To the editor: I was born to a pioneer family in the Imperial Valley, and like other families, my ancestors endured an extremely hostile existence trying to make a desert productive. Their efforts produced the Imperial Irrigation District, brought water and power to a dry desert, and provided food for a growing California (and nation). ("Despite drought, water flowing freely in Imperial Valley," April 13)
There certainly were significant environmental issues then, issues that remain today. And while I was a college student in the mid-1960s, environmental scientists were warning that population growth would one day pit farmers against urban dwellers. To forestall that day, Imperial Valley farmers became more efficient, sold part of the water rights to the urban coastal zone and fallowed productive land.
In response, state government has done nothing to check population growth.
Certainly modern agriculture, like any other activity, carries a mixture of positives and negatives. While my family no longer resides in the Imperial Valley, I take great pride in the knowledge that we were all part of an essential element of California's economic development.
Terrence Damron, Glendora
To the editor: As a resident of southern Nevada, I often hear Lake Mead's low water level — and its infamous "bathtub ring" — blamed on the Las Vegas population boom.
So I appreciated that this article pointed out where the majority of the water is really going. Of the Colorado River apportionment, Nevada receives the least amount (2%) while California receives the most (27% ).
John Coulter, Henderson, Nev.
To the editor: It's fair to surmise that the over-promise of water has been met with political favors to those who grant water rights. I fail to see the science behind promised water allocations.
Peter Stern, Culver City