|
Advertisement
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Posted on 01/06/2003 11:09:56 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Officials in Southern California said for the first time Monday that a deal to transfer Colorado River water from desert farms to urban areas was not necessary to secure the region's future water supply.
Even without the deal, the officials said, they would be able to meet Southern California's water needs for at least 20 years.
"It is desirable to have (the deal). Is it absolutely essential? No. We have other options available to us," said Ronald Gastelum, president and chief executive officer of the Metropolitan Water District.
Gastelum spoke at a meeting called after the collapse of New Year's Eve negotiations over shifting water from farms in Imperial, the state's poorest county, to urban areas. The transfer would have allowed the state to curtail its historic overuse of Colorado River water.
After the session, Gastelum said he believed it would be "very difficult" to reach a deal in light of last-minute demands from the Imperial Irrigation District. The deal may ultimately be abandoned, he said.
|
|
|
The government has ordered California to cut its use of the Colorado, a water source it shares with six other states, because those states are suffering from drought and coping with fast-growing populations.
As a result of the failed deal, the Interior Department immediately cut in half the state's allocation from the Colorado, withholding enough water to supply more than 1.2 million households.
Officials with Metropolitan, the regional wholesaler that supplies water to 17 million people in six Southern California counties, had previously said only that they had enough water - through storage and deals with other agencies - to last two years.
The new estimate assumes that plans not yet implemented will come to pass, including a massive federal-state water reclamation project in northern California that has been debated for decades.
Debra Man, a Metropolitan vice president, said the 20-year estimate would be explained further in a report in February.
The New Year's Eve deadline was agreed to two years ago by California and the other states that use Colorado River water. The deal fell apart amid fears in Imperial that water transfers would threaten the Salton Sea, the state's largest lake and a major wildlife refuge in the southeast corner of the state.
Under the failed deal, Imperial would have sold San Diego enough water to supply 400,000 households for up to 75 years. Farmers in the county, which has been getting 70 percent of California's river allotment, would have had to cease cultivation on some fields.
---
On the Net:
Imperial Irrigation District: http://www.iid.com
Metropolitan Water District: http://www.mwd.dst.ca.us
 calgov2002: for old calgov2002 articles. calgov2002: for new calgov2002 articles. Other Bump Lists at: Free Republic Bump List Register |
Typical MWD, unchanged for nearly a hundred years. Yup, why buy it when they can use political muscle to get the Feds to help them steal it?
Many of your friends(?) are going to be disappointed over that news.
My guess is that it would be the Peripheral Canal.
Oh boy, here we go again. Contra Costa, Alameda, Solano, prepare to get screwed.
I don't think it will help the Trinity River flows in Trinity and Humboldt Counties either.
You are right as it stands but my understanding is the original contract at the time of building the dam called for no more than 40 to 50 % of the river flows. They are taking up to 90% the last few years and one court sided with the down river user that that was wrong but on appeal it was stayed. This was in favor of the Westlands Water District.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.