Water Policy Sound

I respectfully disagree with L. Kevin Mineo’s commentary (“Water Management Policy Ignores Recreational Use of City’s Lakes,” Feb. 16).

Mineo needs to get some of his facts straightened out and get a realistic perspective on the City of San Diego’s management objectives for local water supply reservoirs.

Essentially, Mr. Mineo argues that water recreation users, by paying fees and permits, have paid for the right to expect water supply reservoirs to be managed to their benefit (high, non-fluctuating water levels) over the needs and rights of city water consumers. He supports his views by the faulty statement that 90% of the city’s water is imported and that the remaining 10% cannot have a major impact on overall water costs. He fortifies his case with some distorted, cockamamie suggestion that the city is being slickered by the Rancho Santa Fe and San Dieguito water districts into selling cheap water to the disadvantage of all city residents and the water recreation enthusiasts in particular.

First, it’s the San Diego County Water Authority (which owns no lakes or reservoirs) that imports up to 90% of its water supply. While it’s true that the city has in some drought years imported as much as 90% of its water through CWA, the vagaries of local weather (rainfall) largely dictate the city’s need for imports to augment local runoff as captured in the city reservoirs. For example, in Fiscal Year 1982-83 local water accounted for 38.5%, or 72,000 acre-feet, while CWA supplied 61.5%, or 187,000 acre-feet.

The value of the local water based on imported water costs in 1982-83 was $7.2 million, which is not insignificant, and total city water revenues that year were $56.5 million, including $820,000 collected from water recreation fees and permits. As an argument in economic logic, it hardly seems reasonable that recreation fees, responsible for only 1.5% of the revenue, should control policy any more than the tail that wags the proverbial dog.

More importantly, each of the city’s water reservoirs (lakes to Mr. Mineo) was purchased or built by the city for the express purpose of augmenting the city’s water supply for reasons of public health and safety (water consumption). Unfortunately, water supply needs prudently require that water levels should be drawn down during the summer so that space is available to catch the winter rain runoff.

Water recreation is important to our quality of life, and it has only been during the last decade that great strides have been made by the city to expand these opportunities; such as lakeshore jogging, canoeing, kayaking and sailboating, as well as improved sport fisheries. But all of this must be compatible with and subordinate to water supply.

Rather than criticize the city for its generally excellent management of our water resources, it should be applauded by recreation groups for its actions, such as encouraging the County Water Authority to build Pamo Reservoir and to augment Lake Hodges with a major water reclamation project. The Pamo project is critically needed as an emergency water supply and during “normal” times would serve to provide more water recreation than any existing lake or reservoir in the county.

City Hall has not ignored the recreational uses of city reservoirs, it has a good water management policy for the existing system, and its future plans for Pamo Reservoir show real leadership toward meeting our future needs.

LAWRENCE HIRSCH

Member, County Water Authority

San Diego