The following is a production of K A E T TV broadcasting from the campus
of Arizona State University.
It is the worst drought in centuries. Reservoir levels are dropping. The
populations of two southwestern cities are growing. Las Vegas and Phoenix
confront their water challenges.
Good evening. Welcome to this special edition of Horizon. I'm Michael
Grant. Tonight, we're going to take a look at one of the most critical
issues facing the Southwest. Our water supply for the next hour, we take
an in depth look at water where it comes from how we're using it, whether
we are conserving, we'll be joined by our PBS partner in Las Vegas, K L V
X to bring you the different perspectives of two booming desert
communities with me. Now is my co host, Mitch Fox. Thank you, Mike and I'd
also like to welcome viewers in Arizona and Nevada to this special
broadcast on the drought crisis in the Southwest. It should be an
interesting hour during that time frame, we'll be taking an in depth look
at one of the most critical and possibly contentious issues facing lower
basin states along the Colorado River in just a few moments. We'll join
you folks at K E T and examine the drought from the perspectives of both
states. In the meantime, I believe you have an interesting setup piece for
us, Mitch do indeed. Thanks very much for being here. The Colorado River
of course, has always played a very critical role in the development of
the desert Southwest. But as the current drought continues to take its
toll, will there be enough water to go around? The river has its origins
in the watersheds of Wyoming and Colorado. By the time it has traveled
some 1400 miles to the sea, it will have served more than 23 million
people. Thanks to such feats of engineering as Hoover Dam in many ways,
this Great River is the life's blood of the Southwest. It also has been
the source of intense conflict and negotiation for much of the last
century. Beginning with the Colorado River Compact of 1922 stakeholders in
the river have attempted to secure their water rights in a number of ways.
The compact's most significant accomplishment was to divide the Colorado
River basin in two at Lee's ferry, the upper basin with Wyoming, Colorado
, Utah and New Mexico and the lower basin with Nevada, California and
Arizona. But the architects of the compact would make a seriously flawed
assumption. The commissioners at the time thought that they were working
with about 18 million acre feet of normal average flow in the basin. And
so they conservatively allocated 7.5 million to the upper basin, 7.5
million to the lower basin. And another potential million to the lower
basin thinking that they were only allocating about 16 out of 18 million
acre feet. And the river flow might go anywhere from 4, 4.5 million acre
feet per year up to 22 million acre feet per year. So there's quite a bit
of variability depending on if we have a drought year or a year of heavy
rains and snows. The pact that was made in the 19 twenties to describe how
the river would be divided up was done in a time period that we had some
of the wettest years in history. In 1928 the Boulder Canyon Project Act
authorized the construction of Hoover Dam as well as establishing the
lower basin allocations of 4.4 million acre feet of water to California,
300,000 to Nevada and 2.8 million to Arizona. Those amounts as well as a
number of other river issues would be the subject of intense debate for
years to come. The of laws, treaties, regulations and court decisions that
followed over the decades would comprise the law of the river which
continues to evolve much like the Colorado River itself. I think the fact
that we're in this long drought has brought to everyone's attention. The
fact that maybe some of the decisions that were made early on are going to
have to be modified from an Arizona and Nevada perspective. That means
first looking at the priorities on the river, OK. We're gonna take up the
issue of uh the allocation along the river in addition to the drought
severity. But first, I'd like to introduce my guest here in Las Vegas.
First off to my left is uh Clark County Commissioner, Myrna Williams. Uh
Next to her is the General Manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority
, Pat Mulroy, welcome. And finally from the University of Nevada at Las
Vegas, Hal Rothman. Thank you for joining us. Thanks for having me, Mitch.
Let's talk about those allocations. It's, it's fascinating to note that
uh Las Vegas uses about 5% of the river's lower basin supply. California
takes about 59% and the rest is divided up between Arizona and by Mexico.
I don't think a lot of people realize that that International Treaty
dictates that Mexico has an allocation. Is it time to revisit those
allocations? Can they be revisited? Absolutely. It's time the the law of
the river has become the fiction of the river. It's uh uh in the 75 years
since the, the compact was passed, it was actually passed in 1927. Um The
world has changed. The, the economies of the region are different. The
population distribution is is different and there was a whole spate of
environmental legislation that requires water that the compact simply
doesn't address and it's time to throw it out and have a new one for
farmers. Point out that the 70 year history and law of the river was built
to control flooding. It was primarily developed for agricultural purposes
in southern California's Imperial Valley. Don't they have first right to
decide what takes place based on the law of MS Mulroy. Well, the law of
the river in many ways and I'm not going to go quite as radical as Hal is
over here because I think there are some good parts to the compact and
there are relationships and collaborative opportunities in the compact
that I think need to be explored before you throw the baby out with the
bath.
I think the priority issue which was just mentioned in the introductory
tape, which is what you're speaking to when it comes to the agricultural
users, particularly in California is at the root cause of a lot of it. I
mean, I understand and have always understood that between different
farmers or different agricultural districts, the notion of priority
protects that farmer. And I understand that, but it makes no sense between
cities and it certainly makes no sense between states. So when you take a
concept that works very well in one venue, and then you try to make one
size fit all and make it work across the board. It usually fails as is the
case with this whole notion of priority. I mean, to me it's
counterintuitive that in this drought, water would be running down the
streets in Los Angeles while people in Phoenix would be scrambling to have
water come out of their tap. I mean, that's preposterous. Is it possible
to revisit this and consider municipal water users in addition to the
agricultural uses that are currently in effect? Well, you know, I agree
with both Pat and Hal, somewhere in the middle. I think there's an answer
of water is that's what the West fights about all the time and always has
thought about uh is it possible to revisit it? Who knows uh at this
particular time, what we really have to be interested in is how we all get
through this drought. Ok. We're going to take a look at a short clip right
now. Earlier, I did an interview with the Secretary of the Interior Gail
Norton and she had some thoughts along these lines. Let's take a look at
this in your view. How severe a crisis are we in right now in the lower
basin states? Well, we certainly have an extremely severe drought in the
Colorado River basin. Our scientists have told us that this could be the
worst drought in 500 years. Obviously, we have a physical condition that
is causing serious problems, but we don't really have a crisis because we
do have water in storage that can get us through some dry years. Ok? If
the drought continues. Can you explain who would lose access to the
Colorado River water and how would these reductions be implemented? Well,
we're lucky that in addition to the storage, we also have a legal system
that is very clear in sharing the water among the states. First of all, we
don't have a situation that would cause a real cut back for another couple
of years because of the water that we have in storage. The first thing
that is cut back is the excess water that is being used by California and
Nevada above their usual share of Colorado River water. They have had an
agreement that lets them do that, especially as California ratchets down
from having used more water in the past right now, they're voluntarily not
using more than that. And we then would see a cut back of Arizona's water.
The Central Arizona project when it was first agreed to by Congress
carries a requirement that it is the first of those uses on the Colorado
River to be cut back. Let's talk about the severity of the drought. There
may be slight disagreement as to where we are. Everyone looks at the
bathtub ring at Lake Mead and, and many people are quite alarmed at how
far it's gone down and are concerned about the water intake situation in
terms of getting the water from Lake Mead to explain that a little bit how
it's impacting users in Southern Nevada. Well, we've just spent a
significant amount of money lowering our first intake. Our first intake is
at elevation 1050. And what we have done is we have modified our pumps and
have changed our pumping strategy to where the first intake can take water
from elevation 1000, which is the elevation of our second intake right now
, Lake Mead is at elevation 11 28. And as you know, from our drought plan
, when we hit elevation, 11 25 Southern Nevada goes into drought emergency.
It's a water quality issue for us because the warmer water on the top of
Lake Mead because of the thermal cline is a much lesser quality than the
deeper water. And if we're talking about how far mead can go down, how far
will it go down and how far will we let it go down? That has some huge
impact on us. Can we physically modify our intakes quickly enough? Even if
you know, if all the money in the world was there, can we do it quickly
enough to address the drought? Because there are those. And I think if you
run some of the low flow model runs for the Colorado river two more years
of 50% or less run off and Lake Powell is all but gone. You're down at
Deadpool. So now you're really relying on meat. Now, the stress is all on
me. And as water planners, you don't want to be say chicken little the sky
is falling but it would be irresponsible for us to not plan for the worst.
And if it doesn't happen, gosh, we're lucky, but you have to be ready for
it. What about the difference between Nevada and Arizona? We depend more
on the Colorado River than Arizona does. Is that why we're in the
situation we're in right now? Well, not really. Arizona has a series of
other strategies including much stronger groundwater component in their
water system. But, but the real reason is the division in the 1920 s where
we got 300,000 acre feet a year because there were very few people in
Nevada then and they got 2.8 million. And if we had 2.8 million and they
had 2.8 million, this wouldn't be quite the issue. It is for us here. You
know, that's, that's state centric jingoistic uh approach to this. But,
but part of the problem here, part of the fall here is in the fundamental
allocation that occurred in the 19 twenties. And MS Williams finally and,
and, and I agree with that, I mean, there's no question about it, but when
that allocation was made, there were 12 people living here and it seemed
like a lot, uh nobody really had the vision back then to see what could
happen with the state of Nevada. I know that a lot of people in Southern
Nevada feel that way and I've heard it now everywhere I go. And there's
some merit to what they're saying, the difficulty is taking that position
in an overt way isn't going to solve the problem. We will spend the next
30 years in court fighting about it and we will not make it through this
drought. I would, you know, as rigid as the is, it also is flexible in
some ways that allows the States to work collaboratively. And I think
that's where the secret is that we need to start realizing that we're all
in one watershed and that if we all work together and get rid of the old
game of gotcha that we can get through this drought. I think in that
regard, the secretary was right. There are, there's enough water there to
get us through and if we use some of our economic abilities to help
mitigate perhaps what California is doing, which is buying drier options,
farmers not to farm. So they're economically not hurt. We'll actually turn
our attention now to Phoenix and Arizona and Mike. It'll be interesting to
see how your panel addresses this, this issue. Absolutely. Joining me now
to continue our discussion of Colorado River issues is Herb Gunther. He's
the director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources, Sid Wilson,
General Manager of the Central Arizona Project and Jack August, executive
Director of the Arizona Historical Foundation at Arizona State University.
Jack, let me start with a historical question before we get to some of
those Arizona refused to sign the compact for quite some time. Why did we
refuse to sign? Well, I think the answer really, Michael is a political
answer and it had to do with the fact that strangely enough, Arizona was
dominated by a group of states rights Democrats in the 19 twenties at the
time of the signing of the compact, and they viewed the Colorado River
within Arizona as a proprietary right of their own. And so there were a
couple of people who reminded me of old Fred Coulter, but certainly
Governor Hunt G W P Hunt and one of his advisors, a man named George
Maxwell, who was a rather profligate propagandist for irrigation. He kind
of made his living running around and champion irrigation, got the
governor's ear and we had a state's rights approach while our
congressional delegation for the most part had a broader regional concept
that was embodied in the Colorado River compact. So we were at loggerheads
within for really about two decades, said, how secure is our allocation?
We get the junior water. Right. Right. Uh That's true. Uh Arizona has an
entitlement to 2.8 million acre feet. Uh 1.3 million of that is uh along
the Colorado River has been in use for a long time and it's a secure
supply. The 1.5 million is the Central Arizona project supply which we
deliver through a manmade river. 336 miles in length running uphill to
Maricopa County, metropolitan Phoenix, Pal County, which is still heavily
agricultural based but urbanizing and Pima County with the city of Tucson.
So the, the risk here and one that we frankly thought was much further
off what is during times of shortage because the, the compromise that
Arizona had to make in order to get C A P authorized and funded was one in
which we went from having an equal status on the river to a junior uh
priority status in order to get C A P through Congress because we were a
threat to California. Ok. Let me play out the scenario they were talking
about in Las Vegas pals. A puddle means under stress. Does that mean the
first wax that start occurring are a million, five drops to a million, two
drops to 900,000 and so on. Is that, is that what we're talking about that
that could be under the worst possible scenario, Arizona would lose its
entire 1.5 million acre feet. You know, a water supply for the fifth or
sixth largest city in the US before California loses a drop. Now,
hopefully it won't uh develop that starkly because we're in the process of
meetings and discussions between the Southern basin states. I think Pat
Mulroy alluded to the effort to figure out how to operate within the
parameters of the Colorado River compact to, to, to meet everybody's needs.
At least enough to get through this drought doesn't mean that it'll be
pain free her. Why don't we? And by we, I mean, Nevada and California, why
don't we just simply declare war on California and, and turn this thing
around? Well, that's why we reinstituted the Arizona Navy uh last year.
But uh we, we chose, we choose not to use that because we, we rethink it
though. I mean, more serious, more serious question. The law of the river
, the priorities, the law, Michael is basically what uh the basin states
agree. The law is quite honestly, the law of the river is the framework of
the box. And uh the basin states get together and decide. Well, what does
this really mean? And uh here's flexible. Are we within that box? Here's,
here's my hunch. California and agricultural interests are going to say
the box is we get ours and am I wrong in that assumption? Uh No, I think
that uh again, I think Pat Mulroy was on target. If, if, if we can't come
to some kind of a uh consensus within the basin states, we're going to
litigate it at infinitum, which means nobody wins. And the problem is not
solved for the short term, which is the immediate drought and the
conditions of that drought. Jack quick uh historical look is the law of
the river. Is it constantly negotiable? I, I think so, I think it's
constantly negotiable and I think I agree with her that it's what the
basin states believe it is. I agree, gentlemen, thanks. Um Mitch, like the
Phoenix area, Las Vegas has been enjoying or if you will suffering from
phenomenal growth. Um The water supply doesn't seem to be keeping pace, I
guess. Interesting. We have different stresses because of the growth issue
here and we're going to take that up in our segment right now. Before we
get into the discussion, we do have a take piece. We'd like to take a look
at right now. So please roll that in the driest desert in America, Las
Vegas has been converted into a sprawling metropolis. One of the fastest
growing areas in the nation, Southern Nevada is challenged to provide
enough water for the 6000 people moving in every month and the 300,000
visitors each weekend. In 1931 only 6000 people lived in Las Vegas and in
just over seven decades, the population has grown to over 1.5 million. If
this trend continues, the population will reach two million within 10
years. Historically, forecasts of growth and water demands have been
underestimated growth along with its unpredictability. Present many
challenges. Do we want more traffic congestion? Do we want more loss of
open space? Do we want poor degrading air quality? Those are some of the
issues that our community needs to consider as well as where we're going
to get additional water to continue this growth. While some say this
growth must be stopped. Others say curbing the population would devastate
Nevada's economy. Once you tell people that they can't move in here, then
you don't build the home. And if you don't build the home, then you don't
have your construction worker working, you don't have your restaurateur
selling to them. You don't have your butcher cutting meat for your
restaurant tour. It's like it's just a one continual tale that would take
place of destruction. So we have to make sure that we continue to grow. As
I say, the growth must be sustainable, but we have to grow as Las Vegas
continues to grow. So will the debate about how to handle and conserve our
most precious resource reporting for KL VX? I'm Lindsey Adams.
We're going to take up this issue of growth in both communities. But first
, I'd like to introduce a new guest, Amanda Cyphers. She's a city
councilman with the city of Henderson. Welcome. Thank you. Glad to be here.
I think the big question on everybody's mind is can we sustain this level
of growth in our community and not impact the water supply, MS Williams?
Well, the one thing that we want to do with water is maintain reliability
, we can do it by conservation, we can do it by uh working with other
states in the lower basin. Uh Reality tells us that we are all
interdependent. The lower basin states. Our economies feed each other and
consequently, it's in the best interest of all of us to work together to
make sure that we can sustain as long as possible. Now, recognizing that
growth like drought is cyclical and so to suggest that forever, it would
go on this way would make no sense at all. Let me address that question to
you, Miss Ciphers, particularly in Henderson. There's a lot of growth
taking place out there. Is it responsible to continue along those lines,
taking into account the water supply and where we have to go to get
additional water, we will be growing and I truly believe we will sustain
growth, the way that we grow in the future will change a bit when, when
you look at our um usage or are in the residential homes, our usage that
we have the, the water that we use inside our homes, we get back um and
clean and bring it right back to you almost gallon per gallon. So growth
really doesn't impact on our water um allocation in in what we have. But
what we find out is is how we use our water outside. That seems to be the
use. So as we will continue to grow, it's going to look a little bit
different. You're gonna find less turf areas, you're going to find more
zero escape, smaller yards. Um but we will continue to grow and we can
sustain it. We will do it right. I know we will miss Mulroy from the
outside. A lot of people see the canals, the Venetian, the Bellagio
Fountains and they think, oh, Las Vegas, they're just out of control.
Explain this whole issue, isn't it? Just about grass? It is, it's all
about landscaping. I mean, Amanda said it um uh the impact of growth on
our water supply is a function of landscaping period. Um I have spent the
better part of 15 years trying to explain water use on the Las Vegas Strip.
And the best way to explain it is that all the use on the strip, they use
it very differently from residential. They use 80% inside, 20% outside. So
80% generates a return flow credit or is recycled through a reuse facility.
And the water that is used outside is so negligible. Most of it, the
large ones that everybody loves to flog the Bellagio Fountain and the
Mirage Fountain and those big ones and Steve Wynn's new property, those
private water rights, you know, we can't touch those. They only use 3% of
all the water in southern Nevada, the entire Las Vegas Strip inside and
outside and with that, they generate over 70% of the state's gross product.
Well, we'll turn our attention now to Phoenix and I believe you're going
to have some panelists take up this very issue in your area. That's
absolutely true. But first, we'll give you a little background as we
continue to grow and reap the benefits of development. Are we facing up to
our potential water woes.
Like many communities in the southwest, the Phoenix metropolitan area has
been expanding at a breakneck pace between 1955 and 2000 population.
Numbers in the Valley of the Sun increased 10 fold to over three million
with no end in sight. But as the region plunges deeper into drought, there
remains some question as to the best strategy for meeting our escalating
need for water. We've spent literally decades constructing a growth
machine that operates on the assumption that we will grow, we will grow as
much as we can and we will send our water guys out to build the plumbing
systems and find the water and make it work. There are two overarching
prevailing theories of of of the relationship between water and
development. One is that water flows to money and therefore development
will continue as long as it can, can you know, fund a water supply. The
other theory of course is this theory of sustainability and that is you
should be cognizant in your planning for development. Uh For the fact that
that every time you add a body in a building, you're going to be tapping
into the water supply at present. The valley's water users as a whole are
the beneficiaries of a diverse water portfolio that places them in better
stead than most other large western communities in the Phoenix area. The
primary sources of water come from the Salt River project with its surface
flows, the Central Arizona project and its share of the Colorado River and
groundwater wells. Yet observers caution that despite such an abundant
supply, it would be unwise to become complacent. We've never really wanted
to talk about how much water do we have, how much growth can we sustain?
We ought to try to get some kind of handle on a potential worst case
scenario and how we go about planning for dealing with that. I think it's
very important in doing that, that we make very deliberate and intelligent
choices here to talk about valley growth in our water supply is Rita
Maguire. She's president and CEO of think A Z. She's also former director
of the Arizona Department of Water Resources and Claude Maddox Phoenix
City Councilman for District five. He's also chair of the Natural
Resources subcommittee. Good to see both of you. You know, it seems to me
that a large part of this problem is we have operated for a long time,
Rita on an assumption that we just grow, we'll build buildings, we'll put
people in them and water will be there. And I do, we need a basic mind
reconstruct here. I've got to say Arizona has lagged a little bit with our
neighbors in California and Nevada in terms of actively recognizing in the
recent media stories, the need to conserve. We, we haven't been as
aggressive as maybe the other communities. But on the other hand, we did
our homework early on, we invested very wisely in some very state of the
art technology with the Water Bank Authority, with recharge facilities
with exchanges. I mean, there's lots of things that Arizona has done that
plan for the future. But to be prudent, we need to really start to think
about conservation as an everyday part of our life.
You were making the point Claude before we went on the air. However, that
interestingly enough, it is growth and the money that flows from growth
that provides some of the money for us to pursue other strategies. The
city of Phoenix has been focused on this for many, many years and, and
working with Rita and others, we have developed conservation plans. We've
been educating the public. You had mentioned that more recently, you're
becoming more cognizant of it and that's part of an education plan that's
been out there talking to people about conservation about lifestyle, which
is a little bit different than a drought plan, which is more drastic
behavioral changes. Phoenix has been anticipating growth. We've been
anticipating how we're going to accommodate that as far as water use is
concerned. And part of that has been funded by the development community.
Phoenix is focused on specifically on growth areas which concentrates
residential and commercial development in specific areas and that helps us
to put the infrastructure in that helps us to provide uh the population
that then gives us water that we can recycle and reuse. So there's a,
there's a kind of a hand in hand growth and water reuse development
process going on. Breda Phoenix really has fairly cheap water compared to
other cities. Might one of the solutions be this simple price, the
commodity at its value and the market oftentimes very wonderful mechanism
, it will, it will sort it out, it will send it to the right users or uses
and it won't send it to the wrong users. Absolutely true. Research,
consumer surveys, whatnot have shown over and over again, that price
mechanisms are the most effective method of conservation. It's good to
have the repeated message of low water use, plumbing fixtures, zero escape
and those are all very important. But ultimately, when the pocketbook is
affected, that's when consumers make the decision to be much more careful
and cautious about their water use. You know, I get the impression though
that even though we are in by some estimates, the eighth or ninth year of
this drought, the the the public and I don't want to leave this in general.
I think most of us still don't, still don't get it. For example, how, how
has the city been responding to the to the request for a 5% voluntary
cutback? Well or not very well as a matter of fact, now that that is our
first phase of our drought plan. The city, it's, it's actually a 5%
mandatory for the city of Phoenix. As far as the government entity is
concerned, it's 5% voluntary for the public. In general. City of Phoenix
itself has met, met and exceeded our 5%. Last year's usage was 11% or we
saved 11% over that one year. The general public, we're hitting that 5%.
So people are, people are starting to hear the message. Um And of course,
5% isn't exactly a, a major target goal. Well, no, I mean, it's, it's, it
is, this is a step by step process. I mean, if we went in and said you got
to cut 50% of your water use, people wouldn't know how to deal with that.
What we're doing is we are educating the public on how to address this
issue and we're trying to provide them with a way that they can do it
comfortably. When, when the problem gets to a point where it has to be
uncomfortable, then we will implement something that's going to be a very
, very much more drastic rita, a lot of this is just a function of
political will. Is it not? I mean, I believe up in Las Vegas, I'm sure
they'll talk about this but, you know, they, they have restrictions on
when you can wash your car and when you can water your lawn and for that
matter, maybe whether you can, you can have a lawn politically. We got the
, we got the will to, you know, go that way. Well, you can look at a
recent example. Uh Governor Hull appointed a Groundwater Management
commission about four years ago. It met for two years and spent a lot of
time looking at not only the urban parts of the state's water needs, but
the rural parts and made certain recommends. But quite frankly, I don't
think there was a level of focus and attention on the drought condition. I
suspect if that groundwater commission were meeting today, given the
amount of coverage and interest in this topic, there might be a great deal
more political will to take those recommendations and put them into action.
It's all a matter of timing with any issue as you well know, life, life
and politics is timing. It is indeed, you know, can I just make one
comment in that regard? The city of Phoenix is in the process of
reevaluating our drought plan. We are taking education as far as it can go.
We will have to start making more drastic measures and taking more strong
positions regarding this. So Phoenix realizes that this is not something
you can just continue to kind of walk through. We're gonna have to start
making some hard decisions, man. Thanks for being here. Good to see you
again, Mitch. Um Unlike the valley, as I mentioned, I understand Las Vegas
has adopted a number of water use restrictions, right? That's correct. We
have a slightly different approach to conservation here in Las Vegas,
probably out of necessity and we do have a background report on that. Take
a look at this
as tourists pour into the Las Vegas Valley water pours into the numerous
attractions. The Vegas Strip is famous for Bellagio Fountain is one of the
most popular using 27 million gallons of water. But away from the strip,
residents understand that an endless supply of water in Nevada is just a
mirage. The southern Nevada Water Authority declared a drought alert for
the Las Vegas Valley asking residents and business owners to reduce water
consumption. Washing a personal vehicle on residential property is limited
to once per week per vehicle and requires a positive shut off nozzle on
the hose. Businesses use of mist systems is restricted to June through
August between noon and 10 pm. Residential landscape, watering is
prohibited between 11 AM and seven PM. Water restrictions play an
important role in water conservation if we can reduce water use,
especially outdoors in the urban landscape. That's a significant part of
the total water that's used in the valley. There are other restrictions
that perhaps are more symbolic such as water use and misters and fountains
, but every drop of water is precious and I think it demonstrates good
stewardship and it's a good message to send to our Children. The Water
authority has also implemented a water smart rebate program that pays
residents and businesses to replace turf grass with desert landscaping.
The program has been successful. More than a football field worth of grass
is being removed every day. In 2003, this added up to over 58,000 acre
feet of water being saved. Conserving now allows the time needed to
develop other water resources for the future reporting for KV. I'm Lindsay
Adams.
It's kind of interesting polls show that the public actually supports
these conservation members and they have been successful. Is that true?
That is true. And uh I was just talking with Pat, we, we have conserved uh
about 23%. I was interested in hearing 5% from Phoenix, but in, we've done
some other things in addition to that. Um for example, uh as new
communities blossom, uh they're not being approved unless they use uh
drought resistant landscaping. Uh That's, that's very important. Uh
Phoenix uh like us, we get uh many of our residents come from the Midwest
and the east and don't understand the desert they come in and they think
they're going to put in their lush lawns and yards and uh water day and
night. Uh But there has to be some way to tell them and that's the
county's way of telling them. Uh No, if you want to build, you're not
gonna build with those lush lawns and uh water uh sopping up uh conditions.
We're not gonna allow that. It's kind of interesting though. There's
distinct difference in approach between Phoenix and Las Vegas. Uh, Tempe
has created this 220 acre lake to its downtown. It has a beach and the
boating facilities and so forth. Can you think of a day where that would
happen in Las Vegas? Well, we have three such lakes and then we all the
entities put a moratorium on any more such lakes couldn't undo what was
already there. I think it's, you know, we're talking about the individual
pieces. We got to look at the macro. I mean, whether it's pricing, whether
it's telling people how to use water, probably the single most important
thing that's come out of all of this is an awareness by people of their
water supply. People in Phoenix, people in Las Vegas, you turn the tap on
and waters come out. They haven't thought about it at all. This drought is
functioning as a great wake up call for us to begin to take water far more
seriously than we have in the past and look what Las Vegas was able to do
in one year, we went from an expected water use of 330,000 acre feet to
273. And that despite 6000 people a month moving, that tells you that
water use and growth don't necessarily track on the same line. But Miss
Ciphers isn't also a case where we depend on the Colorado River more than
Phoenix. Phoenix has other water sources and so they're not feeling the
pinch like we are. I, I would, I would definitely definitely agree with
you Mitch. And, and that's obviously why we're looking into, um, in state
water resources in the future and why that is so important. But as, as Pat
has said, you know, the people have really stepped up to the plate and
have done their, their fair share and, and they're continually doing more.
We are removing on an average of a football field a day of turf within
the Vegas Valley. People have really doing their part and, and even though
that we're in drought alert, we, we still how drought emergency that we
will be seeing and there will be new regulations and we have new angles to
look at. But we, it's a moving target where we're looking at making the
drought as easy as possible, but still very effective to get us through
what we need to do. And people are, are buckling down and they're doing
their part and, and it's been a wonderful process for all of us. It's been
an educational process. So how to use water more wisely? All right, I'm
gonna turn to my counterpart Grant who I believe is going to have a
discussion on predicting this drought, how long it's going to go and how
severe it's going to be. It should be interesting, Mike. Yeah, I think so
and I'm sure we'll be accurate as we predict the weather but you know,
we're hoping for a great monsoon. It is approaching. We hope and we wait
expectantly for the rains to come. But will they bring us the relief that
we need? By most accounts, the drought that currently grips the southwest
began in 1995 after some three decades of unusually abundant precipitation.
And while desert dwellers became accustomed to the plentiful moisture
experts and resource managers alike were anticipating the inevitable cycle
of dryness that was to come. Everyone knew a big drought was coming. We
didn't know when we are clearly in territory that we have not been in
since Salt River project was created 101 years ago. We've never
experienced a nine year drought before. I've seen from data that's deduced
from tree ring records and the like the drought that we're experiencing is
about as dry as it's ever been that goes back some 1200 years. The drought
has affected Arizona's watersheds dramatically. Major rivers such as the
Salt and the Verde have received the least amount of run off ever recorded.
And that's very bad news for those who are charged with maintaining the
water supply of Central Arizona, including that most critical of
reservoirs, Roosevelt Lake. If it stays dry, Roosevelt could in fact be
dry. And we have been very fortunate in the last five years or so that we
have been able to purchase water that would have gone unused because CP
didn't have the demand for it. Had we not been able to purchase that water
Roosevelt Lake would have gone dry already. Unfortunately, neither the
desert skies nor climate prediction models offer any reason for optimism
and weather forecasters are anticipating a prolonged dry spell. It's our
belief that we're going to have dry years more frequently than wet years
in the coming decade. This is a dry time and it's not going to turn around
and get wet all of a sudden, we're going to have to deal with this for
years to come. Even the large reservoirs on the Colorado can't go on
forever and those reservoirs are now at about 50% capacity. If the drought
continues for a few more years, we may in fact see some shortages even on
the Central Arizona project, I'm planning for this drought to last at
least until 2010
with me now to talk about the potential impacts of the drought. What's
being done in relation to the water supply is John Sullivan, he's the
Associate General manager of the Water group for the Salt River Project.
And returning to the panel is Herb Gunther, director of the Arizona
Department of Water Resources and Sid Wilson, General Manager of the
Central Arizona Project. And since none of us are meteorologists, let's go
way out on the limb here. What are you hearing from, from your guys in
terms of long range forecasts? Because I know I've heard some speculation
that maybe we've got, maybe we have 30 year boom and bust cycles now.
Maybe they're not seven year boom and bust cycles. Well, what I know is
what I've heard from. Folks who specialize in studying tree rings, folks
who specialize in climatology and what's happening and, and they tell us
that this last five years has been the wettest, five year period in 12 to
1400 years. However, they also tell us that when the wettest or the driest
, excuse me. Uh and they, they also tell us that uh there's a good chance
that it'll remain dry for another 10, 15 years, doesn't mean every single
year during a drought period will be dry. But overall, it'll be quite dry.
And maybe as we look into the future, we'll find that the last 100 years
, as I think herb mentioned earlier has been the wettest in the last 1000
years or so. So the reservoir system that we have is critically important
both within state, the Salt River project and on the Colorado River
because uh those Colorado river reservoirs went from essentially Brim full
, 1999 to half full uh this year. So it's critical that we be able to
catch the one or two or three spike wet years that we might have in a long
series of dry years. John, let me turn to the uh project in the Salt and
Verdi uh water shed. Give us, give us a look right. Now on, on that six
lake system, where are we? Well, as of July 1st, as of tomorrow, we'll be
at about 46% in full in terms of capacity if you look back to 2002, which
I think by all standards was probably the driest year in the last 15
hundreds in terms of run off. Our system actually got down to 26% of
capacity as of July 1st. So we've actually recovered some over the last
couple of years even though we've had drier than normal years. How did we
do that? We did that by reducing our allocation of water to the lands that
we serve, which are now 80% municipal uses from for two years, two years
in a row. The last time we did that was 1950 51. We also have purchased
and exchanged a substantial amount of Central Arizona project water and
thirdly have pumped a substantial amount of groundwater. The combination
of those three things has allowed us to maintain our reservoir levels at
an adequate level for this time period in a drought. But what the project
needs is it needs several good snowfalls, right? Because the mon I don't
mean to minimize any water at any time, but it's really not the monsoon
that that helps the reservoir, the monsoons really only help the health of
the forest. We get very little runoff even from a good monsoon. Uh So
we're looking to the winter run off seasons and it would take several good
run off seasons to actually refill our, our reservoir system. One thing
that we haven't been focused a lot on, but it deserves some focus because
more of our population is in the rural areas. We're focused on the metro
areas. Uh The rural areas are um in pretty bad shape. Yes, they are. And
uh because most of them are dependent almost exclusively on groundwater,
uh There is some surface water diversion but most of it's groundwater and
of course, the limitation on that is the impact of the drought on wells
and the elevation of water in those wells. Uh Part of the governor's uh
drought plan has been a potable water plan which we've done two years in a
row now to help identify those areas and that have problems with potable
water supplies in rural Arizona and make plans to assist them to mitigate
that particular problem. Give me a broad view of what in particular, the
most critical areas are well right now, it seems like the rim area is the
most critical, especially that around patient uh strawberry pine,
strawberry pine in that area. Uh As far as the impact of the drought,
which of course is meteorological, but it does impact the uh the recharge
to the wells and uh requires them to utilize more well water than they
probably would have in non drought period. So we touched on this earlier,
the fact that if the drought continues and, and we get less water down the
river, we may cut back the C A P allocation. Is that an across the board
kind of kind of cut back or does the project have certain priorities on
who it cuts back? First? It saves for last. We do have priorities. And so
the first cuts would not, uh, generally would not affect M and I users or
municipal industrial users or native Americans. Uh non Indian farmers, uh
primarily agriculture in Pne County would be the ones that take the first
cut. So even if we went into or when we do go into shortage, uh someone
living in a municipality or uh farming on an Indian reservation are not
going to be cut with one exception. You remember John mentioned that they
have relied on a good bit of C A P water uh during this drought period to
help them and they don't have AC A P allocation. We've been able to
provide them excess water. When we get to shortage condition, we won't be
able to deliver water like that to C A P or you know, to S R P, excuse me.
And so that potentially has an impact on municipalities that, that rely
on, on S R P water. Ok, John, I've got to ask you what's Plan B do we have
? Do we have a plan B? I'm sure the project has a plan B actually, uh we
have looked at uh if again, everything we look to have seen would indicate
that this drought is gonna be with us for a while. It doesn't mean we
aren't gonna have periodic wet years. Our current situation in terms of
the reservoir system and in terms of our ability to pump groundwater and
the cities having drought plans, the cities that we serve, having drought
plans in place, we believe that there will be an adequate supply of water
out into the future for many, many years. Sure request comment too. A lot
of folks are aware certainly in Arizona, we have a very active water
banking program both through the Arizona State Water Bank and the central
Arizona groundwater replenishment district. And those programs are
designed to store water underground for use particularly during times just
like this. So, so what we'll have to do the water will be more costly
because we'll be removing it. We'll have to pump it, but we do have a
groundwater uh reserve. We don't have as much as we want, but we do have
some literally a saving for a not rainy day. So thank you very much for
joining us, John Sullivan. Good to see you, Herb Gunther. Thanks again.
Well, that's our water situation. Mitch. I understand your water situation
is especially challenging as well. Yeah, and curiously, I'm glad you had
that discussion about water banking because that's one of the solutions
that are currently under way here, we do have another report on what is
under way here in the state of Nevada. Take a look at this in the early 19
hundreds, groundwater quench the thirst of many travelers seeking refuge
in the dry and vast Mojave desert. Now, this groundwater is not enough to
keep the growing number of residents hydrated. Las Vegas's history and
future is tied to water. Residents now receive 90% of their water supply
from the Colorado River. Spurred by the region's record drought, the
Southern Nevada Water Authority is accelerating its plans to develop other
water resources. We've never seen a drought of this magnitude. I think as
we go forward, there will be greater demands on the river. We need to have
diversity in our portfolio. We need to have other resources to make sure
that we have reliable supplies during times of drought. The goal is to
reduce the Colorado river supply to 60% of the total water consumed by
implementing water banking projects and three in state projects built over
the next 10 years. Water banking works like a savings account during
winter months. When water is flowing in Nevada, it can be stored for
future need. Excess water from the Colorado River can be banked in Arizona
and withdrawn from lake maiden times of drought. This project could store
up to 1.2 million acre feet projects using in state resources are also
part of the Water Authority's portfolio one project will tap into
groundwater in White Pine and Lincoln counties. Another project will
withdraw water from rural areas of Clark County. More than $1 billion
worth of wells and pipelines will be needed to connect Las Vegas to this
water. The water authority has also secured rights to surface water on the
virgin and muddy rivers. Proposed solutions along with conservation will
hopefully deliver the much needed water supply to the Las Vegas Valley.
Until then the search for water that initially brought weary travelers to
Las Vegas continues reporting for KL VX. I'm Lindsay Adams.
Ok. Let's talk about that portfolio diversity, something that Phoenix has
done and now we must do it ourselves here in the state of Nevada. Let's
review some of these solutions, so to speak, water banking. That's
something that Arizona and Nevada have partnered together. Explain that
briefly, right? We have been very fortunate that Arizona during the years
when they had extra Colorado river water that they didn't need themselves
banked some of it on our behalf. We have 116,000 acre feet banked in the
state of Arizona for our future use and we would take it through a
Colorado River Exchange. We've also been very aggressive in banking in our
own groundwater basin and thanks to the conservation efforts of the
community, we were even able to bank last year. And so we now have about
275,000 acre feet banked in our grown groundwater basin. That is our short
term bridge. That is what is going to allow us to really diversify our
portfolio by developing our in state resources, which we have been working
on for some time and which we've now quite frankly because of the drought
had to accelerate. Let's talk about another one and that is a plan to take
from the virgin and muddy rivers. It could boost the water supply from the
Colorado River by as much as 40%. What about that? Is that a viable
solution? None of these on their own are solutions. It's all of them
together that create the solution. So that is part of it. That's one
component of the solution. Uh There is no single answer. Um And we have to
do them all. As Pat said, we have to diversify our portfolio. Uh We have
to recognize that actually Southern Nevada is the engine that drives this
state. Uh 70% of of our, well, not over 50% of the state's total budget
comes from Clark County. Many of these smaller counties have to depend on
us for much needed kinds of assistance. Let's talk about that. There's a
plan to bring in water from rural counties. An agreement has been reached
with Lincoln County as I understand it. Uh White Pine County is not quite
on board yet explain that solution. Well, we filed back in 1989 and we did
a broad swath filing at that time of ground and surface water in the state
of Nevada. And since then, we've been quietly doing environmental work.
We've been, we hammered out an agreement with Lincoln County. We are
looking toward entering into an agreement with both White Pine County and
quite frankly County because there are some shared basins in Clark County
that Nye County also has a stake in. We've begun a water planning process
that the board appointed a citizens committee around and we've invited the
rural counties to participate in that water planning process. We see this
as the future regional solution for a larger Southern Nevada that includes
Lincoln County, White Pine County and County and Senator Harry Reid is
involved in this on a on the federal level and we actually have a brief
sound bite from him. Let's take a look at this. What in fact, we're doing
is building, we're giving a right away for a pipeline to be built from the
northern part of the state into Las Vegas so that we can bring water
someday if all the environmental studies work out from the north to the
south. And this will benefit Lincoln County in a number of different ways.
It will allow them to have more land, will also give them some incentive
and some resources to develop the private land when it comes aboard. So I
think it's a win win for Lincoln County and for Clark County. But having
said that it's still going to be hard to get it all done. What about the
resistance from other rural counties? Not all of them are on board. Well,
a lot of them are afraid of anything that Clark County wants a suspect.
We're the big kid on the block and kind of the big bully to many of them.
But I think the rural communities should look at how Lincoln County
handled this. There is a thing in this piece of legislation that Lincoln
County didn't approve. Ok. I'm now joined by my co host, Mike Grant. It
should be interesting to follow this issue from the perspective of both
cities. Absolutely. You know, a couple of states and we've got different
approaches, but we've definitely got a common problem, Mitch. There's no
doubt about that. Definitely. It's been good working with you, Mike.
Absolutely. Mitch. Same here. Thank you very much for joining us this
evening. I'm Michael Grant. Have a great one. Good night. Have a good
night.