Planning for Growth? Then Expect to Pay for Water

After an unprecedented six consecutive years of abundant rainfall, the drought is a fading memory for most Californians. We are overdue for another extended drought, and we must plan for water shortages in this semiarid state.

In addition, we are facing the prospect of adding another 15 million people to the state’s population over the next 20 years.

How can we make certain that our water supplies will match up to where the need for water exists? How might we maintain the economic prosperity and environmental health that we enjoy today, given that more than one-third of our years are classified as drought and that, more often than not, our droughts last from two to six years?

The recent Superior Court decision on the proposed Newhall Ranch development project affirms that these concerns are beginning to be taken seriously at last.

Our robust economy relies heavily on reliable, high-quality water--a resource for which there is no substitute. It is due to a huge and complex system of reservoirs, pipelines and other facilities that most Californians are able to take abundant water for granted. California must bring smart growth principles to its water supply planning if we are to achieve a sustainable quality of life.

Many believe that the approach taken during the 20th century should continue to be the paradigm for the future: “Build it and the water will follow!” For the most part, that approach worked until the last two decades, when the rules of the game began to change.

In the past, when a community grew and its need for water began to exceed local supplies, everyone nevertheless got the water they needed--until one of California’s frequent, biblical droughts occurred. Such a drought would trigger water rationing in many urban areas, creating the political momentum for authorizing and financing a new water reservoir.

Rationing was not too painful in times gone by because our water usage was not very efficient, and cutting back by 10% or 15% did not impose serious hardships or costs on most of us. These frequent periods of shortage helped immensely in the politics of water development.

*

During the first 70 years of the 20th century, California’s water storage and delivery system kept pace with its population growth. Hoover, Shasta, Parker, Pardee and Hetch Hetchy dams, the Los Angeles Owens Valley Project, the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project collectively store more than 40 million acre-feet of water--more than all the water needed by California’s urban and agricultural users today. Almost all of these projects leaped from conception to completion within a 10- to 15-year period. Those were the days!

These projects were all authorized and constructed before the birth of the environmental movement, which led to enactment of a series of new laws to restore the health of our rivers and streams. They were built at a time that the state and federal governments were far more able to provide huge subsidies for water projects than is true today. The approximately 150 major water reservoirs constructed in the state during this era have “used up” the best and most cost-effective sites for storing water.

As open space has become more limited, the flooding of canyons for new reservoirs is not always supported in affected communities.

Taken together, all of these changes mean that today it takes 20 to 30 years to build new water storage projects.

So what, you ask? What difference does it make to my life that it takes two to three times as long to build new water projects as it did 50 years ago?

The difference is that today, rationing would impose unacceptable costs on all Californians. California’s water agencies have taken the lead in developing aggressive, permanent water conservation programs to “stretch” our water supplies. These programs have helped increase water use efficiency in business and residences.

Ironically, as Californians conserve more, rationing becomes a more painful tool for responding to drought. With ever more effective efforts to achieve water savings from conservation, the cushion is reduced. In the next extended drought, rationing will not be a practical option.

Paired with the state’s projected population increase, future shortages will be that much more severe. Will our thriving high-tech, agricultural and manufacturing industries be able to sustain today’s economic prosperity under those conditions?

Clearly, new water supplies using a variety of measures--more water recycling, underground water storage, water transfers, desalting plants, as well as off-stream storage--will be needed to meet California’s needs.

Communities planning for high growth should be expected to pay for developing new water supplies to serve that growth. We must assure that planning is early and accurate.

*

We must establish better linkages between our local growth decisions and our local water development decisions to protect existing residents and businesses from costly and unnecessary cutbacks.

The court decision on Newhall Ranch affirms the importance of these linkages. Ensuring a long-term, reliable water supply to serve this new community must recognize the fragile balance that exists between meeting current water supply needs, protecting environmental resources and supporting smart growth. Protecting the needs of all existing users--commercial, residential, industrial, agricultural and environmental--is essential if California is to maintain its quality of life.

No one would build an addition to their home and fail to keep the rest of it in living order at the same time. We should proceed using the same kind of common sense with our water supplies. It is the only smart way to keep the California dream alive.