Is growth over?

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s recent executive order certifying that California is in a drought and directing state agencies to start thinking about what to do about it is only the latest sign that a way of life built on cheap and readily available water is coming to a close. For much of the state, June was the driest month on record, according to the National Climatic Data Center. The continuing water crisis raises the question of whether we are approaching the limits of growth in California.

For the last century, it seemed there was no limit. More than any other state, California’s economy and population exploded, a growth spurt fueled in large part by abundant water supplies. Now we may be at a turning point, especially in Southern California.

The most obvious indicators certainly point in that direction. Snowmelt in the Sierras, which historically has filled the state’s major reservoirs and aqueducts, has been shrinking steadily. California’s rights to Colorado River water have been gradually scaled back by regional agreements and mounting claims by other states. Court orders in response to environmental lawsuits aimed at protecting endangered fish species have slashed water deliveries from the San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta. And reduced rainfall throughout the region has made it increasingly difficult to replenish groundwater basins.

Initially, the public agencies responsible for ensuring water supplies were cautious in their response to the signs of a growing water crisis, perhaps fearing a political backlash from Californians who expect to be able to open a tap and let it flow, without limits, any time, anywhere, for any purpose. Adding a reservoir, drilling a few more wells or cutting deals with farmers to transfer some of their water to nearby cities helped soften, if not avoid, the effects of the state’s growing water shortage. Now, however, the situation is becoming sufficiently dire that the water agencies are beginning to give the public a taste of what lies ahead.

Earlier this year, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, the largest water agency in the region and the principal supplier to the cities of Los Angeles, San Diego and numerous others in between, announced a 30% reduction in deliveries to agricultural customers, which means that farmers will have less water for their crops and to give to cities. And things could get worse. The agency also adopted a contingency plan that could result in similar cutbacks to urban consumers and rate hikes of up to 20%. Local water agencies, including the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, followed suit, beginning with voluntary conservation programs but warning of mandatory ones to come.

Such steps alone will probably not make enough of a difference to avert a water-supply crisis. There is a finite amount of water available in Southern California, and it has not increased since 1990. The MWD annually imports 2.1 million gallons of water to the region. Without a plan of action by state and local governments, coupled with across-the-board changes in how we consume, major sectors of the state’s economy such as agriculture and real estate development will soon face previously unimagined restrictions.

Meanwhile, environmental groups such as the California Water Impact Network are contending that many of our water-use practices violate the state’s constitutional mandate that water be put to beneficial use to the maximum possible extent and that waste or unreasonable use be prevented. They particularly object to pumping water from the San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta to irrigate thirsty crops like cotton and alfalfa, as well as lawns. These environmentalists plan to petition the state Department of Water Resources to permanently reduce Delta pumping. If state officials or the courts agree, it would affect virtually every aspect of water use.

Real estate development already is feeling the pinch. State laws that took effect six years ago require water agencies to document sufficient long-term water supplies to support large developments. If they can’t, they must block the developments, and these agencies are increasingly doing just that. The Eastern Municipal Water District, the largest water agency in Riverside County, recently delayed approval of a huge industrial development because it couldn’t guarantee water supplies to the facility. The agency also indicated that it may withhold certifications of water availability for other projects if conditions do not improve.

Courts are increasingly weighing in on the issue. Last year, the state Supreme Court overturned approval of a major new planned community in the Sacramento area because the project’s environmental impact report did not adequately address long-term water supplies. Earlier this year, a court in Riverside County reversed the go-ahead for a large residential project in Banning, in part on similar grounds. All told, dozens of planned developments throughout Southern California already have been delayed or abandoned because of uncertainty about long-term water supplies. And that number will soar once the recession in real estate eases.

Scaled-down developments that clear the water-supply hurdle must still meet tough new water-use standards. For instance, don’t expect new homes to be built along the fairways of a new golf course or the shores of a man-made lake. The appliances in the new homes will be low-flow, and the pavement outside permeable to help replenish groundwater. State legislation that would have required developers to utilize all feasible water-efficiency measures in new construction and carry out other conservation measures in the surrounding community didn’t pass earlier this year, but it undoubtedly will be back. Meanwhile, the Legislature is considering a requirement that all urban water agencies reduce their consumption by 20% within 12 years.

Agriculture, which consumes two-thirds of the delivered water in the state and remains a huge component of the California economy, is also feeling the sting of dwindling water supplies. Beginning with the MWD’s reduction in water supplies, agencies throughout the state are pressing farmers to cut their water consumption by not growing water-intensive crops, investing in more efficient irrigation systems and even taking land out of agricultural use altogether. Pending state legislation would establish agricultural water conservation requirements.

The entire state economy ultimately will be affected by the water crisis. Yet it is unrealistic to expect that California’s population and economy will stop growing. Accommodating that growth will require major commitments to reducing water consumption and increasing supply.

Unlike previous droughts, the current shortage of water is largely the product of long-term climate change because of global warming. This means that the shortage will not abate without major changes in how we consume water. The cheapest and easiest way to increase water supplies is conservation. Even small increases in the efficiency of agriculture’s use of water can produce huge savings. Cutting back landscape irrigation, which accounts for more than half of urban and suburban consumption, is another option, as is treating and recycling water. Finally, rain and snowmelt can be collected and stored for future use.

As things stand now, California is rapidly approaching the limits of growth. Those areas of the state with limited local water supplies already are off-limits for development, and those sectors of the economy that are big users of water, such as agriculture, are cutting back. We can extend the period of growth and prosperity by pursuing the measures mentioned above. What remains to be seen is whether that will just postpone the day of reckoning -- when we have done all we can do to cut consumption but demand still exceeds supply. At the point, California will have reached the limit of its growth.