Water Management Policy Ignores Recreational Use of City’s Lakes

A few years ago, on a clear February morning, I watched a boy standing on the road that meanders along Lake El Capitan throw a rock into the water. Today, a boy standing in the same spot would have to throw the rock in relays to about six other children to reach the current, incredibly low, level of the reservoir. You see, today 72% of Lake El Capitan is gone.

Recently, The Times ran photographs showing the substantial decrease in water levels at both Lake Hodges and Lake El Capitan. The photographs show a 115-foot vertical drop at Lake El Capitan, over the caption “reservoirs are back at normal levels.”

This only highlights the obvious lack of awareness in San Diego regarding management of local reservoirs. Most people are not aware that the city either owns outright or owns the water rights to eight lakes in San Diego County. These lakes have been ravaged in the name of water management to the obvious detriment of recreational use.

To argue that the reservoirs are now at their “normal” levels (since this has been a historical level over a great number of years in the past) is to argue that the Salton Sea is “abnormal” unless all of the water is gone, that Mission Bay is “abnormal” without the historical marsh and swampland, and that San Diego Bay is “abnormal” due to the obstructions caused by Shelter Island and Harbor Island.

The debate is senseless, because we should be focusing on why the reservoirs cannot be kept at a maximum or near-maximum capacity for the recreational benefit of the citizens of San Diego.

The city does not have a water management policy that considers recreational uses of the reservoirs. Water management policy is strictly concerned with providing low-cost water. This policy is not only ineffective, in light of the small percentage of water involved, but also runs contrary to the many recreational uses of the reservoirs. Lake Hodges has only 70% of the surface acreage it had in 1983; Lake Sutherland has only 37% of its recent acreage, and Lake El Capitan has 28%. This means in essence that we have lost 30% of Lake Hodges, 63% of Lake Sutherland and 72% of Lake El Capitan. This is obviously a tremendous blow to the recreational use of these reservoirs.

The argument that there is an economic gain to the city in using “home-grown” water rather than water purchased from outside sources is folly because the economic gain, if any, is insignificant to the overall cost of water for the city. Because only 10% of the city’s consumption depends on the reservoirs, it is pretty easy to figure that 90% of the city’s consumption is imported, and therefore even the most economical management of the 10% remaining cannot have a major impact on overall water cost.

As to the cost of running the recreational programs at the various lakes, most people are unaware that City Council Policy 400-3 requires that the City Lakes Recreation Program be operated on a user-financed basis. In other words, the cost of this recreational benefit to San Diego, unlike golf courses, tennis courts or even public libraries, is paid for directly by the users and not by the general public through taxes. In addition, those who wish to partake of this recreational opportunity for the purposes of picnicking, jogging, walking or sightseeing may do so at no cost whatsoever.

It is interesting to note that water from Lake Hodges is being supplied to the Rancho Santa Fe and San Dieguito water districts at the rate of $20 per acre-foot. This doesn’t sound so bad until we realize that the city is paying well over $200 per acre-foot for water that it purchases. The sale to these water districts is being conducted under a contract that was entered into in 1969 (at a price of $10 per acre-foot) and renewed in 1979 for an additional 10 years. (That contract can be found as document number 728946 filed with the City Clerk of San Diego and is available to anyone.) The agreement calls for San Diego to “deliver a total quantity of at least 20,000 acre-feet . . . during each ‘10-year period’ . . . during the term of this agreement.”

The second 10-year period commenced in 1979, and it would appear that the city is obligated to deliver 20,000 acre-feet at that price between 1979 and 1989. Apparently, appearances can be deceiving, because the City of San Diego has already delivered more than 35,000 acre-feet during this 10-year period. It is also interesting to note that the city is required to furnish the districts “a total quantity during each year (of) 7,500 acre-feet of local or imported water.”

There is simply no reason the City of San Diego, even though it is locked into this incredible contract, should sell more than 7,500 acre-feet per year to these districts. Unfortunately, because the city has no perception of the costs to recreational uses that develop from the loss of this water, the situation has not been monitored. In 1984, 9,378 acre-feet were sold; in 1985, 10,894.7 acre-feet were sold. This is incredible, because the result was loss of a significant percentage of the lakes and for some period during the 1985 season private boats could not be launched at Lake Hodges because of the low water level.

Hundreds of private boaters who normally frequent Lake Hodges during the weekends it is open were not able to take advantage of this recreational facility. This in turn caused a loss of revenue that caused problems in continuing to provide recreational services.

For many years the city has had a citizens group called the San Diego City Lakes Committee made up of individuals who donate their time to developing information for the use of the city in managing the lakes. The committee, at the request of the city, has recently finished a study titled “The 1985 City Lakes Recreational Development Plan.” The plan recommends that the water levels in the lakes be kept high and that drastic fluctuations be kept to a minimum, if there is a concern for the recreational use of these reservoirs. Conversely, if the city is unconcerned with this recreational use, it can ignore the recommendations of the committee. If history tells us anything, this plan will probably be ignored by city officials.

In addition to canoeing, kayaking, sailboating, picnicking, jogging, trout fishing, bluegill fishing, catfish fishing and other pursuits on the San Diego city lakes, black bass fishing has been rated by national publications as some of the best in the country, with state and world records caught right out of San Diego County lakes.

What we were shown by the photographs, unfortunately, is that, in a city the size of San Diego, the use of one of its fine recreational facilities can be completely decimated without action to prevent it by elected officials. What is even more lamentable is that not only has this occurred without a move to prevent it, but it has occurred, in essence, without discussion or awareness by the city officials as to whether or not this is the proper course of management of our city lakes. One wonders what the city would do if 50% of the holes in our municipal golf courses, 50% of our beaches or 50% of our libraries were suddenly closed to obtain a questionable economic gain to the city.

It is time that San Diego, which prides itself on its recreational opportunities, take a hard look at water management for the purpose of recreation. This is not a question of misfeasance on behalf of our elected officials, but a question of nonfeasance because they simply do not have sufficient understanding of the problem to be concerned with formulating solutions.