Owens Valley Plan Seeks L.A. Water to Curb Pollution

Seeking to undo damage inflicted by distant Los Angeles for over 80 years, a pollution board on Monday took a major step toward forcing the city to return a large portion of its coveted water to Owens Lake to curb dust storms that rip through foothill and desert towns.

Under the plan, the city notorious for its unquenchable thirst would be forced to give up 13% of its cheapest water source, enough to meet the needs of more than 100,000 families every year. Consumer water rates in Los Angeles would rise about 9%, and in drought years, the extra demand would strain Southern California’s limited supply of imported water, triggering a predicted water shortage in one year out of every 20.

The unparalleled $70-million project would cover 35 square miles of the parched lake with a mix of shallow water, gravel and vegetation. The plan is designed to control salt crystals that sit atop the sprawling lake bed and--when whipped up by winds--occasionally drape the Owens Valley with tons of white powder that blots out the sun.

In a unanimous vote, the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District endorsed the remedy after 14 years of exploring ideas for curing the unusual pollution problem. After an environmental review, the air board will approve a final version of the project in May.

In addition to the estimated $70 million in construction costs, the city of Los Angeles, which drains the Owens River before it can flow into Owens Lake, would have to spend about $23 million annually to replace its lost supply. The water would come from Northern California and the Colorado River.

The dispute over Owens Lake pits rural outposts such as Keeler, in the eastern shadow of the Sierra Nevada, against California’s largest and most influential city, 200 miles to the southwest. There is little hope that the new plan will heal the decades-old wounds: Los Angeles officials say they unequivocally oppose any use of their water and would mount a legal challenge, while Owens Valley residents say they have compromised and waited long enough.

James Wickser, assistant general manager of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, called it an exorbitant and unrealistic expense for a dust solution that city engineers doubt would work. He said the Owens Valley is taking advantage of the city’s “deep pockets.”

“If the people in Owens Valley had to pay for the solution, I’d bet my paycheck that no one there would care about the dust problem at Owens Lake,” Wickser said.

“With the number of people in Keeler, you could give them a million dollars each and relocate them and it would be a heck of a lot cheaper. I don’t see how we can in good conscience spend that amount of our customers’ money for what I personally consider a very minor health problem and aesthetic problem,” he said.

The city’s attitude infuriates many of the 40,000 people from Lone Pine to Ridgecrest who periodically choke on the eye-stinging, throat-burning grit that blows off the playa.

Los Angeles “created the situation, so they ought to fix it,” said Andy Morris, a retiree in Keeler, a town of 50 on the eastern shore of Owens Lake. “All they’ve been doing is sitting on their ass for 100 years, studying the lake. There’s one simple answer. Put the water back in that you stole from it. How many generations does it take to study it?”

As much as 4 million tons of the salty particles blow off the dry lake every year.

“If wind comes over the Sierras, it gets so bad you can barely see the house across the street,” said Mark McCall, a welder who has lived in Keeler for 24 years. “It’s not that you can’t breathe, it’s more like you don’t want to breathe.”

Particulates are considered among the most dangerous air pollutants because they can clog airways, penetrate the lungs and aggravate serious heart and lung diseases, such as asthma, and bring on infections and coughs.

One day last year in Keeler, particles surged to a nationwide record that was 23 times greater than a federal health standard allows. Keeler residents are exposed to unhealthful levels 25 days a year. In Ridgecrest, 60 miles south of the lake, that situation occurs 10 days a year, according to the Great Basin air agency.

“When we see the white cloud headed down through the pass, the ER and doctors’ offices fill up with people who suddenly got worse. It’s a pretty straightforward cause and effect,” said Dr. Bruce Parker, an emergency physician at Ridgecrest Community Hospital. “This is one of the most massive doses of [particulates] that exists anywhere.”

The water war between Los Angeles and the Owens Valley is an infamous tale of greed and scandal that inspired the movie “Chinatown.” As it boomed in the early 1900s, Los Angeles went to great lengths to take control of the water from farmers and ranchers in the Eastern Sierra.

In 1913, the city’s aqueduct began diverting the Owens River, turning the alkaline lake into a giant dust bowl by the 1920s and transporting massive volumes of water, now worth $170 million a year, to Los Angeles.

Generations later, the Owens Valley is wielding a powerful club against Los Angeles--the federal Clean Air Act, which requires states to craft a plan to clean up particulates by 1997 and implement it by 2001. If the state fails to comply, the federal government can impose economic sanctions and step in with solutions of its own.

A separate state law requires Los Angeles to pay for “reasonable measures” chosen by the Owens Valley pollution agency to fix Owens Lake.

Some uncertainties remain, though. The local board could change its mind in May if any serious environmental impacts are uncovered, and the DWP may be able to persuade the Wilson administration’s Air Resources Board to alter the proposal or seek a delay from the federal government. But once the plan is adopted, the DWP must follow the order or challenge it in court.

The water, gravel and vegetation project would take at least five years to complete, so to meet the 2001 deadline, Los Angeles would have to begin construction next year.

The aim is to control dust on a crescent-shaped area--as large as Pasadena and Santa Monica combined--that encompasses one-third of the 110-square-mile lake bed.

About 13 square miles would be flooded year-round with one to two inches of water from the Los Angeles Aqueduct--creating a wet area resembling a beach at low tide. Another 14 square miles would be planted with salt grass and irrigated with a farm-like lattice of canals and drains, while eight square miles would be covered with a four-inch layer of gravel. The wet areas would be expected to draw wintering waterfowl--an ecological and aesthetic boon to the area.

More than one-third of the estimated $70 million in upfront costs would be for from mining and hauling the gravel, which would fill 175,000 trucks.

To irrigate the playa, Los Angeles would have to give up an estimated 43 million gallons of water a day, or 51,000 acre-feet a year. To compensate, the city would be forced to buy more expensive imported water from the San Francisco Bay-San Joaquin River Delta and the Colorado River.

The city’s extra needs would put added stress on the imported supply shared by the 16 million residents of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego and Ventura counties.

“In a year like this, it would hardly be noticed anywhere. There’s plenty of water in the system and demand is down. But it’s yet an additional problem for us to deal with during difficult drought years,” said Jay Malinowski of the Metropolitan Water District, which manages the imported water.

During occasional droughts, extra water might have to be drained from the ecologically sensitive Bay-Delta, he said.

“You cannot add 50,000 acre-feet to the demand without having an impact somewhere. You trade one environmental issue for another,” Malinowski said.

Facing a long string of defeats in court and new environmental rules, the DWP in 1994 surrendered in another long fight and restricted its water use from scenic Mono Lake in the High Sierra.

But at Owens Lake, instead of bringing the adversaries together, the talks have seemed to deepen the division, and there is no compromise in sight. DWP officials say state law is on their side, because it bars the air board from affecting Los Angeles’ right to divert water, while the agency says its project meets the intent of state law.

*

The small pollution agency, governed by six county supervisors and one town council member from the Eastern Sierra, says it tried to find a solution that uses the least water possible, spending $20 million in DWP money since 1983 to research dozens of options.

“I’m for anything that will move this forward and eliminate--and I emphasize eliminate--this [dust] problem,” said Inyo County Supervisor and air board member Paul Payne.

Many community residents want their lake back and urged the board to make Los Angeles return all Owens River water, an option dismissed as extreme. Also rejected was pumping of local ground water, which would dry up natural springs and cause land to subside.

Ted Schade, the air board’s project manager, said that from 96% to 100% of dust was eliminated in experiments that flooded a square mile of the lake bed and covered smaller areas with gravel and irrigated plants.

Still, DWP officials say they will not support any solution until more data is collected.

“We believe there is substantial technical weakness in all of their options,” Wickser said. “We’re willing to put money into solutions that work. We’re not willing to throw away huge amounts of our ratepayers’ money just to meet some deadline.”

Ray Prittie, a DWP civil engineer, said shallow flooding may be ineffective because the lake bed is not flat and it could create dry, dusty islands. Also, salt might migrate through the gravel and the plants may not survive the rough environment. He said the experimental salt grass was planted only a few months ago, so it has not been tested for a full growing season.

“Over the years, a lot of things have sounded good, but they’ve all dropped out, because in the long run they just don’t work,” Prittie said. “Nothing works the way it’s supposed to out on Owens Lake. It can really be a deep pit to pour money into without getting much benefit in return.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

The Impact

Here is how the plan to eliminate dust storms at Owens Lake would affect Los Angeles and its residents.

Cost: The city would pay $69.7 million up front, plus $25 million each year for maintenance and water replacement costs. As a result, rates for DWP customers would rise an estimated 9%--$1.78 per average household.

Replenishing supplies: The city would have to buy extra imported water from the San Francisco-San Joaquin River Delta and from the Colorado River. Water officials say there would be a shortage once every 20 years.

Sources: Great Basin Air Pollution Control District; Department of Water and Power

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Defeating the Dust

A plan to restore part of the dry Owens Lake to control dust storms would cost the city of Los Angeles an estimated $69.7 million in construction costs, plus $25 million a year in maintenance.

(please see newspaper for full chart information)