem of the valley. Thissituation has been resolved, thanks to cooperative pumping agreementsbetween Inyo County and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power(LADWP) to protect local agriculture and wildlife.

The LADWP is under court order to restore Mono Lake, rewater partsof the Owens River, restore some wetlands in the basin, and control thedust from Owens Dry Lake. It is experimenting with shallow flooding andgrowing salt-tolerant vegetation on the lake bed and is applying dust con-trol measures over an ever increasing portion of the lake bed. These envi-ronmental restoration efforts are all using water that formerly was part ofthe city’s water supply. The city has not been meeting court-ordered dead-lines and has been sued to force compliance.

Over the next years, the City of Los Angeles estimates that it will beable to take on an average , acre-feet per year through the Los Ange-les Aqueducts, only about % of the ,-acre-feet capacity of the aque-ducts, about a little more than a third less than it had been taking.

The Mono Lake Committee, working cooperatively with LADWP, wassuccessful in identifying alternate sources of water needed to solve the basin’sproblems. They were also successful in securing both state and federal fund-ing to help pay for them. The alternative sources include a massive toiletretrofit program for city residents, to reduce the amount of water used perflush from – gallons to . gallons per flush, and the construction of theEast Valley Water Recycling Project, which will bring treated wastewaterto the spreading grounds below Hansen Dam for recharge into the ground-water. In October , LADWP reimbursed its customers for the mil-lionth ultralow-flow toilet.

To make up for the continuing shortfall in water needed to supply LosAngeles residents, LADWP purchases additional imported water from theMetropolitan Water District. The state is so plumbed, with connectionsbetween agencies and aqueduct systems, that water can be transferred fromone agency to another with relative ease. However MWD’s supplies are alsounder increasing pressure.

WATER QUALITY Because the source of water is essentially snow melt off the Sierra Nevada Mountains, Los Angeles Aqueducts’ water quality is


014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 35

amazingly good, not heavily mineralized. It averages about milligramsper liter total dissolved solids.

Colorado River Aqueduct

The Los Angeles Aqueduct was far from being fully exploited before theCity of Los Angeles and others began looking for additional water supplies.The first surveying expedition for the Colorado River Aqueduct, led byWilliam Mulholland, took place in . The construction of such a mas-sive project would require the backing of more than one city. In , atotal of cities, including Los Angeles, banded together to lobby the statelegislature to form the Metropolitan Water District of Southern Califor-nia (MWD), the special district needed to build and manage the ColoradoRiver Aqueduct. Three years later the residents of MWD’s member citiespassed a $ million bond act to fund the aqueduct’s construction. Con-struction began in .

Over the next years, a total of , men would endure the harshCalifornia desert while constructing the -mile-long aqueduct, composedof miles of tunnels, five pumping plants, and underground siphons.

When completed in , there were no takers for the Colorado RiverAqueduct’s water. A few wet years had replenished the groundwater sup-plies in the Los Angeles Area, and MWD was forced to offer water at nocharge in order to build a user base. But the need for water in southernCalifornia grew as World War II progressed. A lot of the industry neededto support the war effort located to the Los Angeles Area. General Pattonprepared his army for combat in North Africa by training in the LowerMojave Desert, where he drew on the aqueduct to supply his troops.Other military bases were built in northern San Diego and Orange coun-ties, which needed water. As a result, all of San Diego County joined MWDand brought with it its allotment of Colorado River water. The pipelinesbuilt to service these military bases provided the backbone water distribu-tion system needed to accommodate the postwar population explosion insouthern California.

As southern California grew with the postwar boom, MWD expandedits territory to include other cities and agencies. By , MWD suppliedwater to member agencies and cities in six counties on the coastalplain from Ventura to the Mexican border


014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 36

The Colorado River Aqueduct has the capacity to deliver . million acre-feet per year of Colorado River water. The Colorado River travels , milesthrough seven states (Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona,Nevada, and California) and the Republic of Mexico. Its drainage area cov-ers , square miles, including the hottest and driest regions of theSouthwest. The reservoirs on the river can store four years of water in aver-age rainfall years, and they serve to even out the wet-year/dry-year cycles.


SWP West Branch SWP East

Branch Jensen

Filtration Plant

Weymouth Filtration Plant

Mills Filtration

Plant

Inland Feeder Project

Skinner Filtration Plant

Diemer Filtration

Plant

Eastern

InlandEmpire

LasVirgenes

West Basin

West Basin

LosAngeles

Beverly HillsSanta Monica

Foothill

Glendale PasadenaSan Marino

UpperSan Gabriel

ValleyCentralBasin

BurbankSan Fernando

Long Beach

San DiegoCountyWater

Authority

UNITED STATESMEXICO

Santa Ana

OrangeCounty

California Aqueduct Colorado River Aqueduct Water Filtration Plants

FullertonAnaheim

ThreeValleys

Western Torrance

UtilitiesAgency

N

Figure . Map of the MWD service territory.

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 37

THE LAW OF THE RIVER Attempts to negotiate the Colorado River’s use amongthe seven states through which the river flows began as early as withthe designation of the Upper and Lower Basin states. Six of these seven statessigned the Colorado River Compact allocating . million acre-feet per year


U P P E R B A S I N

N E W M E X I C O

C O L O R A D O

W Y O M I N G

U T A H

N E V A D A

C A L I F O R N I A

A R I Z O N A

M E X I C O

L O W E R B A S I N

Figure . Map of the Upper and Lower Basin states.

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 38

of Colorado River water to the Upper Basin and . million acre-feet tothe Lower Basin States. Mexico was allocated . million acre-feet. The totalso allocated equals . million acre-feet, which is more than the estimatedannual average flow of the river, causing the river to be oversubscribed. Theperiod chosen to determine the amount of water in the river was wetterthan the long-term average. Records of precipitation and runoff havebeen kept for only – years in the West.

The compact plus numerous other laws, court decrees, regulations,and treaties developed over the years have collectively come to be knownas the Law of the River. The Colorado River has been deemed the most controversial and regulated river in the country. This is not surprising con-sidering that seven arid states, several Indian tribes, and the Republic ofMexico all claim a share of its water.

The Law of the River appropriates . million acre-feet of Colorado Riverwater per year to the state of California for both agricultural and munic-ipal uses. But California has been using on average about , acre-feet more than its annual allocation. Because the other states had not beenusing their full entitlement, MWD was able to keep its aqueduct full, deliv-ering . million acre-feet a year despite a fourth-priority entitlement ofonly , acre-feet per year.

The United States Secretary of the Interior acts as the Watermaster forthe river, and has the authority to declare surpluses or shortages. Since Ari-zona and Nevada are now taking their full entitlements, there is no more“surplus” for California.

THE 4.4 PLAN In December , as one of his final actions as Secretary of the Interior and after many years of hard negotiations, Bruce Babbittdecreed that California must learn to live within its entitlement of . mil-lion acre-feet a year. To accommodate this transition, California was givenuntil to develop alternative water supplies and conservation pro-grams. During this period, the Secretary of the Interior will make additionalsupplies of water available to California using a negotiated set of interimsurplus guidelines for Colorado River water from Lake Mead. MWD is nowworking hard to find ways to keep the Colorado River Aqueduct full orto find alternate sources of water under this decree.

The most obvious place to look for more water is the Imperial Irriga-tion District (IID) in Imperial County. San Diego has negotiated with IID


014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 39

to buy water that farmers would conserve. The All American Canal couldbe lined, saving water that has infiltrated into the ground into a ground-water basin that farmers south of the border have come to depend on. Orland could be fallowed, not farmed, eliminating farm worker jobs in a des-perately poor county. Also at issue is the future of the Salton Sea.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS CAUSED BY DIVERSIONS OF THE COLORADO RIVER The manydiversions of the Colorado River, to farmers and cities that lie near the riveror its aqueducts, have adversely impacted the river’s wildlife and ecosys-tems. During most years, no water reaches the estuary or the Gulf of Cal-ifornia. The river is all used up. This has resulted in a loss of , squaremiles of Baja California’s wetlands, over %. The reduction in wetlands


. Colorado River Entitlements

Upper Basin States . million acre-feet

Colorado

Utah

Wyoming

New Mexico

Lower Basin States . million acre-feet

Arizona . million acre-feet

Nevada . million acre-feet

California . million acre-feet

California Allocations

Agricultural Districts . million acre-feet

Palo Verde Irrigation District

Yuma Project Reservation Division

Imperial Irrigation District

Coachella Valley Water District

MWD . million acre-feet

California Surpluses (when available)

MWD (was San Diego) . million acre-feet

Agricultural Districts Any additional surplus

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 40

has endangered and disrupted the area’s wildlife and the livelihood of itsindigenous people. Birds migrating between the northern and southernhemispheres on the Pacific flyway no longer use the estuary as a stopover;many now stop at the Salton Sea. There are more than species listed bythe federal government as endangered in the Colorado River watershed.

The Salton Sea was formed in by a flood that redirected the entireColorado River through existing irrigation ditches into the Salton Sink inthe Imperial Valley. The Salton Sea is a sump with no outlets. Its only sourcesof water, aside from the limited amount of rainfall, are raw sewage and indus-trial waste from Mexicali and agricultural drainage from the Imperial andCoachella valleys, where Colorado River water is used for irrigation. Yet,despite the sources of the inflow, the south end of the Salton Sea has becomeone of the most diverse bird hot spots in the world, hosting about

species, two-thirds of all bird species in the continental United States, more


METROPOLITANWATER DISTRICT

SERVICE AREA

UNITED STATES

IMPERIALIRRIGATION

DISTRICT

PALO VERDEIRRIGATION

DISTRICTCOACHELLACANAL

COACHELLAVALLEY WATER

DISTRICT

SALTONSEA

COLORADORIVER

PARKER DAM

LAKEHAVASU

ALL AMERICAN CANALYUMA PROJECT

IMPERIALDAM

LAKE MEAD

LAKE MOHAVE

DAVISDAM

HOOVER DAM

NEVADA

ARIZONA

MEXICO

CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA SERVICE AREASAND MAJOR FACILITIES OF ENTITIES USING

COLORADO RIVER WATER

Figure . Map of the major facilities and water agencies served by the Colorado River.

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 41

than of them listed species or species of concern (www.saltonsea.ca.gov/environ.htm).

Efforts to restore the Colorado River watershed and the riparian and wet-land habitats of Baja California parallel similar efforts in our own region.Some in the environmental community believe it better to restore the estu-ary as a healthier place for birds on the Pacific flyway than to sink addi-tional dollars into efforts to save the Salton Sea. A study funded by thePackard Foundation determined that the estuary has shriveled to one-tenthits historic size and needs an additional , acre-feet of water annuallyif it is to survive.

The Salton Sea, because of continual evaporation, is already % saltierthan the ocean. It is destined to become even saltier. The increases in salin-ity will eventually kill off the existing ecosystem. Ways to preserve the SaltonSea and the wildlife habitat that has developed around it are being studied.

Any efforts to restore the Colorado River watershed and estuary will alsorequire more water to be left in the system, which means a further reduc-tion in the water supply available to cities and agriculture from this over-committed resource.

WATER QUALITY The quality of the Colorado River’s water has also suffered.Salt, or salinity, is an increasing water quality problem. Though occurringnaturally, salt or mineral concentrations increase in water that is used byagriculture or when processed through wastewater treatment plants andreturned to the river.

The Colorado River originates high up in the Rocky Mountains, whereits salt concentration, usually expressed as total dissolved solids, or TDS,is only milligrams per liter. Water taken from the Colorado River forirrigation purposes passes over and through the soil, dissolving mineral saltsin its path, and then returns to the river as agricultural return flows. Theriver serves Las Vegas and other communities along the river with drink-ing water, which is returned as treated wastewater to the river. Finally, theriver’s water, captured behind a series of major dams, evaporates in the hotdesert sun, further increasing its salinity. By the time it reaches the intakeof the Colorado River Aqueduct at Parker Dam, the river’s salt concentra-tion has increased to a long-term average of milligrams per liter.

This increase in salinity stands in the way of local water reclamation effortsbecause, as Colorado Aqueduct water is used, flushed down the sewer sys-


014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 42

tem, and reclaimed by local wastewater treatment facilities, it increases insalinity yet again. Once salt concentrations exceed –, milligramsper liter, water is no longer serviceable for irrigation, groundwater recharge,or any other use unless put through an expensive reverse osmosis processto reduce the salt content.

The high salinity also causes the water to feel hard. This means that moresoap is needed to wash, that scum or a ring appears around the bathtub,and that it is generally not as pleasant as water that is soft (has less min-eral content). Because Colorado River water is so hard, MWD blends muchof it with water from the State Water Project, which is much less hard.

The State Water Project

The California State Water Project is a system of dams, reservoirs andlakes, power and pumping stations, and miles of aqueduct designedto transport water from the northern portion of the state (the SacramentoRiver Watershed) to the central and southern portions of the state. The stateDepartment of Water Resources manages the aqueduct, while MWD, whichhas contracted for % of the water, almost half, manages and distributesits share throughout its service territory, the coastal plain of southernCalifornia. The Kern County Water Agency contracted for % of the water,so both agencies together account for % of the water. The first deliver-ies to MWD occurred in .

The California Aqueduct, the longest aqueduct in the world, requiresa tremendous amount of energy to pump water up the San Joaquin Val-ley and over the Tehachapi Mountains and other mountains into south-ern California. The State Water Project is the single biggest user of eletricityin the state.

The State Water Project, as originally planned, would have cost approx-imately $ billion, but, because then Governor Pat Brown determined sucha price would never be approved by California voters, less than half theplanned project was funded and built. As was the case in those days, envi-ronmental impacts were not considered and even economics were not givenserious consideration. The engineering, however, was very well done.

What remains to be built of the State Water Project are () some way totake Sacramento River water through or around the Sacramento–SanJoaquin Delta to the pumps in the south end of the delta, and () dammingthe north coast rivers and redirecting them to flow into the Sacramento


014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 43

River and to the delta. The peripheral canal, which would have taken Sacra-mento River water around the delta to the pumps, was soundly defeatedat the polls in , and damming the north coast rivers is no longer anoption because they have been declared “Wild and Scenic,” a federal des-ignation that provides significant protection. As a result, less than half of the . million acre-feet (maf ) a year the state signed contracts to delivercan actually be delivered. The half that cannot be delivered is called“paper” water, for it exists only on paper, in the service contracts. Servicecontracts are promises to deliver if the state can. They are not entitlements.Each contractor must pay for its share of the aqueduct system and the oper-ations and maintenance, whether or not they get any water.

Stated another way, in California Department of Water Resources(DWR) Bulletin -: “existing SWP facilities have . . . an % chanceof delivering . maf to project contractors in any given year.”

THE CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT The State Water Project’s impact on the environ-ment cannot be examined without including the impacts of the CentralValley Project (CVP), since they are operated cooperatively. The CVP wasbuilt, starting in the s, to provide irrigation for the entire Great Cen-tral Valley. It consists of dams and reservoirs, mostly in the SierraNevada Mountains, starting with Shasta Dam on the upper SacramentoRiver, miles of canals, and power plants. It serves long-term con-tractors, irrigating . million acres of farmland and supplying water to million people, and it generates enough power to serve million house-holds. The watersheds of the Central Valley provide water for about a thirdof California’s cropland and for about cities in the valley and the SanFrancisco Bay area.


. The Three Southern California Aqueducts

Year Managed Length Capacity Can Deliver Aqueduct Completed by (miles) (acre-feet/yr) (acre-feet/yr)

Los Angeles LADWP , ,

Colorado River MWD . million ,

California State DWR . million . million

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 44

Both the CVP and the State Water Project divert water before it reachesthe delta and pump water out of the delta. As much as % of the waterthat would normally flow through and out of the delta and out the GoldenGate is now either diverted before it gets to the delta to serve both agri-cultural and urban uses or pumped out of the delta into the two massivewater delivery systems.

The Sacramento–San Joaquin Rivers Delta is a rare inland estuary thatwas once an enormous wetland filled with so many birds that the sky woulddarken when they were startled. This wetland supports over species ofplants and animals. A commercial salmon cannery was established on theSacramento River in , when, it is estimated, salmon numbered in themillions. The delta is the hub of the state’s water system.

This extremely productive wetland was seriously impacted by the debriswashed down off the mountains by hydraulic gold mining in the s andby farmers who built levees and islands in the delta so that they could farmand feed the gold miners. The delta now consists of over , miles ofwaterways and islands. Over % of the original wetlands have beendestroyed. Development of bedroom communities for the San FranciscoBay Area is encroaching into the delta.


LA County Source of Supply

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Calendar Year

Mill

ion

Acr

e-F

eet

Metropolitan Water District

Los Angeles Aqueduct

Recycling

Local Groundwater and Surface Production

Figure . Historical Southern California water supply sources.

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 45

ENVIRONMENTAL AND WATER QUALITY PROBLEMS CAUSED BY WATER EXPORT FROM NORTHERN

CALIFORNIA The construction of the Central Valley Project and the StateWater Project and the subsequent movement of water from where it fallsto where it is wanted have led to the almost-total consumptive use of the


Alameda

AlpineAmador

Butte

Calaveras

Colusa

Del Norte

El Dorado

Fresno

Glenn

Humboldt

Imperial

Inyo

Kern

Kings

Lake

Lassen

Los Angeles

Madera

Marin

Mariposa

Mendocino

Merced

Modoc

Mono

Monterey

Napa

Nevada

Orange

Placer

Plumas

Riverside

Sacramento

San Bernardino

San Diego

Santa Clara

Shasta

Sierra

Siskiyou

Solano

Sonoma

Stanislaus

Sutter

Tehama

Trinity

Tulare

Tuolumne

Ventura

Yolo

Yuba

San Francisco

San Luis Obispo

San Benito

San Mateo

Contra CostaSan Joaquin

Santa Cruz

Santa Barbara

TrinityLake

ShastaLake

LakeOroville

Tehama-ColusaCanal

FolsomLake

Folsom SouthCanal

MokelumneAqueduct Hetch Hetchy

Aqueduct

Delta-MendotaCanal

MaderaCanal

MillertonLake

Friant-KernCanal

South BayAqueduct

North BayAqueduct

San LuisReservoir

CoalingaCanal

Cross ValleyCanal

Los AngelesAqueduct

California

Aqueduct

Colorado RiverAqueduct

CoachellaCanal

San DiegoAqueducts

All AmericanCanal

LakeAlmanor

CorningCanal

Black ButteReservoir

Stony GorgeReservoir

East ParkReservoir

TuleLake

ClearLake

Indian ValleyReservoir

LakeBerryessa

LakeMendocino

LakeSonoma

Glenn ColusaCanal

Contra CostaCanal

San

New Bullards BarReservoir

EnglebrightReservoir

CamancheReservoir New Melones

Lake

LakeMcClure

New DonPedro Lake Lake

Crowley

Pine FlatLake

LakeKaweah

NacimientoReservoir

San AntonioReservoir

SuccessLake

TwitchellReservoir

IsabellaLake

CastaicLakeLake

Casitas

CachumaReservoir

LakePerris

SilverwoodLake

LakeMathews

HenshawReservoir

San VicenteReservoir

GrantLake

LowerOtayReservoir

Red BluffDiversion Dam

LuisCanal

Santa ClaraConduit

HollisterConduit

LakeTahoeClear

Lake

WhiskeytownLake

State ProjectFederal ProjectLocal Project

Los VaquerosReservoir

DiamondValley Lake

Source: California Water Plan Update, Bulletin 160-05

Figure . Map of major water delivery systems statewide. (: California WaterPlan Update, Bulletin -.)

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 46

San Joaquin River. This once-mighty river, which in historic times floodedthe entire San Joaquin Valley and often grew to be miles wide, is nowdry for as much as miles of its length. It has been reduced to an agri-cultural sewer. The lower reaches are sometimes referred to as the “colonof the state,” with essentially only agricultural drainage and other waste-waters entering the delta from the south.

An old state law requires that when dams are built in a river, water mustbe left to sustain the fishery. The courts have now ruled that Friant Dam,on the San Joaquin River above Fresno, has illegally diverted almost theentire flow of the river and that the river must be rewatered. The case is nowthe subject of serious negotiations between all of the interested parties.

Both supply systems, when built, were supposed to deal with the seri-ous problem of groundwater overdraft in the Central Valley, but neitherone has done so. The San Joaquin Valley has experienced the greatest vol-ume of land subsidence in the world, due to overpumping. By the s,, square miles of the valley had subsided more than a foot. The Cal-ifornia aqueduct fell more than two feet between and , andsome places in the valley have subsided as much as feet.

These two supply systems have also created massive environmentalproblems for the delta. Species that inhabit the lower end of the food web,such as phytoplankton, are at their lowest levels in history, and the ecosys-tem that fuels the estuary’s web of life is experiencing such a low level ofproductivity that massive changes appear imminent. The little delta smelt,which once numbered in the hundreds of thousands, are so few in num-ber that they could go extinct within the next year or two. Juvenile stripedbass, threadfin shad, and long-fin smelt are also at historically low levels.

The three factors usually blamed for causing this crisis are toxins in thewater from all the agricultural drainage and sewage treatment plants in thearea, exotic species arriving in the ballast water of freighters coming intoSan Francisco Bay that have taken over habitat niches, and, most signifi-cantly, the loss of freshwater flow through and out of the delta. Other issuesfor the delta environment include water quality, the integrity of the lev-ees, and impacts on the fisheries in the delta, in the bay, and out to sea.

Water quality in the delta is usually measured by how much salt isallowed how far upstream. Salt from the bay must be kept out of the deltaand away from the pumps to protect water quality for delta farmers andfor all of the cities that draw drinking water from the delta, not just


014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 47

southern California. Keeping saltwater out of the delta requires freshwa-ter outflow. Besides salt, standards include dissolved oxygen, toxins, andflow. Water quality standards were established by the State Water ResourcesControl Board but were never enforced. A law suit was filed in the earlys to enforce state standards. The judge required that the USEPA


Delta Waterways

Sacramento, San Joaquinand Mokelumne RiversDelta Waterways

NORTH BAY AQUEDUCT

Barker SloughPumping Plant

RIVER

UMNE

SACRAMEN

TO

SAN JOAQUIN

RIVER

BanksPumping

Plant

South BayPumping Plant

TracyPumpingPlant

• LODI

RIVER

•SACRAMENTO

RIVER

AMERICAN

BAY

SOUTH

SUISUN BAY HONKERBAY

GRIZZLYBAY

AQUEDUCT

MOKELUMNE

MOKEL

AQ

UED

UC

T

RIO VISTA

CO

STA

CANAL

•

DELTA-MENDOTA

CANAL

CALIFORNIAAQUEDUCT

CONTRA

MOKELUMNE

AQUEDUCT

0 2 4

Scale

6 Miles

N

Source: California Department of Water Resources. Sanitary Survey Update Report 2001.

Figure . Map of the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta. (: California Depart-ment of Water Resources, Sanitary Survey Update Report, .)

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 48

establish federal standards. Its standards are more stringent than state stan-dards. With the establishment of CALFED (see Chapter ), most of theplaintiffs, expecting the standards to be enforced, dropped the suit. Dur-ing the fall of , the suit was revived to enforce the federal water qual-ity standards.

Because the delta is composed of tule peat, from decaying tule reeds, theorganic matter in the soil reacts with the chlorine used to disinfect drink-ing water to form trihalomethanes (THMs), which are suspected carcino-gens. As a result, other disinfection chemicals must be used that create otherdisinfection by-products, with their own concerns. Runoff from both citiesand agriculture and from sewage treatment plants adds its own toxins.

There is also a need to drain some , acres of farmland in the SanJoaquin Valley, where large amounts of naturally occurring seleniumleaches out of the irrigated farmland and where clay layers under the top-soil capture irrigation water and retain it in the root zones of crops. Thefederal government promised to build a drain, but there is nowhere to putthe outlet. It cannot end in the delta, next to the pumps. It is too expen-sive to pump over the coastal mountains (to where?). Part of the drain hasbeen built. It ends at the Kesterson Wildlife Refuge, where the seleniumhas been blamed for an environmental disaster that has resulted in mal-formed and dead birds and the poisoning of local wells. The alternative solu-tion to this problem is to purchase and retire the land that should neverhave been irrigated in the first place.

Some of the delta islands are as much as feet below sea level, becausethe tule peat soils have oxidized and blown away. Many of the levees werebuilt out of the same tule peat soils and riprapped with rock. They are main-tained by a hodgepodge of agencies and private interests. Only some of themwere engineered and are maintained by the Army Corps of Engineers orsimilar authorities. The levees are being undermined by burrowing animalsand scoured by the strong tidal currents in narrow channels, boat wakes,high winter flows from the rivers, and the action of the pumps, causingreverse flows around some of the islands. These factors confuse fish search-ing for their spawning grounds and make the levees more susceptible tofailure. Should a levee fail, and some predict that failure is inevitable, waterwill rush in to fill the island void. Most likely, this will be saltwater fromthe bay, destroying the island for future agriculture and negatively impact-ing water quality for the cities as well. Keeping the saltwater out would mean


014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 49

quickly releasing massive amounts of water contained upstream behinddams, greatly reducing statewide storage capacity, with no assurances thatthe released water would arrive in a timely manner.

Predictions regarding global warming all include rising sea level and morehigh-energy storms, which will only exacerbate the problems of levee inte-grity, where % of the native wetlands, which could buffer storms and sealevel rise, have been destroyed. The inevitability of a major earthquake inor near the delta points to another disaster waiting to happen. Tule peatsoils are subject to liquefaction in an earthquake. The levees have been pre-dicted to fail within the next years.

The water industry’s response to all of these issues has been to increasepressure to build a peripheral canal around the delta to the pumps or tolay a pipeline through it so that they could pump out even more water. No one is asking how much water is needed to protect the health of thedelta. Other circulating ideas include learning from the hurricane disas-ter that hit New Orleans so hard in , where the wetlands that protectedthat city were destroyed by neglect and by a lack of understanding of theimportant role that wetlands play in providing a buffer against stormevents. The state could buy some of the islands that are below sea level andrestore some of the wetlands. There was a bill in the legislature to studyreducing the amount of water exported from the delta. Reducing exportwould greatly improve water quality and support fish and wildlife as wellas make the hub of the state’s water system less vulnerable to sea level rise.It would also be cheaper than rebuilding the levees.

AREAS OF ORIGIN The environment and economy of those places from whichthe water is transferred also are impacted. Not only are the “areas of ori-gin” concerned about the environmental impacts of dewatering, but thepeople who live in those areas (mostly in the Sacramento River watershed)are also concerned about their own ability to grow and develop. In orderto grow, they need to retain their own water supply and some control overtheir own futures.

CONCLUSION

Each of the sources of water on which the Los Angeles Area is dependentis oversubscribed, and most of the sources have water quality problems. Yet


014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 50

our communities continue to grow and farmers want to put more land underirrigation and/or control more water while the Endangered Species Act,restoration activities, and water quality constraints are reducing the amountof water available for consumptive use. Local surface supplies are contam-inated by urban runoff. Parts of our groundwater basins are contaminatedwith industrial solvents, rocket fuel, and other pollutants and have beendeclared Superfund sites. Although much of our contaminated groundwa-ter is being treated and put to beneficial use, it will require many years anda great deal of money to resolve this situation.

The Los Angeles Aqueducts deliver on average a third to % less thanthey have historically, because of air quality and habitat restoration effortsbeing undertaken in the Owens Valley and the Mono Basin. The ColoradoRiver’s supply to MWD is being cut back from . million to . mil-lion acre-feet a year by the Department of the Interior by the year .And the State Water Project can only deliver, on average, less than half ofthe contracted amounts. During the -year period from to , onlyan average of . million acre-feet was delivered, instead of the . mil-lion acre-feet in the contracts. Meanwhile demand increases to leave ever-more water in rivers, streams, and the delta to restore fish and wildlife,wetlands, and riparian habitat. Some have likened this situation to that ofa permanent drought.

The water industry continues to push for more reservoirs to store morewater during high spring flows for later use. Industry leaders have been meet-ing in secret with state officials to amend State Water Project contracts andto plot how to extract even more water out of a very sick delta. Buildingmore dams and diminishing the outflow through the delta will only cre-ate new environmental problems as well as exacerbate existing ones. Thefisheries off the coast of the state are impacted by the lack of nutrients and


. Summary of Shortfalls

Year Managed Length Capacity Can Deliver Aqueduct Completed by (miles) (acre-feet/yr) (acre-feet/yr)

Los Angeles LADWP , ,

Colorado River MWD . million ,

California DWR . million . million

014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 51

freshwater outflow, and fishing associations are very active in water pol-icy issues. The threat of global warming’s raising the level of the sea andthe fragility of the delta levees only exacerbate these concerns.

Chapter addresses these and a host of other issues in the context of theentire state, since all systems are connected.


014-052_Green_Ch 01 5/7/07 1:19 PM Page 52

Chapter 11 LOS ANGELES AREA WATER SUPPLIES · Reservoirs/Lakes A large volume of surface water is...

Documents

Transcript of Chapter 11 LOS ANGELES AREA WATER SUPPLIES · Reservoirs/Lakes A large volume of surface water is...