Dump Sewage Disposal Plan, Laughlin, Nev., Told

It is the West’s latest boom town. Seemingly overnight, Laughlin has metamorphosed from an unremarkable blip on the Colorado River to a thriving tourist mecca teeming with gamblers.

Only trouble is, visitors leave more than dollars behind when they hop in the RV and head for home; they also leave sewage. And if the high rollers are to continue answering nature’s call between blackjack hands, a way must be found to dispose of the mounting volume of waste.

Laughlin has found a solution, but it is not going over real big with the town’s downstream neighbors in Arizona and California. Sanitation officials in Nevada say the best answer to Laughlin’s dilemma is to dump the 4 million gallons of sewage produced daily into the Colorado River.

Promoters of the idea promise that a state-of-the-art plant will filter, chlorinate and cleanse the sewage to a point where it poses no threat to the fish, fowl and humans who use the waterway. Indeed, they pledge, the effluent coming out the tail end of the treatment plant will be cleaner than what is already in the river--clean enough, they say, to drink.

Such assurances, however, have failed to win the proposal many boosters downriver. Residents and elected leaders in the Arizona communities of Bullhead City, Lake Havasu City and Parker have attacked Laughlin’s plan, calling it at best unneighborly and at worst an environmental sacrilege.

Among other things, Arizona residents worry that a treatment breakdown could turn the river into a cesspool and scare off millions of tourists who flock to it to fish, swim and water ski each year.

“The question I ask is this: If you’re not going to protect the Colorado River now, then when?” said William Riley, an environmental planner with the Western Arizona Council of Governments. Laughlin officials “have alternatives, but they’re taking the easy route. If we in Arizona treated our neighbors this shabbily, I’d be ashamed.”

At least two Indian tribes--the Chemehuevis, who control 30 miles of Colorado River shoreline south of Needles in California, and the Colorado River Indians in Parker--have echoed those sentiments.

In Southern California, meanwhile, concerns have surfaced about the threat that the sewage could pose to the river’s suitability as a drinking water source.

Overall, Southland residents receive 25% of their drinking water from the Colorado River; in some regions, like San Diego County, that proportion is much higher. The Metropolitan Water District, which provides drinking water for most of Southern California, has not formally opposed the discharge, even though its intake plant--which pumps Colorado River water through a 242-mile-long aqueduct to a reservoir in Riverside--is downstream of Laughlin.

But MWD officials have asked that Laughlin be required to screen its effluent for viruses and disease-causing parasites before dumping it in the river. So far, regulators in Nevada have rejected that suggestion.

“As you continue to increase discharges over time . . . you may reach a point where you put so many of these organisms into the (river) that you have the potential for a problem,” said Ed Means, MWD’s associate director of water quality. “Obviously, we’re vitally concerned about that.”

Laughlin officials contend that the hostile reaction they have received is unfair. They note that other cities--among them Needles and Las Vegas, which generates a far greater volume of sewage than Laughlin--have been using the river as a sewage receptacle for years. Why, they argue, should Laughlin be chastised for seeking to do the same thing?

“None of these opponents have given a valid, scientific reason why this shouldn’t be done,” said Richard Reavis, chief of permits and compliance with Nevada’s water quality division. “It’s the old ‘not-in-my-back yard’ syndrome.”

Next month, Nevada authorities will decide whether to grant Laughlin’s request for a discharge permit. Until then, debate over the proposal--which has dominated conversations in the river communities like no other topic in years--is expected to continue in earnest.

Already, a group called Safe and Sane Sanitation in Parker has gathered 800 signatures on petitions protesting the plan. The opinion pages of local newspapers are crowded with letters expressing outrage over the idea, many of them evoking images of polluted Boston Harbor to illustrate their point.

And in Lake Havasu City--a burgeoning hamlet heavily dependent on water-related tourism--nervous civic leaders have sought help with the fight from Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Rep. Bob Stump (R-Ariz.) and Democratic Gov. Rose Mofford.

Despite the clamor, Reavis said he expects that the state will approve the permit and that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will then affirm the decision.

A bit of history helps explain the sewage disposal crisis gripping Laughlin. Located in the southeast corner of Nevada 95 miles from Las Vegas, the town for years was little more than a sleepy backwater, home to a couple of dingy casinos attracting only the most desperate of gamblers.

Perhaps because of its location--perched beside a boater’s paradise 300 miles from Los Angeles--and comfy winter climate, Laughlin gradually worked its way onto the vacationer’s map. Today the town is abuzz with activity, the noise of its busy slot machines muted only by the roar of the cranes and backhoes building still more high-rise casinos.

Laughlin’s gaming income has jumped 17% per quarter during the last year, propelling it past South Lake Tahoe into third place on Nevada’s list of gambling revenue producers. By the end of 1990, Laughlin’s 4,000 hotel rooms--which are full 98% of the time--will nearly triple. Another 12,000 rooms have been approved for construction.

A new runway will soon permit commercial jets to land at the Bullhead City Airport across the river, and a waterfront golf course--the city’s first with 18 holes--will be completed next year.

But with the growth have come problems, and the most vexing of these is sewage. Currently, effluent from the Clark County Sanitation District’s Laughlin treatment plant is used to irrigate hayfields. But officials say high land prices and the growing volume of waste make that system impractical.

Instead, the Sanitation District wants to spend $28 million to expand its plant to an eventual capacity of 8 million gallons a day and upgrade its treatment system to meet the strict federal standards required of those discharging into rivers.

Experts say the effluent produced by the sophisticated treatment system would have no ill effects on the river’s water quality or wildlife. One enthusiastic supporter even compared the treated waste water to “a bottle of Perrier.”

District officials also say the facility’s design incorporates several emergency backup systems--including ponds that can hold up to 2 million gallons--that provide extra insurance against the release of raw sewage.

“This is a true belt-and-suspenders system,” said Douglas Karafa, Laughlin utilities manager for the Sanitation District.

Critics, however, argue that even the best mechanical systems can fail. And they say the risk of raw sewage fouling the clear blue waters of the Colorado is one they do not wish to take.

“I moved here in ’69 because it’s beautiful country and a nice place to retire,” said Ed Hansen, a former Anaheim police officer who serves as Mohave County constable in Bullhead City. “I want that river blue, not brown.”

Other opponents say they have confidence in the technology but worry about the public relations effect of dumping sewage into a recreation paradise. Bob Lee, who owns a bait and tackle business in Lake Havasu City, is one of them.

“Who in their right mind would drive five hours from L.A. to swim or fish in a river they thought was full of sewage?” Lee asked. “I wouldn’t.”

Added John Parrott, Lake Havasu’s top Chamber of Commerce official: “This may be the Rolls-Royce of treatment systems, but the public perception of treated sewage going into the river is dangerous, and we’ll bear the burden of that.”

Still other foes of the sewage project criticize Laughlin for pressing ahead with river disposal even though alternatives appear to exist. A Las Vegas builder, for example, has offered to purchase 2 million gallons of effluent a day to irrigate a golf course development in Laughlin.

“With all the progress on water reclamation being made in the world today, we just don’t understand why they’re rushing ahead with this stupid idea,” said Bob Lawrence, chairman of the Buckskin Sanitary District board of directors in Parker Dam.

Nevada officials dismiss other disposal options as unreliable or inappropriate for the volume of sewage Laughlin generates. And they contend it makes little sense to gripe about Laughlin’s plans when Las Vegas already discharges 80 million gallons of treated sewage into the river each day. Since the 1940s, effluent from Las Vegas has been funneled into a natural wash that carries it 11 miles into Lake Mead, which is part of the river.

Opponents counter that they are by no means pleased with the way Las Vegas handles its waste and hope one day to halt all sewage flows into the river.

“We’re working to turn it around,” Lawrence said. “That’s why what’s happening at Laughlin is such a giant step backward.”

In pushing their project, Laughlin officials note that they will win a special jackpot for pouring waste water into the Colorado--specifically, the right to take an equal amount of fresh water back out.

Under the so-called “law of the river”--a complex set of legal documents governing the allocation of river water among the states--Nevada gets 300,000 acre-feet of water annually, which is then divided among various communities. But if a city returns water--even treated sewage--to the river, the law regards that as “credit” allowing for greater withdrawals.

“Right now, we’re only allocated 10,000 acre-feet a year, and that’s putting the limits on our growth,” said Ted Finneran of the Laughlin Chamber of Commerce. “But if we can clean up this sewer water with our Space Age treatment plant and put it back in the river, we’ll get more out.

“And that sounds pretty good to us.”