Southland’s Colorado River Water Supply

Robert A. Jones should be commended for his interest in Southern California’s water supply future (“Trolling for Bass,” Essay, March 13). However, Jones is misguided in his opinion that Metropolitan Water District’s efforts aimed at securing reliable water supplies from the Colorado River are somehow tied to Southern California’s need to significantly improve the region’s water distribution system.

Regardless of whether MWD is able to secure additional low-cost supplies from the Colorado River, the water demands that will be generated by the Southland’s increasing number of residents and businesses in coming years require that we make investments in the distribution network that supplies the coastal plain with reliable supplies of imported water. Metro- politan’s ongoing efforts include new water delivery lines, additional water treatment facilities and the construction of the region’s largest water storage reservoir in southwestern Riverside County.

The most critical component of our plan to maximize the water we secure from the Colorado River is really quite simple: Currently, river reservoir management procedures result in a practice in which reservoirs are kept unnecessarily full. As a result, if storage reaches a certain level, excess water must be released. For example, during the period from 1983 to 1988, 50 million acre-feet of water was released and most of it flowed to the Gulf of California, unused by any Colorado River users.

To prevent similar water losses in the future and make a small portion of it available to Southern California, Metropolitan is urging the secretary of the interior to revise current Colorado River reservoir management criteria.

Dependable, affordable Colorado River water has been the primary factor in Southern California’s economic expansion for 50 years. If the Southland is to continue to grow and prosper, it is mandatory that the Colorado River Aqueduct be assured of a continued capacity supply at a reasonable cost.

JOHN V. FOLEY

Chairman, MWD

* “Water is opaque,” Jones writes. His essay neither illuminates nor enlightens. The residents within the MWD of Southern California bought and paid for the Colorado River Aqueduct and it has served us well. It delivers 1.2 million acre-feet of water to all of Southern California annually. With priority rights to only 550,000 acre-feet of Colorado water, a half-full aqueduct has been the single greatest threat to the future.

The Colorado River Reliability Plus program of MWD is the low-cost alternative for keeping the aqueduct full. The current operating plans of Lake Mead have allowed over 50 million acre-feet of water wasted to the sea over the past half-century. Jones claims that we would all be better off paying Texas billionaires for federally subsidized water, than operating the system efficiently. Good public policy should not be replaced with smoke and mirrors.

GLEN PETERSON

Director, MWD

* Jones did a grave disservice to readers. He left out key facts regarding the deal San Diego is making with Texas’ famous Bass brothers to lease water from the Imperial Valley, where the brothers have recently bought land worth $140 million.

Jones forgot to tell that they want to transport water to San Diego via MWD’s Colorado Aqueduct. That represents a gigantic giveaway of assets that Los Angeles and other Southland cities have paid billions to develop.

If San Diego wants to cut a deal with the Basses, it should build its own aqueduct.

VINCENT J. FOLEY, President

Water and Power Associates Inc.

Arcadia