What are the threats to our water?
It’s plastered on the sides of the buses, it blares from the radio, it’s even taught in schools: “Every drop is precious.” But in the midst of a three-year drought, our region’s water security is under attack. Some of the threats:
Us – Last week’s look at urban water use was startling. Apparently, several of our cities didn’t take the state’s reporting requirements seriously, failing to fill in the forms correctly. Regardless, the numbers weren’t good.
People in Modesto shouldn’t use nearly 50 gallons more than those water misers in Ceres. But it was worse in Ripon (388), Merced (279) and Oakdale (248). Each city had excuses, but it’s still clear use must come down. It’s hard to argue that we think water is precious when we’re using so much on lawns.
Trees – Almonds are thirsty, and we’re growing more than ever. Still, the vast majority of trees are being grown in orchards served by irrigation districts, and we say “grow, baby, grow.”
But in eastern Stanislaus County farmers are turning what was once dry grassland into orchards, pumping groundwater to grow the trees. That pumping has led to falling water tables and less water in our rivers as it seeps out to replenish the aquifers. Eastern Stanislaus is one of three critical areas in the state – along with San Luis Obispo and Tulare counties. It doesn’t help that this unsustainable pumping isn’t seen as a crisis by all.
But it’s not just those farms outside irrigation districts. General manager Steve Knell sought to reassure those who live in Oakdale Irrigation District with an op-ed entitled “Groundwater levels dropping, but sky isn’t falling” (Nov. 5, Page A13). He noted rising water tables at a few locations. But looking at all of OID’s wells, it’s clear the water table is dropping – on average, 15 feet over a decade. In some areas, the water table has fallen 30 feet. The sky isn’t falling, but the water table clearly is.
The Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors will vote Nov. 25 on a groundwater ordinance to line up with new statewide rules. Already supervisors are signaling that we shouldn’t move too fast or set the bar too high. We disagree. There must be valid monitoring, judicious permitting for new wells and repercussions for overpumping. And land in irrigation districts shouldn’t be immune from monitoring.
The San Francisco Giants – Not the baseball team, but the 24 Bay Area cities that get water from San Francisco Public Utilities Commission. They’ve got a giant thirst, and it’s growing. San Francisco wants another 25 million gallons a day off the Tuolumne River. The SFPUC figures it’s cheaper to get more water from the Tuolumne River than to try alternatives, such as desalination plants. We hope the SFPUC can be persuaded to redirect its efforts.
Salmon and their bureaucrat friends – The State Water Resources Control Board has already said it wants to see 40 percent of our rivers – the Tuolumne, Stanislaus and Merced – flowing into the Bay to help flush the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. At the same time another state agency plans to redirect most of the Sacramento River via the governor’s twin, 40-foot tunnels. How do you save an estuary by taking water out of it? By putting someone else’s water in it. The single-focus, single-solution environmentalists need to broaden their perspectives and work with us to solve the problem – not just demand more water than can be used more effectively here than in the Delta.
Our own success – All of our area irrigation districts have raised water prices to farmers, but it’s still one of the greatest bargains in the world. Farmers pay from $9 to $25 per acre-foot (326,000 gallons). By comparison, a San Francisco resident pays $2,118 for an acre-foot. In Modesto, residential water costs $610 an acre-foot.
There’s no doubt that farmers put that water to much better use than anyone living in San Francisco. But would our arguments have greater weight if farmers paid more for that water and used the proceeds to improve the infrastructure? We think so.
And that brings us to Proposition 1 and the water bond. Our state passed the $7.5 billion bond to help us build reservoirs for the future. Hopefully, state regulators and others recognize that most of the state wants us to use our water wisely. They’ll support us as long as we do.
This story was originally published November 15, 2014 at 4:01 PM with the headline "What are the threats to our water?."