TC
824
C2
A2
no. 160:
66
C.2 1
LIBRARY
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
PAVIS
state of California
THE RESOURCES AGENCY
Apartment of Wa ter Resources
BULLETIN No. 160-66
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN
DAVIS
APR 2 ^ iS66
LIBRARY.
MARCH 1966
HUGO FISHER
Adminisirator
The Resources Agency
EDMUND G. BROWN
Governor
State of California
WILLIAM E. WARNE
Director
Department of Water Resources
state of California
THE RESOURCES AGENCY
Department of Wa ter Resources
BULLETIN No. 160-66
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN
MARCH 1966
HUGO FISHER EDMUND G. BROWN WILLIAM E. WARNE
Adminisirafor Governor Director
The Resources Agency State of California Department of Water Resources
LIBRARY
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
DAVIS
FOREWORD
This bulletin Is the first of a series about progress
on water resources planning, construction and related activities
pertaining to implementation of The California Water Plan. It
has been prepared as a function of the Coordinated Statewide
Planning Program of the Department of Water Resources.
Of the many agencies engaged in water resource
activities in California, the Department of Water Resources
alone possesses the authority, interest and responsibility for
the conduct of statewide water resources planning activities.
This report, authorized by the Legislature, is responsive to
this unique charge.
The first chapter presents a review of progress in
implementing The California Water Plan from 1956 through 19^5 .
The second chapter gives the Department of Water Resources'
present estimates of (l) future water requirements and require-
ments for other project services, such as flood control and
recreation, throughout California; (2) capabilities of existing
projects to meet such requirements; (3) the sizing and timing of
future federal and state projects which now appear to be needed
to meet the growth of demands for v;ater supplies until the year
2020; and (4) a generalized discussion of projects needed to
supply other services.
In a number of areas, the estimates presented in this
report need to be strengthened. Techniques for predicting the
economic demands for project services and for staging projects
ill
to meet those demands need to be improved. Subsequent reports
of this series will present refinements of the data used, where
necessary, to provide more dependable analyses of the needs for
future projects. As the times for construction of nev; facilities
approach, the needs for services will become clearer, and It will
be possible to assess the required accomplishments of each
project with Increasing precision.
An appendix to this bulletin will be published later.
It will present additional Information on the subject matter
covered In this report.
Iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
FOREWORD ill
ORGANIZATION, DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES xl
ORGANIZATION, CALIFORNIA V/ATER COfMISSION xiii
CHAPTER I. 1956-1965: A SIGNIFICANT DECADE
IN IMPLEriENTATION OF THE
CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN 1
California's Growth, 1956-I965 2
Population, Personal Income and Manufacturing . . 2
Agriculture ^
Increases in Statewide Water Demands 6
Ten-Year Chronology of Water Project Development ... 8
The State Water Project I8
The Central Valley Project 20
Other Major Projects 20
Local Assistance Programs 21
State Programs 22
Federal Programs 23
Ground Water Development 23
Electric Power Development ■ 26
Important Legislation and Court Decisions 28
Legislation 28
Court Decisions 30
Planning Activities 33
State Agencies 3^
Federal Agencies 35
Interagency Planning Coordination 36
V
Page
CHAPTER II. CALIFORNIA'S WATER REQUIREMENTS
AND DEVELOPMENT OUTLOOK 39
Projected Growth, 1960-2020 40
Population and Urban Land Use 40
' Irrigated Agriculture 44
Irrigable Lands 47
Present and Projected Water Requirements 49
Applied Water Requirements 50
Net Water Requirements 54
Requirements for Other Water Project Services 56
Flood Control 57
Recreation 6I
Fish and Wildlife 64
Water Quality Control 67
Water Supplies and Water Development by
Hydrologlc Study Areas 69
North Coastal Area 72
San Francisco Bay Area 7^
Central Coastal Area 76
South Coastal Area 78
Sacramento Basin 80
Delta-Central Sierra Area 8I
San Joaquin Basin 83
Tulare Basin 85
North Lahontan Area 87
South Lahontan Area 89
Colorado Desert Area 90
VI
Page
Statewide Water Supplies and Development 92
Required Water Supply Capability of State
and Federal Facilities 9^
Capability of State and Federal Conveyance
Facilities 95
Capability of Central Valley Project and State
Water Project Conservation Facilities 99
Additional Conservation Facilities Required for
V/ater Supply IO3
Upper Eel River Development 109
Trinity, Mad, and Van Duzen River Developments, 110
Paskenta-Newvllle Project Ill
Marysville Project 112
Sites Reservoir 112
Lower Eel River and Lower Klamath River
Developments . 113
Desalination 113
Western States Regional Water Planning . . . II6
Flood Control as a Project Purpose II8
Authorized and Proposed Flood Control Projects . . II8
Desirable Scope of Flood Control Investigations . 122
Role of Electric Power 128
Forecasts of Power Requirements and Development. . 128
Market for and Value of Hydroelectric Power . . . I3I
Sources and Cost of Power for Pumping 13^
CHAPTER III. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS 137
Vll
ILLUSTRATIONS
No. Page
1 San Luis Canal-Dos Amigos Pumping Plant 19
2 Rio Hondo Spreading Grounds , 25
3 Irrigation of Cotton-San Joaquin Valley 45
4 Vicinity of West Covina, 1940 48
5 Vicinity of West Covina, I963 '48
6 American River at Floodstage^ December 24, 1964 . . 58
7 Folsom Lake State Recreation Area 62
8 Trinity Fish Hatchery 65
9 Artificial Spavvning Channel, Camanche Dam 65
10 Demonstration Desalination Plant-San Diego .... 115
FIGURES
1 California's Economic Growth, 1955-1965 3
2 Reservoir Development in California, 1956 to I965. • 10
3 Installed Generating Capacity, State of California . 2?
4 Hydrologic Study Areas of California 4l
5 Projected Growth of Applied Water Requirements,
State of California 55
Figures 6 through 28 are bound as a series in Chapter II
6 Population, Land Use, Applied Water Requirements,
Net Water Requirements-Statewide Totals
Population, Land Use, Applied Water Requirements,
Projected Water Supplies and Net Water Requirements
7 North Coastal Hydrologic Study Area
9 San Francisco Bay Hydrologic Study Area
11 Central Coastal Hydrologic Study Area
Vlll
FIGURES (Continued)
No. Page
13 South Coastal Hydrologlc Study Area
15 Sacramento Basin Hydrologlc Study Area
17 Delta-Central Sierra Hydrologlc Study Area
19 San Joaquin Basin Hydrologlc Study Area
21 Tulare Basin Hydrologlc Study Area
23 North Lahontan Hydrologlc Study Area
25 South Lahontan Hydrologlc Study Area
27 Colorado Desert Hydrologlc Study Area
Present and Proposed Major Water Development Systems
8 North Coastal Hydrologlc Study Area
10 San Francisco Bay Hydrologlc Study Area
12 Central Coastal Hydrologlc Study Area
14 South Coastal Hydrologlc Study Area
16 Sacramento Basin Hydrologlc Study Area
18 Delta-Central Sierra Hydrologlc Study Area
20 San Joaquin Basin Hydrologlc Study Area
22 Tulare Basin Hydrologlc Study Area
24 North Lahontan Hydrologlc Study Area
26 South Lahontan Hydrologlc Study Area
28 Colorado Desert Hydrologlc Study Area
29 Projected Intrastate Water Transfers for 1990
Level of Development 93
30 Sources of V/ater Supply to Meet California's
Projected V/ater Requirements 96
31 Projected V/ater Requirements-State Water Project
and Central Valley Project, Referenced to
H^rdrologic Study Areas 97
Ix
FIGURES (Continued)
No. Page
32 Projected Water Requirements on the State Water
Project and Central Valley Project, Referenced
to Project Service Areas 104
33 Staging of Major Conservation Facilities to Meet
Projected Water Requirements of the State Water
Project and Central Valley Project IO5
34 Projected Growth of Electric Power 129
TABLES
1 Summary of Expenditures for Water Development
in California by Principal Federal and
State Agencies, I956-I965 9
2 Ten-Year Chronology of Major Reservoir Development
in California, I956-I965 11
3 Major Conveyance Systems Completed or Under
Construction, 1956-I965 I6
4 Summary of I96O and Projected Population, Land Use
and Irrigable Land in Hydrologic Study Areas ... 43
5 Estimated Urban Water Use 5I
6 Summary of I96O and Projected Water Requirements in
Hydrologic Study Areas 53
7 Summary of I96O and Projected Sources of Water to
Meet Net Water Requirements in Hydrologic
Study Areas 71
8 Authorized Federal Flood Control projects II9
9 Proposed Multiple-Purpose Reservoirs with Flood
Control Potential 123
10 U. S. Army Corps of Engineers' Flood Control
Investigations 124
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THE RESOURCES AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
EDMUND G. BROWN, Governor
HUGO FISHER, Administrator of Resources
WILLIAM E. WARNE, Director of Water Resources
ALFRED R. GOLZE ' , Chief Engineer
JOHN R. TEERINK, Assistant Chief Engineer
JOHN M. HALEY, Chief, Statewide Planning Office
This report was prepared by the Staff of the
Planning Investigation Branch, Statewide Planning Office
under the direction of
Wayne MacRostie Principal Engineer
by
Robert A. Williams Supervising Engineer
James L. Welsh Senior Engineer
Assistance was provided by the District Offices of the
Department of Water Resources
under the direction of
Gordon W. Dukleth Director, Northern District
Carl A. Werner Director, Sacramento District
Charles A. McCullough . . Director, San Francisco Bay District
Carl L. Stetson Director, San Joaquin District
James J. Doody Director, Soutliern District
Special assistance was provided by the
Office of the Chief Counsel, the Power Office,
and the Staff and Services Management Organization
under the direction of
Porter A. Towner Chief Counsel
J. K. Cummings Chief, Power Office
Wesley E. Steiner Assistant Chief Engineer
XI
CALIFORNIA WATER COMMISSION
RALPH M. BRODY, Chairman. Fresno
WILLIAM H. JENNINGS, Vice Chairman, La Mesa
JOHN W. BRYANT, Riverside JOHN P. BUNKER, Gustine
IRA J. CHRISMAN, Visalia JOHN J. KING, Petaliima
EDWIN KOSTER, Grass Valley NORRIS POULSON, La Jolla
MARION R. WALKER, Ventura
WILLIAM M. CARAH
Executive Secretary
ORVILLE ABBOTT
Engineer
xlli
CHAPTER I. 1956-1965: A SIGNIFICANT
DECADE IN IMPLEMENTATION OF
THE CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN
The California Water Plan was published by the Depart-
ment of Water Resources in May 1957. The Plan provided a broad
and flexible pattern into which future definite projects may
be integrated in an orderly fashion. It recognized that allow-
ances would have to be made for additional experience, advances
in technology, and other changes in future conditions that
could not be foreseen at the time of its publication. The
basic concept of the Plan as a master plan to meet the ultimate
requirements for water at some unspecified but distant time in
the future, when the land and other resources of California
have essentially reached a state of complete development, remains
unchanged.
During the decade commencing in 1956, when the studies
v/hich led to The California Water Plan were completed, many
significant events have occurred in water resources planning
and development, and in allied fields, either toward implemen-
tation of the Plan or related thereto. This chapter briefly
describes California's growth from 1956 through I965; the
accomplishments in water development during that period; sig-
nificant legislation and court decisions that have had a direct
bearing on the Plan; and current planning activities of state
and federal agencies looking toward further Implementation of
the Plan.
-1-
California's Growth, 1956- 1965
During the last 10 years In California, all areas of
activity. Including employment, personal income, construction,
retail sales, corporate profits and cash farm receipts have
advanced to higher levels. California's growth in several of
these areas, from 195^ through 19^5^ and the resulting increase
of statewide water requirements, are discussed in the following
paragraphs. Figure 1 presents this inforroation graphically.
Population, Personal Income and Manufacturing
Since the Gold Rush, this State has experienced
perhaps the greatest mass migration in the history of man.
There is no sign of a halt in the trek westward that stops at
the Pacific shore. The tempo of the migration of the past
decade has, in fact, exceeded that of any other like period.
Net migration into California has averaged about
350,000 persons annually since the end of 1955. This 10-year
Increase through migration of about 3.5 million persons has been
augmented by another 2.25 million as a result of natural Increase
within the State. The total growth during the past decade, of
approximately 5-75 million people, represents an increase of
almost 45 percent over the estimated 1955 population of I3
million. California is now the most populous State in the
United States with a 1965 total population of 18.75 million.
-2-
FIGURE I
POPULATION
965
955
1 1 1 1
1 1
1 1 1
1
PERSONAL
.INCOME
1965
1955
VALUE ADDED BY
MANUFACTURING
1965
1955
GROSS 1965
IRRIGATED
ACREAGE
1955
TOTAL APPLIED
WATER
1965
1955
0
6 8 10 12 14
MILLIONS OF PEOPLE
16 18 20
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
BILLIONS OF DOLLARS
80 90 100
6 8 10 12 14
BILLIONS OF DOLLARS
4 5 6
MILLIONS OF ACRES
10 15 20 25 30 35
MILLIONS OF ACRE- FEET
10
v^^.;yMM^,,m:m-^^^^^^^^^^^^^
s
1 1 1
1
1
1
1 1 1
40 45 50
CALIFORNIA'S ECONOMIC GROWTH 1955-1965
-3-
The growth of population has directly affected the
water requirements of urban areas. Through increasing the
demands for farm product s^ it has also contributed to the growth
of agricultural water requirements.
The personal income of California residents was re-
ported to be 30.2 billion dollars in 1955- Ten years later it
has almost doubled. This has been an important factor in the
growth of domestic water requirements and of outdoor recrea-
tional activities. The latter has led to increased emphasis on
water-oriented recreation at water development projects.
Since the end of World War II, in 19^5, California's
industrial growth has been continuous. Total value added by
manufacturing in California increased from 9.6 billion dollars
in 1955 to about I8 billion dollars in I965. Although many of
the industries experiencing this growth have relatively low
water requirements, overall industrial expansion produced a
substantial increment in total industrial water demands in the
State during this period.
Agriculture
Agriculture is one of the principal industries of the
State. California farmers have marketed annually more than
three billion dollars worth of agricultural products for the
past seven years; the value of their production has surpassed
that of farmers In any other state for the past 16 years.
California has an excellent climate, with soils permitting the
growth of a variety of crops, but man himself has been most
-4-
important In this production achievement. Much of California's
finest agricultural land lies in semiarid zones and, during the
major growing season, rainfall is insufficient for crop produc-
tion. Irrigation has made the difference. Approximately 95
percent of the tonnage being harvested in California receives
some supplemental water.
During the past 10 years, about one million acres of
additional irrigated land has been brought into production,
bringing the State's total to over 8.5 million acres. One of
the more important aspects of this growth, especially as it
affects planning for water development, has been the regional
shifts in agricultural expansion. The enormous growth of the
metropolitan areas in California (principally Los Angeles and
San Francisco Bay) has forced thousands of acres out of agri-
cultural production. To a great extent this loss has been the
Central Valley's gain, especially in the San Joaquin and Tulare
Basins. The latter area alone has accounted for about one-half
the increase in irrigated acreage during the past 10 years.
Besides the development and expansion of irrigated
agriculture, the technological revolution that is taking place
on the American farm has brought about astonishing gains in
crop production. Although this agricultural revolution began
only 30 years ago, when mechanical farming became widespread,
the past decade has seen farm output rise more than in any
decade since the turn of the century. The reason has not been
so much the increased inputs of land and labor (the latter has
actually been declining for the past several years) as it has
-5-
been the increase in the efficiency vilth which the resources
have been applied.
In 1900 one farm worker was producing enough for
about seven people. Fifty years later the figure was around
15. Since 1950 ^ it has almost doubled again.
The fact that less land and water are now needed
for the same quantity of output has directly influenced the
need for 'water resources projects.
Increases in Statewide Water Demands
The increases in water demands during the past decade
reflect the growth in population, industry and irrigated agri-
culture. At the end of 1955, total statewide applied water
for all purposes was approximately 28.9 million acre-feet.
Since then, water demands have increased by about 470,000
acre-feet annually to a total of 33.6 million acre-feet in
1965.
Municipal and industrial requirements have grown
significantly during the decade, increasing from an estimated
2.7 million to 3.9 million acre-feet. About two-thirds of the
increase has been caused by growth in population and, to a
lesser extent, by a rise in per capita consumption. Industrial
development has accounted for the remaining one-third.
Prom 1955 to 1965, applied agricultural water require-
ments increased from 26.2 million acre-feet to 29.7 million
acre-feet. Although this increase, measured in percentages, is
-6-
considerably less than that for municipal and Industrial
demands, agriculture remains the largest user of water at 88
percent of the total.
One of the most significant aspects of the increasing
demand for water is the change in character of use occurring in
some parts of the State. In the South Coastal area, for example,
agricultural water requirements are decreasing while urban needs
are rapidly expanding. In 1955 agriculture accounted for approx-
imately one-half of all water requirements in the area. This re-
quirement was only 35 percent in 1965. Similarly, the municipal
and Industrial use of water has increased substantially in the
San Francisco Bay area. Municipal and industrial requirements
are now one-half again as large as they were in 1955 and consti-
tute more than 60 percent of the region's total water require-
ments.
Tulare Basin has had a substantial growth in irrigated
agriculture. Annual applied water requirements for this purpose
Increased approximately I.5 million acre-feet between 1955 and
1965 J to over eight million acre-feet. Urban uses tripled from
1955 to 1965 J but are still only four percent of the total use.
In the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins, annual agricul-
tural water requirements have Increased by more than two million
acre-feet during the 10-year period. Municipal and Industrial
usage is approximately 500,000 acre-feet.
-7-
Ten-Year Chronology of Water Project Development
Many of the features proposed In The California Water
Plan have been hullt during the past 10 years. Approximately
2.1 billion dollars were spent during the decade for major water
development. This included beginning construction of the State
Water Project, major extensions to the federal Central Valley
Project, other federal reclamation and flood control projects,
and continuing development by local water agencies and public
and private utilities. Federal agencies spent slightly over
one billion dollars and the State spent about 600 million dollars.
Table 1 summarizes the estimated total annual state and federal
expenditures. In addition, local water agencies and public and
private utilities spent about 500 million dollars.
Major reservoirs completed during the last 10 years or
now under construction are shown in Table 2. Figure 2 shows the
locations of these projects. The capacities of these reservoirs
total more than l6 million acre-feet.
Table 3 shows the major water conveyance facilities
completed during the 10-year period or now under construction.
When all of those facilities are fully operable, the total water
delivery capability will be Increased by approximately six
million acre-feet per year.
Locations of the reservoir and conveyance features
shown in Tables 2 and 3 Q-ve depicted on the eleven even-numbered
figures from Figure 8 through 28 in Chapter II.
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES FOR WATER DEVELOPMENT IN CALIFORNIA
BY PRINCIPAL FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCIES
1956-1965
(for construction and planning only
in thousands of dollars)
Fiscal :
year :
California
Department
of Water
Resources
Bureau of
Reclamation
U. S. Depart-
ment of the
Interior
U . S . Army
' Corps of'-i/
: Engineers—
Totals
1955-56
2,723
27,352
25,973
56,048
57
4,929
45,000
32,960
82,889
58
7,803
47,000
41,328
96,131
59
16,332
56,027
47,036
119,395
60
35,407
52,196
46,262
133,865
1960-61
48,914
74,037
43,384
166,335
62
36,772
72,360
40,178
149,310
63
56,383
64,144
43,844
164,371
64
146,317
59,280
32,979
238,576
65
246, 9 542/
60,100^/
45,000^/
352,0542/
TOTALS
602,534
557,496
398,944
1,558,974
1/ Expenditures for navigation and beach erosion not included.
"?/ Estimated.
•9-
FIGURE 2
MODOC
LEGEND
• CONSTRUCTION COMPLETED DURING DECADE
O CONSTRUCTION INITIATED DURING DECADE
NOTE.
RESERVOIR IDENTIFICATION ON FACING TABLE.
E N 0 O C I NO I , G L £
X •,'\," _28j_.
"■^'55 47 1
^ ._ . . r-jc. . „ s .! ., ;~ ' •r^e < (^79 I
\m ...... r . . . .^col.sa! <,
' '«\, ..1^ I)/
— Isztt::.*"^' y \ ^
[^L I y "?"%" \:5 66
^
VOl A Rl PO
17 O
y..
'i( %N.s««t. CL...I ,- c '■*'''-, X r •)
—X
RESERVOIR DEVELOPMENT IN CALIFORNIA
1956 TO 1965
-10-
K
CC
O
o
^
fc
<i:
M
S
<
^
u
o
s
tM
M in
C\J
Cs
VO
O t^ CTN
W
J
:2 ^
hJ
O
U 1
m
S
s^
<
o
Pu m
H
p::
O CTN
X
J ^
o
>
cc
w
<:
Q
w
1
M
s
O
tiQ
>
t^
CO
w
E
cd
CO
4J
(U 0)
to bO (U
O U I
Sh O 0)
rvil
o
C
bCi
<
o
>
u
W
<D
CC
I
0)
rH C
Q< O
E -H
O -P
o
CO <U o
S ^ 2
CC K cccccc cccc CC ceo: CCCCCCCCCC CCCCCC CC
CL, 0-, cuPMa<P-.o-, DHa-(0-,
3 3: 3: S S 3 3 33 3 3^133:33: 3:12
to
to
3
3
to
CO
r— I
rH
^
X
to
to
0
^
0)
•H
•H
c
?H
f-c
0
<D U
<u
to
c
C
fn
CO
0
0
S-,
<D (D
fn
hO
CO
CO
0
•H
>
>
C_)
fn >
O
C
+J
•P
>
to
•H ii
iH
O -H
•H
CO
CO
•H
to
CC 0
!L,
•H
c
Jsi CC
(D
^
CC
3
t^ f-i ii
0
0 ^
CO
o
QJ O Sh
i; 4J
Js! ^
X
CC
0 0 0
C tn
> 0
>>
(D -H O <U
CD -U
^
0 fn
^
to
J:*; > > 0
^ O
tH 0
^
c
^
Sh C 4^ >
(U 3
Ph
0 O
o
3
ii
(U -H -,-{ u
3
CC fn
f-i
CO
0 .X
O O C -H
fn CQ
O
Jh &h
fc
CO
fn
0 CC CC o
cr tn
o
O
o
> 0
4J (U CC
O
fr,
U,
O
S-,
U
iH
O
J-.
Sh
CO S-i
>>
Ph
^
^ 0
>; C -H
QJ
QJ
0
0
0
0
to
fc
0
O O cO 0
O 3
•P r-i
0
c
CC S-,
fn < e W
X: rH
x:
>
to rH
>
I-H
>
•H
>
CEP
1-^ CO
•H r-i
x:
0
o
CJ
ti -H C
CO +J
-p
•H
E -O
•H
-O -H
C
-P
•H
to to CO O
C 0
-p
Ph £!
0
0 C CJ 0)
■p -p
?H
CC
r-{ T3
CC
73 CC
CO
CO
CC
CO 0 >3 >5
C bC
•H 3
3 O
f-,
r-i 'a
jn CO cti 3
3 -H
o
0 tH
•H
+J
CO
> Sh 3 O
CO -H
J-l 0
O
CO
3 rH
o CO :z: o cu wj 2
X s
s
CO
W
C> fc O CJ)
CO CQ
Eh :s
CO
o
t^ O
o o o m o o
o
o o
O
o
o
o o o o
o o
o o
o
o
O O
O rH O CM
o mo
o o
O
O
o
o o o o
O Ln O O U3
CM
o o
O i-H O OC
o ^
o
POLO
LO
^=r
m
o t~- o o
O CM
CTN
CM
o o
C30 cr\0 on ovooD
m^
t^
oo
CM
o -=r o o
on c^ o oo
in
t-- O O
>sD Ln
o
CM
CM V£)
cr^
V£)
CM
rH LOtn CM
o
•3-
OO ^
CM m
^
1— 1
1— 1
rH
CM CM
rH
in.
CM
Q
O
Q
Q
Q
:3
M
HH
M
Q
Pm o»
•-0
•-^
1-0
CJ)
CO M O CC Cd
W CO
CO
CO [£!
3 O DC CC CC C^
Cx3 W
CJ O Ph < CQ Q o»
o« CO
CO
CO CJ)
>[iHCQCQWCaCQCJ>^
CJ> O CC
oa CO O i-J CO M Cs
C5 =«
o8
o» CO
COQCOCOCJ)COCOCOS
CO CO 3
o 13 S o 1:3 0-, cu
Ph o
o
o n
coco:=>n3coo:3oco
O pi Q
>5
0)
0
CO
o
CO
>3 >-l
(0
c
J
c
0 l-i
to
•H
rH
o
rH O CO
0
O
0 O 0 TD
>5
rH -H O >
>3
+J
o
^ O rH C
c ^
CO C -P
f-i
x:
>i
t3
CO rH P-, bD O
0
to O
> O C -P
?-i 0
hO to
0
C
J rH C E
to
CJ) o
4J) 0 C
0 to
T-i r-i
r-^
x; 0
0 to x: f-i u o
3
to CC
>i C -H cO
CQ -H
C
U rH
to
o s
CO x: CO -p CO J
O
C to
^1 < E to
73
o
■P 0
13
o
f^ o p> O E ?H
X
O 0 0
tn -H cO
0 CO
jC
u c
^
rH 0
to
0 4-> -H E CO -H x:
XI O rH
0 C CJ 0
X %^
to
3 C
CO
rH ii
CO
T3 -H CO E ^ CO O
0
?-i O CO
X: CO CO rH
CO CO -H
O O
0
3 CO
>
CO S CO CO -H rH O
O
CO 3 x;
O CO IS 0^
hJ P- 3
o a
pa
tH ,J
OS&hC^SSOJ
hH
O CO 3
VO C--
CO
cr\ o
rH
in in
in
invo
VD
cr\ CTN
CJN
CT^CJ^
CTi
r-i CM f>n^T LnV£) t— OD C7N
rH r-<
ro-a- invo f— co C7\ o r-\
r-{r-ir-ir-{r-\r-ir-iCMC\i
CM on.=r
CM CM CM
-11-
<
M
S
K DC
O O
1-0 fc
< M
^^
S »-3
-o
<
0)
fc O
3
O
c
s
•H
>H M LO
4^
C5 vo
c
O Eh 0>
o
J S rH
o
O W 1
^~^
2 S V£)
O Pu m
CM
cc o o>
X iJ rH
w
o w
J
>
CQ
cc w
<
< G
Eh
W
>-i (X
1 M
s o
w >
Eh IX
W
W
W
K
C5 4J
cc cc cd tn
K K cc: CC CC PC K
PC
\
o^l
ClH PlH
b
(U
CO
pL. P-, Ol,
Pm
E>
ss :s ^
s 3 3 5 :s 3
3 5
03
0)
00
4->
w hD a;
w oJ <«
O fn I
!^ O <U
W O
o
c
bO
<
o
>
u
Oi
m
(U
PC
I
H C
ex o
E -H
O 4J
o
& >5 •
03 (U O
s ^ s
PC PC PC DC DC
5 3 S 3
PC DC DC
Q 3 3 3
0)
^
^
Eh
o
0
0
0
^
c
OJ
x;
x:
X
^
0)
03
u
-p
4J
0
0
Eh Eh
>
x:
o
03
^ 03
^ 0
0
0 0
^ -H
o
tl
0
0 0
0 Sh
t^ Eh
ii
> >
0) PC
?H C (U
fa
0 fa
0 ^ O
0 O
^ 0
•H -H
<x> ^
4->
0) O ii! >
fn
Jh ^ 0
^ > ^
>5 0 0
PC DC
f-i O 0
m
^ > >; (D -H
^
O JsJ
O 0 0 >5
0 tH 0 03
Eh
0 Eh
o 4J dj
cti
(D -H C 0) PC fn
Sh
Eh
<D U, U
0 DC 0 W
03
Eh O
0 to
•H fn
i-H
0 DC 03 f-i 0)
O
T3 o
O t. O Q
Eh SU O
■P O
C 03
o c o
is!
fn O O £1 > fa
ti
C fa
^
MO
O >50 DC
=S
Eh
E Eh
•H 0)
0)
0)
ox; 4J "H
0
03
0
03 f-i x:
-P
XI
bO 0
3 0
to DQ -P
rH
0)
03 ^ >3 o3 PC x:
>
i-H x;
> -H 0 0 O
Eh -H X: 03
•H
C to
rH >
03 O
-P
U
-P 0 -H C E
-P
•H
x; -p
•H
-P rH > C
03 C w JJ
Eh -H to
0 OJ
O C rH
-P
O
W S oJ O 03 13
:3 PC
hO :3 PC
C E^ rH 0
0 -H Eh C
ir>
Eh O
id rH
•H 03 -H -H
O 03 3 4J .H 03
o
•H O
03 0 -H fn
rH Eh 03 03
O- Eh
O 03
S CO Pl<
J
J t^ cyco « s CO
tC 00
CO O CO fa
O Eh S CO
00 0-*
S O
O O O
o
O O O O O O
o
o o
O O O O
o o Ln o
^ O
O O
o o o
o
in O O O O O
r-l
o Ln
O O O O
o o ru Ln
t--o
O O
LO O O ^3-
O O LTiO OOO
ff\ •% •% ff\ #\ #^
O
int^
vx> mo o
o vD -=r m
oo o
ir\ o
CMOO o -=r
LTi O O O OO iH
m
cn^
ii^vx>rHt~-o-a-^3- on
Ln o
rH m
CM r-i CM
u^,
UD in 1— 1 vTD Ln LO cr^
rH C^ t-- Lr\ LTA rH
cnmcM
rH i-H
f\J
C\J
^ oo
n
Q
Q
Q
O Q
CJ
O
o
3 o
3
3
3
o» 3
oa Q
O Q
oS
o8
O oa
O
Q o rz)
Q fal W J ^ Q
O Q
O Q Q Q
DC DC fa O
DC PC ;=) w
3 fa CL, DC
M o Q o oa g;
hH
fa M
fa ^ 13 M
CQ CQ O fa
DD Da s o
S CQ Q 3
3 CO M 00 &^ 03 3
o 3
os:s>oocooo
CO CO
CQ 00
S 00 O O
O ^ 3C ^ P-. 3C O
iJ o
O 00 00 CQ
E3 ru O CO
^3 :d fa :d
o
•H
to
O)
o
C
N O
0 to
-a T3
c w
03
C 0
Eh ^
0 03
c
03
E
x:
o
c
0
Eh
fa
0 to
0 CS
Eh e:
O -H
E
>> Eh
rH 0
CO Eh
4J
-P 0
•H -P
Eh -P
Eh 3
03 CQ
4-) O
0 03
x:
0
■p
03
O
e:
o
Eh
0
03
>
to
to
03
Eh
O
0
i-\
4->
-P
0
0
Eh
O
c
o
•H
CO
Eh
0
>
-a
c
O CQ M DC J
03
CO
o
Eh
0
X; T3
bO C
•H O
K pL,
Eh
03
&H
03
to
0 -H
0
03
C
O
o
03
>
o
c
c
o
•P c
>5 O
0 -p
^ to
to -H
•H S
x; 0
3 J
0
03
►J
hO
C
•H
Eh
CX
00
0
0
Eh
O
0
0
Eh
O
U
ba 0
C to
•H to
Eh O
a Eh
CO 0^
c
03
W
o
EC X
03
E S
03 0
O 2
VD
CTN
LOVD C--0O
C\J CVi <M CM
C\J
o> o rH CM oo-c- m
CM on oo on on oo cY-1
oo oo
oo <T\CD
OO oo.=r •
CM m-a- LO
.3- 13- -3- ^3-
C3^
r-i
VD c~-oo cr\
.=r -3- .=r -sr
•12-
\,
Ml
<
M
s
CC CE
o o
t-3 fc
< M
^-^
S ►J
-o
<
0)
fc o
3
o
C
2:
•H
>H M Ln
-P
O VD
c
O E-i CT^
o
tJ S iH
o
O W 1
>— -
2: S VD
O Pm LPi
r\j
cc o o>
t iJ -H
W
o w
•J
>
CD
CC w
<
< Q
E-i
W
>H K
1 M
2 O
W>
&^ o:
w
CO
w
K
(^1
w
1=)
6
-P
W to <D
CO CU "Ih
O
-P
w
\
o
c
0
bO
<
o
>
<D
w
en
I
0)
-H C
(i o
E -H
O -P
o
cd <u o
S ^ 2
cc cc cc a: cc cc vc cc cc cc vc cc vc cc vc cc cc cc
[Xh Ct, pL, pin [Jn fc
OiOhCLiCl, Pl, OliPh OhOhPli&^O-i Pu.
13 S 3 3:3553 5 35 33 333333
>i
>
^ c
^
c
tH
c
CO CO
OJ
0)
cc
OJ
+J o
0)
o
Jsi
o
3 -H
?H
u ^
•H
CO
(U ^ -H
£1 u
o
(1) a; (U
U
JQ
dJ 0)
u
•H Jsi OJ
iH > CD
<U
3
tn >
0
fH <U E
O i! iii
rH -H fn
s
>-i
CJ) -H
E
^
E-i <l> <
x: Qj (u
CO e: O ti
^ <
Js!
p:^
<
0
!Lh
f-(
U
O <U (U
> <u
(D
(U ^
O
0)
•H O ^
0)
(D
o u u
o >, >
fn d) ^
0) J^ f-i
fn
•H O
^
^
E fH
>
>
coo
rH .H fH tH
0) ?H fn
i^ 0) O
(H
C -P
fn
CJ>
u
Sh -H W O
•H
•H
CO
0) C N p::
> O O
O 0) fc
>
o c
O
<u
QJ CO O Ph
cc
iC
D-, to W
TJ O N
•H li,
fn
fn
•H
4J> 0)
[i.
^
c
>
> C
^
•H -H
P -H fn
P::; C
CD
C O (D
K
C E
(U
o
•H
•H O tO 0)
0) 73
Ta
<D 3 3
O C tn 0)
03 JH
>
O rH
< a
jG
>
w
P:^
a: >5in .-i
>
(U
(D
.-H J ^J
>5< o j:;
fn -H 4J
•H
>i f-i t3
^
u
-P -H ii
O Xi
•H
o
O
•P
O -P
Cll TD 3
PS
C cti XJ
rt
c o
3 p::
o
4J
-P f-i W 73
p:;
^
fn
-P C C
t^ C bO CO
<U C O
«J <U -H
(D
oj cd
O
CO
•H
•H ti O -H
QJ
<1>
•H CO cO
Sh CO -H (1)
P3 M 00
O CQ S
p:3 CO CO
CO
t-3 P4 CM -=3: hJ s
S:SJCOCO<COP3&H
o o o
O O O
o
o o
O
o
O
O O O O
o
O
o o o
o o o o
o o o
o o o
o
o o
O
o
o
O O O O
o CO
o o o
O O O O
O VO >-
O LP. O
o
\s\o^^^
o
r- o o inir-
o -^r
VD O O
LOO O O
O iH OO
LO t~-CO VD
O r^^^
C\J
LTN^ CD ^ en
V£)
CJN
\s\\s\co CO o m-3-
mcM
MD M3 VO
un
iH
CM
rH
CY^rH (>~im
C\)
<JMX% t^ LOGO CO
rvj
K
PS PS PS
Q
CQ
CQ OQ PQ
O
CO
CO CO CO
3
Q fc
^
13:=)^
o«
Q O
^3 CO P::;
Q
Q W W Q 1 <
1 1 1
o
3 P:: ^3
Q S Q Q O PD CD
M oa o« 3 PS 3
Q
Q
PS PS PS
PS Ph PS PS
CO 3 S
M CQ M M oa CO S
> C5 C5 S 3 O
M
IH
3 3 3
3 O 3 3
CO O CO
s w 2 s o ;=) CO
t-3 Ph P4 O Q pL,
SSQOQQSQQ
c
0)
o
(U
•H
^
to
O >5
CO U U
>i.
CO
S (DO)
<u to
0) XI
-p
o c >
^ (US
fn
x: <D
to
-O ^ -H
<U Jh O
<1)
O fn
CD
CO 3 Q
0) O 73
3
o o
o
3
OJ Eh
Js:
u x: CO
cr
C P^
•H to
U
0) s <«
(i;
CJ v^ C-- o CO q;
<u
CO
0) C -H
SL, 0) cO
•H • =M
(U
COS
x:
Pn to to
rH O > <U
CO jam
!!. to C to a: 3
Sh
C • • CO C
o
C
•H H
H +J CO iH
&H o
<D (U O C rH
o
o o o PS CO x:
X
•H
<U 3 3
CO C Q >H
1— 1 -H
x: C to -H to QQ
to 2; 2 CQ o
u
CO
H i-q J
> < -H
D- (U "H
O O ^ rH 0
XI
^ TJ C
S
4->
0 >
S -P -H
3 -H O H E TJ
CO
O 4-> -P O to 0)
S CO
■P c c
H C ^ O
CO c x:
CO Jh CO O CO (D
H
cO -H -H O O tn
0)
o
•H cO CO
0) CO cO ti
o < o
fe D3 1-3 p::; H^ DC CO
1-3 0_ pL, 3 ^q |JH
SSiJcOCOQCOJO
u
1
1
o
■=r
ir\
QJ
c
3 C
vo
vo
■o
o
U O
CT\
o\
C
o
+J -H
iH
iH
13
to -P
O iH C\J
c>o-=r LPvvx) t~-co
o>
o rH r\j cvi^ in
vo
t^CO CJNO
iH rvj m-=T
Ln LO m
mm Lpi Ln mm in
<£) v^ VO VXi VO UD
^£>VOVOVO >-f-C--C^t^
-13-
cc cc
K K
;^1
(D
Cm
CU Ph
PL, Ph Ph P-<
o
3 s
C
cd
^ Jh
-p
0 CO C
-p o
QJ 4-> cd
QJ -H
Sh 3 o
QJ tn
O X) -H
<tH 4->
+J
•H ?H
1 CO
o
^ (U
QJ -H
•H
M Eh S
U Q
fn
B
^
O tn <
o
■P 4->
CO
(D
►J 0 J^
cd C
CJ to
<u
>
> (D ^
O
•H -H
y^
•H
■P -H QJ ^
O tH
^ Q
-p
K
rH K ^ O
O +J
■p
CO
CC! O El,
o cd
to C
^
CO T3 U
>
•H O
\,
(U
3 0) QJ 0
C\J fn
Q -H
rHi
x:
fn O P> rH >
QJ
pi
<
+j
Cti rH -H 73 -H
-P CO
C cd
M
CC
T? O C 'CJ K
:3 C
o >
S
<U
QJ O O -H
o o
•H f-,
K tr;
fc
O S CQ S
X3 O
-P QJ
O O
1-0 fe
cd
cd to
> c
< M
C QJ
f-, o
^-N
S ^4
+^
o o
O O O V£) O
cd +J +J
0 CJ
T3
<
(D <D
o o
o o o on o
x: cd o
to
0)
o
m
w
o
bC <V
^ 1
^ ^
in oomo -=r
P> 13 -H
to 13 -P -P
O 0
OOr-l
t---=r Lr\ ooco
•H
>H M U^
^
O (U
tH rH
LO CM OO O
CO C CO o
cd
+:>
O V£)
C!
P fn
ro
QJ Cd +J -H -H
^ :s
C
O Eh ON
W O
<-\ ' 4J O Q ^
P> 0
o
o
►J S rH
O W 1
cd
W -P rH O tH +1
COrH OOO -H J-i>stO
O 4-> XJ
•H cd c
— '
^S.^
\,
QJcd -HShO ti jJ>4JtH
fn S cd
O CM in
fMl
.H:3 SL,p)tO +J tO-HQ
-p
CM
cc o c^
>5
-PT3 piC-H to CO-HrH
to 13 rH
X J rH
O
•H -H to O O -H QJ Q tH ^
•H C O
w
u u
c
0> -HCJC Q O 4JQJ
-P O cd fn -P
ij
>
0)
W W Q <
cd-H o Cd tH>2t)-p
O JJ o
CQ
K W
bD
cc ec
(X oa o8 S S
Q.t:) t) Sh ^ ::S p> cd 4J
•H c rH c; -H
<
< Q
<
3: S
S C5 c^ K O
cdC CO&1 QJ 0-H03:cj
Jh O O O f-(
Eh
1 M
Q Q
Q Pl^ Cu M Oh
CJvH OO -P tOrH^H-H
•HrHC Cd d) -H r-i r-{ %^
hOQJ 4->fecti S 0::-P£icd-P
P> -H !h O P
to -P -P to
s o
C
C-p cdco tD o (X tn
Q hO O O Q
w >
o
>5
•H cd hO >5 to rH ^ P-, -H -H
•H CJ O
E-H K
•H >j Cti
>> .H+3<;-ia)CdN QJrH OQ
Jh ^ rH C
W
W Cti
ja
cti-H t<corHa:30+JcdQj-H
0 ^^ -d fc O
CO
^ X)
t^
x:^ Jh:3 a)>H;HhDcdQ.T3Cc;
+3 M O -H
W
U
0) 0
QJ
(X l-H0>,hD0OQ)S'H-H:30
Cd O >j+J
K
•H
> fn
-P
to CJ+JC-H -H 0>S:-H
IS >5rH P> Cd
O
•H O tM
fH>i >j C<CcdQtM -H-H P>
0 fc C M
>
Q fe
<
•HXD Q)Cd3 3-P OCQ>5Cd
X: rH 3 -H
u
C C
O rH+JOtOSCC 3 cdM
O rH >, O t^
d)
O O
O O -H
>'0 rHtOCJO cdcd-PSCCQ^
C Cd 4J CJ) ti
w
P- -P
-P >j 3 OJ
S-t d) CdO JtOCOCOC S fn
cd > c M
<u
•H -H
•H C CVrH
Qj-p >0'0 cd a)>50-pfH
D:: 3 >=
K
rH rH
rH CD T3 Cd O
too c'ina'iH'i-HGcd-p'aM
0 0 0 0
Oj OJ
cd O 3 O X
Q):3 tOCdCdOhDOOPCQQJrH
0 O O fn p)
e e
E O Hj
^fH-Cfn QJ U bOOX
C CO 0 to
^ f-(
^ C rH rH
PtO S-P >s>5rH>3 >iCd-Pf-cXl'H
•H ^ 0 -P 0
(U 0
0) O CJ) C rH
t;-ltOC OCP-PrH+J+JatOOgrH
> O >i C 73
x: x:
JH ^ CJ cd 0)
OnO fnO-H-HCd-H-HQJCdQJZSQJ
f-( cd cd o o
E-i E-i E-i M S CO re
o-H d3oc^cjcj>ocjq[£icj:;x;xi-hi-3JSs:
QJ O 4J
1
1
> cd 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
0)
t^ 1
o
•H QJ -H
rH
C CU
QJ C
3 C
to to > Q
a o +j|
XJ O
fn O
3 O QJ CJ
Q Q
e
•H Oj
C O
P> -H
r-t x: ?-, 5
O O
o
+J -0
13
CO 4J
o +-> jD oa
:s ^
o
X £1 O fc Q Q Q
Q Q O (J
.. ..
a >> •!
in
'O t--0O C3^
MCJO<5OQ0iSPMSQ^M&HfcO
a
<D O
t--
^-^-c-- 1--
\ \ >Oo«J2COCo:3CQQCQI-H
K > O CJ) M
S ^ SI
rH| CMlcQOOtJiOOOQHcrsXK
MHn hJ S S
.14-
to
u
X)
Q
1
1
Q
■p
o
*\
•H
c
Sh
o
4->
-P
•H
to
o
■P
•H
•H
CO
O
-P
c
to
O
o
tH
(D
•H
Q
JJ
K
4->
o
1
CO
C
•H
CC
+>
>
o
u
o
u
•H
4^
#\
Ti
0
■P
CO
rH
h
CQ
CO
•H
O
+s
C
>
Q
^
CO
o
fn
-P
•H
^
(U
C
c
^^
Q
u
to
O
•H
o
o
-o
C
0)
o
•p
(U
o
-p
o
CO
T3
3
•H 4J
CO
>
O
c
4-> O
IS
^
+J
Sh
O
•H
-P
CO -H
0
o
d)
rH
4J
O
M U
Xi
■p
•H
to
fo
c
•H
•H 4J
c
>j CO
^
c
1
o
Jh
fn to
to
C 3:
(D
■p
o
fe
o
4J
U -H
>5
CO
£
to
o
N*^
to
M Q
c
>,'-i
a-ci
cO
•H
n
■P
•H
CO
c
o
e
c o
Q
Eh
fH
C\J
o
Q
c c
D.
CO
u
o
CO
(U
to
OJ
•H
•H O
S -P
&-P
o
-o
>3-P
u
S
M
t,
i-l
3 -H
O O
E
c
rH
c
■P
CO
-p
c
QJ
o
►J
•P
-p
o
cr+j
>5 0 .H
O
o
c
o
CO
•H
IS
o
o
(U
CL,
CQ
to
o
t-,
CO CO
O
^ o o
o
u
rH
•H
•H
C
1
<
•H
•H
-p
O M
c
O 4J
to
4J x; "H
>. u
4-3
•H
Ph
E^
Q
Jh
C t-5 -H
(U
•H to
■P
■a
•H
c
to
•P
(D
■P
CO
bO
-P
O
U
bD Sh -H x;
o
T3
o
-H
t^
r-t
to
E
C
•\
fn
(0
o
C ^ <
P Q
bO O
W O fc
l-H
•H
to W
>5
0)
•H
CO M
CJ
•H
r-{
rH
CO Q rH
rH
-P
Q TD
CO
S-i
a; c i-J fo
cO t3 ^
CO >
o
iVh
&
rt
o
(U
QJ
rH O
•H
o
o
a
^
(1)
o
a
^
C
O ^ -P -P
W vH T3
>,
C
o
•H
CO
0) cc
3
y—N
O iH 4J -P
CO
4J
c
-p
S-,
i-t
■p
o
tn
-p
to
00
TD
iH ^ fc
:3 O IS 13 CO
CO
c
O fc
C -H
CO
CO Cm
a
<D
ttJ
-P
O 'O
C bO
3
<U(
0
c
•-i
IS
o
f-,
^
3
D, CO
>iCO c
>.
CO -H
SU
O
•H
>5 E
3
o
o
<D
C
•H
hO-P
CO
-p
fn
0)
o
rH
-p
4->
s
u
3 O
•P
•H
O
•H
CO >, c
to {-,
s
CO
C
^H
CO
CD
CO
CO
-P
•H
fn
3
C 13
;3
CO M
o
o
o
3
CO
o
4->
4->
<u
>. IS
c
C
S^
o
CO 1
o
(J
Ph
-p
o
a-p
c
P
Sh
E
1
o
:3 H O
QJ
o
0)
•H
c
o
(L)
c
CO
3
3
>;-,
IS
o
S
0 rH
o to
o
c
^
o
O CO CO CO
<:
>
CO
OJ
rH rH
fn
•H tH
•H
0)
(D
CO
E
C 73
hD CO -H
<D
^ XJ ^
CQ
x:
6
0)
CO
x x;
•
•
• •
CO
•H
CO
C
TJ >
o
•H CO
•H
-p
O -P
^
+j
•P
00
00
to
c
^
>
CO
^ O
CO
O Jh
o
C
3
c
CO
CJ
3
3
c
o
CO
(U
S^
CO fn
<-\
CO CO
CO
CO
O
o
•p
CO
o
O
•
•
o
■H
ssoooeL,CL,eL,pHcocowcocococo:=>:3
•H
•
-P
■P -
r-i
CO
1
1
1
1 1
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CO
o
■H
•H
f-l
>
G
>
+:>
0)
O
Q
tD
C
h
Q
IS
o
Q
i-,
o
X3
M
o8
IS
O
x>
CJ)
^
Q >^
o
O
o8
IS
x>
<
Q
O
00 Q <
w
J fe
O (3 Q > Q K U
<
3QIJhOQM:So8C
oa
O
tdfefc^OISCQO
\,
s
M
cj)oasoaMCL,cQOocis
CO CO 00
CO
\,
C\J|
S20oo&H&<p-ieL,cocoOTcowcoco;3;zi
ml
■15-
K
O
Q
K
EH LTN
[£) VC
J C^
p., rH
S 1
O '^
o Ln
c^
CO rH
s
on
W 2
&H o
Ua
CO M
J
1>^ tH
m
CO o
<
tD
B-l
W P::
O Eh
S CO
•a: 2:
>H O
M CJ
s cc
O M
O Q
2
K &
o
1-3
<
s
Hi
ca
3
■P
oJ
-p
CO
* •
OJ
• •
>i^
-p
Cti
^-~
•H
p
w
O
C <iH
cd
•H
o
d
— -
aJ
P
o
cti
, ,
x:
w
p
(D
bOH
C
•H
0)
^
^ ,
• •
o
c
0)
faO
CO
<L)
tH
£1
•H
to
C
o
a
CO
E
0
p
to
CO
OO OOCJOU o
« • • • • • • 0\
o o o o c— ooo
O O O O t— r\l LfA
O rH i-H rH -=r rH -:3-
;^i
o
o
O
o
(T\
•
•
C7>
0^
r-\
13
^1
^1
rH
r-i
O
LH
o
OJ
MD
O
Ln
rH
a^
tn
tx^
-3-
C\J
<-{
CTn
o OO
OO -3- rH on
o ^r
o r-cM
c\j oc
o
o
t--
o
o
on
*
•
• • •
•
■
•
•
•
•
•
•
CM
rH
O rHOO
OJ ^
C\J
r-i
on
VO
o
m
M3
O
c\j rH on r\j
,-{
^T
CM
a^.
C--
CXj
m
rH
(-{ f-^
C\J
r-\
CO
to
CO to CO
to
to
0
0
0 0 0
0
0
O
o
c
o o o
o
V
fH
Sh
o
t-i (L, ^
Pi
u
>5
3
3
•H
3 3 3
3
3
p
o
o
p
o o o
o
O
•H
CO
to
cd
to CO to
to
to
rH
(U
0
E
0 0 0
0
0
fn
c
•H
cr;
CC
ctJCC K K
CC
CC
0
f-(
C
P
C
rH
P
0
o
:d
O
f^
^
O
?-, Sh Sh
u
u
Cd
x:
•H
to
•H
0
0
0
0 0 0
0
0
:s
p
P
Cm
0
r-{
P
P
P
CC P P P
P
p
3
Cd
o
r-\
Cd
Cd
a)
n5
cC cti Cd
_cd
cd
c
O
E
0
a
E
s :5
«m3 S 3
3
5
cd
CO
cd
>> O
bO
•H
cd
o
p
rH
p
o
C
O
r-t
"i-i
tU(
Cm Im Cm
t^->
C^H
•H
<M
O
c
to
<
•H
o
o
O
3
O O O
O
o
rH
o
cd
0
3
•H
C
0
cd
o
•H
CC
O
O
to
3
CC
p
P
0) +J 4J P
P
p
ap
c
o
C
o
S
p
c
C
u
c c c
c
C
o
o
Si
Cm
Cd
hJ
o
Cm
0
0
3
0 0 0
0
0
ti
•H
o
c
T3
U
>i-H
O
E
E
CQ
E E E
E
E
p
t^ <;-i
C fc
Cm
Cd
fn
P
P
4j 4j 4j>
P
P
0
P
•H
3
cd
O
CQ
P
3
Jh
^H
X5
^ 5h ^
f-,
Ph
s
to
rH
cd
c
CO
cd
cti
cfl
G
cd cti cd
cd
cd
•H
Cd
0
>2
cd
>5
P
•H
0
ex ex
a
a cu a
G.
a
0
C O
Ph
p
CO
P
CO
O
Ph
0
0
0 0 0
0
0
x:
3
•H
•rH
cd
3
Q Q
Q Q Q
Q
Q
Eh
CQ
O
O
K
CQ
C
C
O
o
\
•H
•H
cmI
CO
to
C
•H
•H
o
on
>
>
•H
P
•H
•H C
c
to
O
•
Q
Q O
C -H
o
•H
•H
>
3
-a
P
o
P
o
2
p
C
C
C O CO
to
•H
0
3
o
o
•H
O
•H tH -H
•H
Q
3
XJ
3
p
3
3
•H
3 CO >
>
cr
(U
T3
CJ
rH
TD
cr
to
CT-H -H
•H
x:
<
3
(U
3
Cd
(U
«5 -H
Cd > Q
Q
CJ
o*
3
TS
c
3
O
>
O -H
c
Ph
<
cr
0
cd
a'
l-D
•H
•-5 Q x:
x:
cd
0
P
r-^
p
< P
3
o
<
Q
o
O
Ph
>
c
Cd
>, c
C
cr
c
C -H C
c
CQ
•H
0
c
x;
0
to
0
<
x:
cc
a
CO
Cd CK Cd
cd
c:
E
cd
o
E
0
E
p
•H
CO -H
CO cd Ph
Ph
rH
0
o
p
0
rH
0
0
3
C
3
x: CQ
CQ
Cd
o
bD
0
bD
0
hD
c
O
f-,
x: kJ
x: o
P
Td
Sh
M
K
S-<
bO %A
E
CO
o
p
p cd P
P
to
cd
cd
C
cd
C
cd
3
<M
^
C
3 x: to
to
cd
U rH
•H
x;
rH
<C rH
r-i
x:
•H
o
{«
o 0 cd
0
o
O
c
C
O
c
C
0
cd
rH
2
CO
CO EH w S o
rH
w
Jh
P w
to W
^
p
Cti
o
o
0
O
O
3
O
o
CJ)
X
J
s
cu
• 16-
cc
o
o
w
E-i m
W >>D
J ON
O, rH
y-^
S 1
TD
Omd
CU
O LPi
3
a>
C
00 rH
•H
s
4->
W 2
c
Eh O
o
CO M
o
>-i tn
v_^
CO O
:3
OO
w cc
O E-i
w
2 CO
.J
< 2
CQ
>-. o
<
w o
^
>
2 (X
o w
o c
2
K :=>
o
•-^
<
CO
CO
4-3
CO
S
0
•p
w
>,
CO
o
O
in
CJ)
V£>
^D
vo
0^
C!^
ct>
•
hO
r-\
rH
iH
13
c
•H
E
3
O
O
o
o
Dh
O
Ln
o
o
o
CM
on
on
C
«
9i
0)
rH
CVJ
o
c-
o
t^
o
0 >
•
•
•
•
4-> 0
fv-)
CT^
on
t\J
CO Q
on
in
4J
•H
^3-
to
0)
o
3
O
w
ompletion d
uct to the
fn
c
^H
0
O Ti
(U
u
o
K
c
0
-p
0
s:
o
1 3
cti
£:
4J
^
•H
cr
s
4J
3
0
4J
• <
3
<
4J
CO
o
C
o
CO
E
4J CO
aJ
CO
^
3
CO
0 Ti
43
0
rH
C
•H
<M
4-i
<«
O
O ti
r-H
o
cti
CO
O
0
^X3 O
O
•H
:s
(X
ON Cm
a+J
c
4J
rH ^
o
o
^,
o
c
<M
rH
u
•H
o
hO
0
o
• « cO
+:>
Jh <;h
0
E
C CJl
a;
4J
•H
•H
4J
3
o
£
w
rH
Q
Jh
CO
•H 0
•
•H
cd
CO
0
4J x:
4J
(D
Q a
C
Cu
u
O 4->
C
x:
CO
0
3
3
0
H
CO
Q
CQ
constr
line of
nlargem
t.
+j
4J
u
0 c
o
O
0 c
0
3
3
XJ -H
^ E
TJ
-o
C CO
0 0
Q)
O
3 E
4J W
3
3
<v-. ^
o-
cr
rH
1 0
CO CO
<:
<
4J
CO
SZ
rH
O
C
• 4J
>. c
O
o
^
CO
o
4J 0
bO
M
-5
O
E
•H
<U
0
0
• o
O "m
•H
iH
3
CO
O fn
CO O
Q
Q
cr
CQ
C^H
a
<
3
•
cO >,
c
C
rH
•• C 4J
O 4->
CO
CO
>»
o
-a o c
•H
CO
CO
CO
O
C -H CO rH O
pa
1
0 4J rH
CO CO
-a
-D
<a
W) fn Om
4J a
c
C
£
E
0 O
O CO
o
O
4->
CO
kJ Ol,
E-i o
o
O
3
x:
(U
0
O
0
w
\,\,
CO
CO
CO
EH
rHiCXjl
onkri
■17-
The State Water Project
One of the most significant events in the decade was
passage by the State Legislature of the California Water Resources
Development Bond Act (Stats. 1959, Ch. Ij62) . This measure,
commonly known as the Burns-Porter Act, was approved by the voters
in November I96O. It provided the principal financial base for
construction of the State Water Project.
Construction under special legislative appropriations
began in 1957. Antelope and Frenchman Reservoirs and the South
Bay Aqueduct are in operation, and work is completed or in progress
in every other major subdivision of the project.
The total capital cost of the project features now
authorized for construction is estimated at about 2.5 billion
dollars. The project will provide municipal, industrial, and
irrigation water supplies; provide flood control; improve recrea-
tion and fish and wildlife; and provide v/ater quality control
and drainage. It will also produce for sale substantial amounts
of hydroelectric power but, considering pumping requirements,
will consume more power than it generates. Its primary purpose
is to make available 4.23 million acre-feet of water each year,
approximately three-quarters of which will be for muncipal and
industrial pur^Doses and one-quarter for agriculture. The metro-
politan areas to be served by the project contain 66 percent of
the population of California. The major agricultural service
area includes about 850,000 acres in the San Joaquin and Tulare
Basins.
-18-
DOS AMIGOS PUMPING PLANT - SAN LUIS CANAL
This portion of the California Anueduct , desip;nated the San Luis
Canal, is a joint-use facility of the State Water Project and
federal Central Valley Project. At this location, the anueduct
has a capacity of 1?,100 cubic feet per second.
-19-
The Central Valley Project
Two major extensions of the federal Central Valley
Project have received congressional authorization since 1956.
These are the San Luis Unit (authorized in I960) and the Aubum-
Folsom South Unit (authorized in September I965). Major con-
struction of the Trinity River Division (authorized in August
1955) was completed in 1964. Construction of the Sacramento
Canals Unit (authorized in 1951) is under way.
During the decade, water deliveries from the Central
Valley Project increased by almost 30 percent to over 2.8
million acre-feet in 1964, the latest year for which complete
statistics are available. Power generation nearly doubled and
approximately 4.5 billion kilowatt hours of energy was produced
in 1964. The addition of the San Luis, Sacramento Canals, and
Auburn-Folsom South Units will Increase the potential service
area of the project to approximately 2.5 million acres.
Other Major Projects
The Corps of Engineers completed Coyote Dam and Lake
Mendocino on the Russian River in 195S Success Reservoir on
the Tule River in I96I, Terminus Reservoir on the Kaweah River
In 1962, Black Butte Reservoir on Stony Creek in 1963^. and
New Hogan Reservoir on the Calaveras River in 1964. The Corps
also continued work on levee systems, channel work for flood
control and navigation and beach erosion projects.
-20-
The Bureau of Reclamation completed the Solano Project
in Napa, Solano and Yolo Counties, consisting of Lake Berryessa
and the Putah-South Canal. It completed Twltchell Reservoir on
the Cuyama River near Santa Maria, Cachuma Reservoir on the
Santa Ynez River and conveyance facilities to the Santa Barbara
area, and Casitas Reservoir for offstream storage of Ventura
River water.
V/ater resource development by local water agencies
and public and private utilities during the 10-year period was
extensive. Examples of such developments are the Sacramento
Municipal Utility District's Upper American River Development;
expansion of the Nevada Irrigation District's system on the
Yuba and Bear Rivers; completion or expansion of the Pacific
Gas and Electric Company's North Pork Kings River, Pit River,
Feather River and Stanislaus River systems; the Oakdale and
South San Joaquin Irrigation Districts' Tri-Dam Project on the
Stanislaus River; additions to the East Bay Municipal Utility
District's Mokelumne River Project; and the final stage enlarge-
ment of The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California's
Colorado River Aqueduct. The features of many other similar
projects are listed in Tables 2 and 3.
Local Assistance Programs
During the 1956-I965 decade the State and Federal
Governments provided over 200 million dollars of direct financial
assistance to local agencies for various types of water projects.
This v;as accomplished through programs existing in 1956 and through
nev; programs started during the decade.
-21-
state Programs
California provides direct financial assistance to ^
local ar-encles under the Administration of Flood Control Funds
program and the Davls-Grunsky program.
The Administration of Flood Control Funds program has been
very active during the last decade. From 1956 through I965
approximately 100 million dollars for about 40 different projects
was disbursed. Projects eligible for state financial assistance
In acquiring lands, easements, and rlght-of-v/ays under this program
Include (l) major flood control projects constructed under specific
federal authorization; (2) small flood control projects constructed
under the basic authority of PL 8O-858, as amended; and (3) water-
shed protection projects constructed under the provisions of
PL 83-566.
The Davls-Grunsky program provides direct financial
assistance to local agencies v/hlch construct water development
projects. The Burns-Porter Act provided that I30 million dollars
of the bonds authorized by the Act should be used to finance the
Davis-GrunslQr program.
Since 1957, the Department of Water Resources has
received 102 requests for preliminary determination of eligibility."
There have been 39 formal applications resulting from the requests.
Thirty, Involving funds in excess of 25 million dollars, have been
approved. Five formal applications for large grants are being
reviewed.
Federal Programs
Several federal programs x\fhlch provide for direct
financial assistance to local agencies in connection with water
-22-
projects were enacted at the start of the last decade. Tv;o
relate to irrigation projects and are administered by the Bureau
of Reclamation. A third program concerns watershed protection
projects and is administered by the Soil Conservation Service.
Public Law 84-130 provides for financial assistance by
the Federal Government to irrigation districts and other public
agenc3.es for construction of distribution systems on federal
reclamation projects. Since 1957 approximately 35 million
dollars has been loaned under this program.
Public Law 84-984 provides financial assistance to local
agencies for the construction of small water projects for irriga-
tion and municipal-industrial purposes. Since I96O, approximately
29 million dollars has been loaned under this program.
Under the basic authority of Public Lav; 83-5^6, the
Soil Conservation Service provides direct financial assistance
to local agencies for the construction of small watershed projects.
Authorized purposes of the projects may include watershed pro-
tection, flood prevention, water conservation, distribution,
drainage, wildlife enhancement, and recreation. Approximately
18 million dollars of financial assistance has been provided
under this program during the decade.
Ground Water Development
Although less dramatic than surface water development,
ground water development has furnished much of the water used
in California .
■23-
There has been significant growth of ground water
use in the past decade. Annual Increases in ground water
pumpage have averaged 300,000 to 400,000 acre-feet. In 1955,
ground water supplied an estimated 12 million acre-feet of the
28.9 million acre-feet used, and, in I965, it furnished about
16 million of the 33.6 million acre-feet used. Over 10 million
acre-feet of the I965 pumpage came from San Joaquin Valley
ground water basins. There were two million acre-feet pumped
in the Sacramento Valley and nearly 2.5 million acre-feet pumped
in Southern California in 1965.
Accelerated ground water use has intensified many
problems, but progress has been made in finding solutions.
Water importation to some basins has been increased because of
ground water overdraft. Hydraulic barriers to stop sea v;ater
intrusion into coastal ground water basins are being installed
in Los Angeles, Orange and Ventura Counties. The barriers are
lines of recharge wells near the ocean. Proposed statewide
standards and local standards for several areas have been
formulated to prevent construction of defective wells or in-
adequate sealing of abandoned wells, which could let poor
quality surface or ground water degrade ground water supplies.
These standards have not yet been adopted by the responsible
agencies.
Conjunctive operation, or the coordinated operation of
surface reservoirs with underground storage basins, has been
advanced by application of new electronic computer techniques.
■24-
<u
x:
0)
-p
x:
•
p
^
OJ
QJ
CJ '
c«
>
c
O
•H
•H
cc
CO
CD
bC
o
tn
no
•
Cti
cti
w
x:
Sh
s^
CJ
o
•H
0)
i-H
O
t^
o
>
o
tn
0)
o;
-p
OJ
w
cc
£
0)
p
-p
^
•H
tH
E
(D
•H
o
bZ
o
f-,
CC
cti
<;h
^H «^
O
Xi
-P
o
OJ
CO
p
p
(D
"C
o
rH
0
t
X3
C-
E
Ct
o
•H
=S rH
rH
o
c
«J
>
<D
>
(U
<D
C x;
£1
•H
c
c«
•P
OJ
cti
c
(U
x:
(U ^
K)
0
0)
a;
>
tn
>
o
C
cti X3
<D
x:
cti
tn
to
'C
u:
TS
ct
c
c
(1)
•H
=i
fn
w
o
a
ra
^
to
X3
b£
hC
fn
t£
c
01
C
•H
-p
•H
OJ
Cti TD
X2
s
CO
<D
^
-o
fn
0)
c
a -p
3
tn
Cti
o
S
^1
#1
bC
w
0
-
x;
cti o E-1
•H
o
C O
Sh
r-H
•
o
to
Q-(
>.
, c
•H
r-H
•H
nH
Jh
to
Cti
Cti
Cti
o
OJ
X3
-25-
This type of operation can minimize ground water problems and
enhance the composite yield of available water supplies.
Electric Power Development
During the last decade, the use of power has grown at
a phenomenal rate. There have been a number of important tech-
nological changes in power development.
From 1956 to 1965, California's total installed
electric generating capacity more than doubled, rising to 21.3 mil-
lion kilowatts. This rate of expansion was substantially greater
than the population growth rate and indicates growing industri-
alization and increasing uses for electricity.
Figure 3 shows the 10-year increases in installed
steam-electric and hydroelectric generating capacity for
Northern and Southern California and for the State. New hydro-
electric plants accounted for about 20 percent of the State's
increase in capacity. About 90 percent of these plants serve
Northern California. More than 95 percent of the new capacity
for Southern California is in steam-electric plants. This shov;s
that most of the conventional hydroelectric opportunities avail-
able to Southern California were developed before I956.
The technological advances in the generation and
transmission of electricity during the decade significantly
lowered power costs. The impact upon future planning of water
resource development is discussed in Chapter II.
-26-
FIGURE 3
SiiVMoni>i Noniiw
O
00
ID
CO
00
U3
OJ
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
^
W%^.
mm.
Wzw/
^^^^p
i
im
^^<<^V/
4v/y//vv/
Vvvvvvv///
yyyyX>-y/^
\ >-
''■7?^;
<
o ^
///////////
/////^ ////////
A 1-
Ll —
///////////
///// fj) '////////
/A ^
iur>
1-
< —
q: o o
'Wc
^^^^
^^1^^^
VA <
STAT
AL1F(
YDRO
-1.53
-2.43
""^
^"^M
Y/A. o
////J ^
^•9
o
1 into
^^
/////^j^/////^
-■'W.-.
5 cn(J>
//// -^
<
////////////////
//// \.
. ■■^?^
UJ
////////////////
////\
t-
'^/////////////
/////A
■■■-■.■"1^
W)
^///////M
/%^
(n
m
s
>-
M
/>-////
\-
■^^^
/.t////
\ ^
:•*
'OXX///
y^y//.
\ <
^ixyyy
y<-V///
A 0.
^ vvv
//Q.////
-V •^
: -."^vf
^V//
'^/<////,
/ o
o v%
/,<j>////
/
'^y ////
A o
.f^*7?
-^V
Z.'^////
/^ cc
^V
/,<////,
/A Q
;:;;.^
y
/\ii////
//I '*"
o
^/"^////y
//| ^
^^
^/ ////
m
1
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
^
ID
5}
OJ
(0
CT>
Q
10
<
2
00
a:
IT)
o
U-
_i
in
<
2}
o
Li.
O
UJ
1-
*
<
(0
2?
1-
CVI
>-
«>
m
1-
O
o <
<
S LlJ
Q.
g> >-
<
O
03
in
C5
«^
1-
U3
in
<
m
QC
UJ
z
UJ
o
*
Q
10
(J)
UJ
_l
_l
tvj
<
0^
1-
C/)
z
o
^^
(0
CT>
00
in
0}
(0
in
o>
cvj
CO
O
00 t£ ^ CO O 00
Sii\/Moni>i Nonnm
u)
CO
-27-
Important Legislation and Court Decisions
From 1956 through I965 more Important legislative acts
and court decisions affecting water development In California
were completed than In any previous decade.
Legislation
Important legislation has been enacted on both the
state and federal levels to round out authorities of water
project planning and construction agencies and to set policy
In fields related to water development.
There has been much California legislation In the last
10 years that pertains to implementation of The California Water
Plan. The Plan was adopted as a general guide for the orderly
and coordinated development and utilization of the water resources
of the State ( Stats. 1959, Ch. 2053). The Burns-Porter Act
(stats. 1959, Ch. 1762) authorized and made appropriations for
the State Water Project. The Davis-Grunsky Act (Stats. 1959^
Ch. 1752) presents policies and procedures for state fincincial
assistance to projects of local agencies. Under the Davis-
Dolwlg Act (Stats. I96I, Ch. 867), the Legislature declared that
recreation and enhancement of fish and wildlife are among the
purposes of state water projects and are to be supported by
appropriations from the General Fund. The Porter-Dolwig Act
(stats. 1961, Ch. 1620) declared that the people of the State
have a primary Interest in the correction and prevention of
damage to ground water basins and appropriated funds for study of
projects to protect such basins. Pursuant to the Cobey-Alquist
-28-
Flood Plain Management Act (Stats. 1965:. Ch. 506), the Legis-
lature encouraged local agencies to regulate land use in flood-
plains. The Cobey-Porter Saline Water Conversion Act (Stats.
1965, Ch. 993) augmented the Department's basic authority to
engage in saline water conversion activities, and granted addi-
tional authority to finance, construct, and operate saline water
conversion facilities, either Independently or in cooperation
with public and private agencies, upon specific legislative
authorization.
In addition, statutes to expand state participation in
federal flood control projects were enacted, further steps were
taken to preserve the qualities of both surface and ground waters,
provision for state participation in regional water planning
activities was made, and state jurisdiction over dams and reser-
voirs was expanded.
Federal legislation has generally emphasized research
and planning and has broadened areas of federal cooperation v;ith
state and local agencies. Through the Water Supply Act of 1958
(85-500, 72 Stat. 297), federal agencies were authorized to par-
ticipate and cooperate in developing local water supplies. Under
the v;ater Resources Research Act of 1964 (88-379, 78 Stat. 329),
provision was made for research centers or institutes. The Water
Resources Planning Act of 1965 (89-80, 79 Stat. 250 ) established
a Water Resources Council to oversee plans, policies and programs
of national and regional character and provided the mechanism for
setting up river basin commissions to plan developments in their
respective areas. The Water Pollution Control Act of 1956
-29-
(84-660, 70 Stat. 498) declared that the states have primary
responsibility in preventing and controlling water pollution and
provided federal financial assistance or services in related
technical research. The Water Quality Act of I965 (89-234, 79 Stat.
903) provided for the establishment and administration of water
quality standards for interstate waters and increased federal
grants for sewage treatment plants and studies of waste water
disposal. The Federal Water Project Recreation Act of I965 (89-72,
79 Stat. 213) provides for recreation and fish and wildlife en-
hancement at federal water resources projects, together with
rules and cost-sharing criteria related to those purposes.
Expanded federal programs have also been authorized in
desalination, assistance to local projects, and electric power
transmission.
An important policy statement of the United States was
approved by the President in I962 and published as Senate Document
No. 97, 87th Congress. This document sets forth policies, stan-
dards and procedures to govern federal agencies in the formulation,
evaluation and review of plans for use and development of water and
related land resources. It expands guidelines in such matters as
interest rates, period of analysis, benefits to be considered,
accounting for conditions of underemployment, price levels and
treatment of taxes.
Court Decisions
The decree of the U. S. Supreme Court in Arizona v.
California, issued on March 9, 1964, was one of the most impor-
tant events in the California water picture to occur since The
California Water Plan was published.
-30-
The decree resulted from a suit brought by Arizona
in 1952 to settle differences of interpretation of the Colorado
River Compact of 1922, the Boulder Canyon Project Act of 1928,
and related documents, as these would affect water supplies for
the Central Arizona Project.
The Court ruled that apportionment among the Lower
Basin States of Arizona, California and Nevada would apply to
water from the main stream of the Colorado River only. The sole
use of the Gila River was assigned to Arizona and New Mexico.
The Court awarded 4.4 million acre-feet per year to California,
2.8 million acre-feet to Arizona, and 0,3 million acre-feet to
Nevada. These awards were contingent upon 7.5 million acre-feet
being available to the Lower Basin. In the event of an annual
supply of less than 7.5 million acre-feet the decree left the
allocation to the Secretary of the Interior or to future Con-
gressional action.
The California Water Plan v;as developed on the premise
that contracts for a total of 5.362 million acre-feet per year
from the Colorado River would be honored. The decree has reduced
this amount by almost one million acre-feet. About two-thirds
of the loss will be replaced with additional importations from
Northern California and the Owens Valley. The California Water
Plan must be modified to supply the remaining one-third, and to
allow for Lower Basin supplies dropping below 7.5 million acre-
feet per year.
-31-
studies indicate that the supply available to the Lower
Basin will be less than six million acre-feet if the average flow
for a period like 1930 to 1965 should be repeated. This recogni-
tion that there is not enough water available from the Colorado
River to supply the long-range needs of the Colorado River Basin
states has led to consideration of ways to augment the supply from
that stream.
Several other court decisions will influence water
planning. The decision of the California Supreme Court in Warne
V. Harkness (1963), 60 Cal. 2d 579; 35 Cal. Reptr. 6OI; 387 P. 2d
377 J held that authority v;as provided under the water code provi-
sions governing the Central Valley Project to issue revenue bonds
for financing the costs of pov/er facilities in the Oroville Divi-
sion of The State Water Project. In California V/ater Resources
Development Finance Committee v. Betts (1963), 60 Cal. 2d, 595, 387
P 2d 387, a companion case to Warne v. Harkness, supra, the State
Supreme Court's decision allows revenues from water and power
marketing contracts under the presently authorized State Water
Project to be used to support bond issues in addition to Burns-
Porter bonds if required to construct additional features of that
project or of the State Water Resources Development System to
meet growing water requirements in California.
In Dugan v. Rank (I963), 372 U. S. 609, 83 Sup. Ct. 999,
16 L ed 2d I5, the Supreme Court of the United States decided that
the Federal Government might seize the water rights of landowners,
providing it makes just compensation based on the value of the
land before and after seizure. In the United States v. Fallbrook
Public Utility District, et al (1965) 3^7 Fed. 2d 48, the Circuit
-32-
Court of Appeals upheld the right of the City of Pallbrook to
construct a dam on the Santa Margarita River and indicated that
if the Federal Government appropriates water under state law it
must comply with that law.
The U. S. Supreme Court considered on appeal the case
of Ivanhoe Irrigation District and the State of California v.
Mccracken, et al (1958), 357 U. S. 275, 78 S. Ct. 1174, 2 L ed
2 d 1313. It held that the l60-acre limitation on federal
reclamation projects does apply in California.
Planning Activities
Since 1956, many planning studies have been conducted.
Some of the features of The California Water Plan which should be
implemented to meet the growth of demand for water project services
have been defined by these studies. They have considered a number
of physical, economic, budgetary, legal and social factors not
fully evaluated in the Plan. These studies which are being made
by state and federal agencies are discussed below.
State Agencies
The Department of Water Resources conducts broad
planning activities directed toward statewide water development.
Locally, demands for water supplies are projected, capabilities
of local surface and ground water resources to meet the needs
are estimated, and surplus water supplies or importation require-
ments are determined. Consideration is given to local needs for
flood control, recreation, fish and wildlife enhancement, and
other project services. Local demands for imported water and
other services are integrated at the statewide level to determine
large-scale facilities required to conserve and transport the
water from basin to basin and to supply associated project
-33-
services. Finally, Investigations of specific conservation
and transportation projects are undertaken to evaluate their
accomplishments J costs, and feasibilities , and to select and
define projects.
These are the only studies being made in California
which consider all functions of water projects in all areas of
the State to develop optimum plans.
Several other state agencies are concerned with water
and land resources and with planning for future development. The
Department of Fish and Game, under contract with the Department of
Water Resources, evaluates the Impact of state water projects
on the fish and wildlife of affected areas and recommends water
requirements associated with the preservation and enhancement of
those resources. The Department of Fish and Game, in cooperation
with the State Office of Planning in the Department of Finance,
is also developing the "California Fish and Wildlife Plan" for
the protection and enhancement of wildlife resources.
The Department of Parks and Recreation, through
contracts with the Department of Water Resources, supplies
advice and services in preparing recreation plans for features
of the State Water Project and estimates future water project
recreation needs. The Department of Parks and Recreation is
also conducting a study, in cooperation with the State Office
of Planning, to evaluate the need for all types of outdoor
recreation and to determine how to meet such needs.
-34-
The Department of Conservation has responsibilities
for development and utilization of the State's primary natural
assets in forest, mineral and soil resources , and conducts in-
vestigations in all these areas.
The State Office of Planning is responsible for the
preparation and periodic review and revision of a comprehensive
long-range general plan for the physical growth and development
of the State to be known as the "State Development Plan". It
conducts this study with its own staff and v/lth assistance from
consultants and other departments of the State. The Department
of Water Resources , in its statewide planning activities _, contri-
butes to the State Development Plan.
Federal Agencies
The Bureau of Reclamation conducts water resources
planning, design and construction activities in California.
Its planning activities are directed toward multiple-purpose
water resource development. They begin with reconnaissance
investigations of possible projects to meet estimated demands
within selected service areas and culminate in definite project
reports which define the feasibility and recommend congressional
authorization and appropriation of funds.
The Bureau's major current planning activities in the
State are focused mainly on additional local and transbasln
diversion projects to extend the Central Valley Project. Pro-
posed extensions v/ould include service to additional areas on
the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valley floors; to foothill areas
adjoining those valleys; and to portions of Santa Clara, Santa
-35-
Cruz and Monterey Counties. The Bureau Is also making recon-
naissance and feasibility studies of projects in the North
Coastal and San Francisco Bay areas. In Southern California it
is Investigating projects in Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties,
and in the desert areas in the southeastern part of the State.
Planning programs of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
are also oriented toward general multiple-purpose development of
water resources. The three principal functions for which the
Corps undertakes projects, however, are flood control, navigation
and beach erosion control. Only flood control will be considered
in this report. The Corps is working on planning investigations
related to single-purpose flood control or multiple-purpose
projects authorized by the Congress. The Corps also has a
number of authorized investigations of such projects. Chapter
II identifies the projects being studied.
The Soil Conservation Service is considering financial
assistance to 35 projects under Public Law 566. This agency is
also considering watershed management in the Eel River Basin and
other drainage basins of the North Coastal area.
Interagency Planning Coordination
The widespread water resources planning, design and
construction activities of the state and federal agencies in
California indicate that coordination is necessary to avoid
duplication and competition. To assist in such coordination,
the California State-Federal Interagency Group was established
in 1958. It is composed of the California Director of Water
-36-
Resources, as chairman; the Director of Region 2, Bureau of
Reclamation; the Division Engineer, South Pacific Division,
U. S. AiTTiy Corps of Engineers; and the State Conservationist,
Soil Conservation Service.
A task force, composed of the planning chiefs of the
respective agencies, is working toward reconciliation of
differences among planning criteria and proposed plans of
development. The task force has completed a comparison of
economic criteria for project formulation and has developed
the basis for coordination of reconnaissance level planning
activities in the North Coastal area. It is currently working
toward coordination of four-year feasibility level Eel River
Basin planning investigations which may lead to fonnulatlon of
one or more joint federal-state projects.
To avoid duplication of basic data, a data pool has
been or will be established in each of the following areas:
hydrology, geology, designs and cost estimates of alternative
physical features, project formulation, in-basin water require-
ments, recreation potential, fisheries preservation and enhance-
ment measures including flow requirements, and benefit evaluations,
Each agency will use this information to make planning evaluations
within its prescribed legal policy framework.
-37-
CHAPTER II. CALIFORNIA'S V/ATER REQUIREMENTS
AND DEVELOPMENT OUTLOOK
This chapter presents the current projections by the
Department of Water Resources of the State's economic growth to
the year 2020 and the corresponding requirements for water
supplies and other project services. It presents the available
information on local and statewide water supplies and on yield
capabilities of existing and authorized water development
features. Additional projects required to meet water supply
needs to the year 2000 are identified, and possible alternative
means of supplying the needs thereafter are discussed. Present
knowledge about projects needed to supply flood control and other
project purposes is presented generally. Finally, the changing
role of electric power in water development is described, and
an Indication of its impact upon projected power costs and power
values is given.
With the exception of the projections of the part to
be played by electric power, the analyses described were made
with respect to the 11 hydrologic study areas of the State shown
in Figure 4. These areas were selected because each of them has
relatively homogeneous characteristics of streamflow, existing
and potential local water development, and import requirements
or export potential.
-39-
Projected Growth, 1960-2020
The growth California has experienced during the past
60 years is expected to continue over the next 60. While this
further expansion holds great promise for sustaining a strong
and vigorous economy, it also represents the State's greatest
challenge. Problems associated with housing, education, jobs,
transportation, water supply, air and water pollution, and other
matters will require foresight and ingenuity in finding and
implementing solutions.
The projected growth of the State to the year 2020
was based on historical trends. Including the experience of the
last 10 years described in Chapter I, and on the resources and
growth potential of each hydrologic study area. These projec-
tions were used to estimate increases in requirements for water
supply and other water project services.
Population and Urban Land Use
The population of California has approximately doubled
in every 20-year period since i860, except between I88O and I9OO.
Accompanying this spectacular growth has been a drastic shift in
population distribution between rural and urban areas. In I86O
only 20 percent of the population lived in urban areas, but by
i960, the proportion living in such areas had risen to about
86 percent. These changes have strongly Influenced the pattern
of water utilization in California.
.40-
FIGURE 4
NORTH COASTAL
SAN FRANCISCO BAY
CENTRAL COASTAL
SOUTH COASTAL
SACRAMENTO BASIN
DELTA -CENTRAL SIERRA
SAN JOAQUIN BASIN
TULARE BASIN
NORTH LAHONTAN
SOUTH LAHONTAN
COLORADO DESERT
U ^
HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREAS
OF CALIFORNIA
-41-
The long-range population projections made by the
Department cover periods of 60 years or more. They have been
derived^ primarily, from data provided by the U. S. Bureau of
the Census. Estimates and 20-year projections of the California
Department of Finance, together with analyses of birth, death
and migration rates, have also been utilized. Consideration has
been given to such economic factors as industrial development
and employment.
The population of the State and of the 11 hydrologlc
study areas for 196O and the projections for 1990 and 2020 are
shovm in Table 4. These estimates for the State are also shown
on Figure 6 and for the hydrologlc study areas on the odd-
numbered figures from Figure 7 through 27.
In 2020, California's population is expected to be
54 million. This represents an Increase of 38 million over the
i960 figure. Slightly more than 50 percent of this increase
will occur in the South Coastal and San Francisco Bay areas,
with the remainder in the other, presently less populated, areas
of the State. In 2020, the proportion of the State's population
residing in these two metropolitan areas is expected to be only
63 percent compared to 77 percent in I96O.
Projections of total population and density of popula-
tion were the principal factors used to estimate land area re-
quired for future urban development. Department estimates shown
in Table 4 indicate that by 2020 nearly six million acres will
be needed. It is estimated that, between 196O and 2020, there
will be an average annual Increase of 65,000 acres. This
-42-
ooo
o o o
ooo
§
ooo
ooo
ooo
OOO
ooo
OOO
ooo
ooo
ooo
III
t-^o'o'
r-i mo
O
O
ooo o
0(MG\
o'o'o'
o int^
^ oj on
8
OJ^ l/>
c\j o m
C\J CU ^
CO ONO
F-H <H
§88
O
O
o
888
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
OOO
ooo
OOO
ooo
OOO
E^O O
o'
M3 O O
moD in
o'o o
moNCv
^ mm
•■DOO
VDvDMD
^"o'o'
O^lO
CO c--^
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
ooo
888
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
OOO
OOO
OOO
mo o
OJ LTiCO
ooo
^■^
rHkD IT*
O C7\0
^ CMOJ
OJ C\J C\J
CVJOJ CM
OOO
O O c
ooo
^'o'o
rHC\)
610,000
600,000
590 . 000
OOO
ooo
ITviTiO
CM ro^
rH rHrH
LfMnO
CO'-O f^
2fQ
ooo
OOO
ooo
OOO
moj OJ
CO Os^
ooo
OOO
ooo
ONO O
^ mo
rH mv£j
ooo
ooo
ooo
0*^0*^0
miTico
oco in
ooo
ooo
ooo
<J\0 o
O OJ CN
f-mb-
ooo
ooo
ooo
rH O O
OJ mcTi
miAp^
o w
OOO
OOO
OOO
m[--m <T\
ooo
OOO
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
o o o
o mco
CTvCO^X)
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
C al
0) u
o u
ooo
ooo
ooo
c-oo
minin
mo^O^
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
LTiCD 0\
\0 iS^.=T
ooo
ooo
ooo
CO o o
OCCXi
ooo
ooo
ooo
Ol o o
ja- o m
OncOvo
ooo
ooo
ooo
OJ o o
mt^rH
OVd- ON
ooo
ooo
ooo
CO o o
C--CO f-
H mm
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
i-i oco
^CO O
ooo
ooo
ooo
d'o'o'
■p +J
O «)
CO o
o
ooo
ooo
ooo
rHO^O
mco h-
m^ a\
ooo
ooo
ooo
CO o^o
OMTvO
OM--H
OOO
OOO
OOO
ooo
o o m
r-i^ m
ooo
ooo
ooo
^o o
t^mco
^ moj
ooo
ooo
ooo
^ o o
OJ mt--
<D OJ
C «J
0) o
ooo
ooo
ooo
CO o o
'^ o o
moNO
ooo
OOO
ooo
ooo
co^co
ooo
ooo
ooo
o'o''o'
r-oj o
mtoj o
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
t--OV£)
OOO
OOO
ooo
0*0*0*
O OJ^
oco m
urn
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
MD 0>-=f
mvo iH
ooo
ooo
ooo
mo o
^c-m
^ ONrH
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
'^A
_ oo
ooo
ooo
~i
_ o o
ooo
ooo
o o o
CO moj
4J -W
o a
s o
ooo
ooo
ooo
f-^O o
CO rHOS
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
CO f-t^
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
OJ o o
m'^ OJ
u\=t m
^L.
ooo
vD OnOJ
OnOvO
ooo
vC ONOJ
0\0\0
ooo
VO ONOJ
(j\a\o
H — i-l rH OJ
ooo
\Q OnOJ
o>aNO
ooo
mD 0\0J
OnO\0
-43-
represents an acreage requirement each year comparalDle to the
present area of Sacramento. Most of this requirement vxill occur
in and near the present population centers , including the Los
Angeles-Orange Counties metropolitan area, San Diego , Riverside,
San Bernardino, Santa Barbara, San Francisco Bay area, Sacra-
mento, Stockton, Fresno and Bakersfield.
Irrigated Agriculture
Agriculture in California is undergoing important
changes. These changes are basically caused by economic factors
over which the farmer has little or no control. Some of these
considerations are: an expanding population that has created a
greater demand for farm products; rising personal incomes that
have had an influence on the eating habits of people causing
them to reduce their intake of starches and to favor a variety
of higher value foods such as vegetables, meats, nuts, and
fruits; and a price-cost squeeze over the past decade caused
by increasing fixed production costs and descending prices
received for farm products.
Other factors contributing to the agricultural changes
include technological advances such as more efficient, labor-
saving farm machinery and the development of more effective
fertilizers and weed and pest control chemicals. These have
made it possible for the farmer to multiply his productivity
several times in recent years. These trends have brought about
larger more efficient farms that need less labor per unit of
output .
-44-
>-
UJ
_l
_I
<
>
^
2
CO
•H
^
c
O
J-,
<
0
o
w
<i-,
-3
•H
•H M
-z.
■P
CO -H
<
M
0 P
IT)
to
*.
•
•H 1— (
z
0
1— 1
o
Vili
S -H
t-
0
0 >
t-
r— 1
?M
o
w. c
<_)
c
c
•H
0 -H
u_
p> p
o
o;
CO
to
QJ h;
2:
:3
:3 .H
0
c ^
—
^
•H ^
h-
0)
P -H •
<
-p
c <u
0
CO
C '-to
^M
S
003
q:
c\.
q:
w
rH C !^
1— 1
•-
rH <\J (U
<A t\ 4J
•H
S C CO
c
M &
^
tc
0
+J to
<1h
C • "
•H
0; to CO
rH
E P -H
Cti
(D C C
CJ
^ QJ f,
•H E 0
<;h
2 (D <i-^
0
C ^ -rH
Q; -H rH
-p
fn D to
c
c 0
0)
u a;
0
QJ ^ «i-i
^
■P 0
a;
CO C
c
g: CO P>
X3 C
0
rH ^ QJ
cr
CO 3 0
^
:3 C QJ
0
p> CO a
<Ui
=i p ir->
TD
0 c-
(D
•H >,
P
^ rH P
C
hi TJ to
3
Ct -H 0
C
CI E
0
P CO rH
0
CO t^ tO
Qi
P> to f^
C
to 0
0
■O QJ ^
•H
0 r-K
P>
P P
a)
0 £ C
h£,
QJ b{! 13
•H
•r^ 3 0
^
0 c 0
f-(
Jh x: (^
M
P^P CO
-45-
Based on these considerations, estimates have been
made of California's share of the projected nationwide market
for agricultural products for both domestic and export use.
These estimates have been based on historical plantings of crops
in the State, suitability of soils and climate, competitive
position with respect to distance to market, and other factors.
Crop projections have included increased percentages of cotton,
alfalfa, fruit, nuts, vegetables, and vineyards, and decreased
percentages of pasture, hay, grain and rice.
From the projected quantities of crops to be grown,
the irrigated land requirements have been estimated on the basis
of historical and projected crop yield statistics. In making
such projections, predictions of the University of California
Agricultural Extension Service, estimates of the U. S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture and other sources of crop production infor-
mation have been utilized.
On the bases of climate and of land availability and
suitability, the statewide projections were then allocated
among the various hydrologic study areas.
With the exception of estimates for the present service
areas of the State Water Project, these projections do not re-
flect full consideration of all of the economic constraints in-
volved. It has been assumed that future market prices will give
farmers the ability and willingness to pay the full costs of water
and other products and services required for crop production.
Future refinements In these estimates to include full considera-
tion of economic factors may result in modification of these
projections.
-45-
The results of the projections of irrigated land
requirements are shovm in Table 4. The information is also
presented on Figure g for the State and on the odd-numhered
figures from Figure 7 through 27 for the 11 hydrologic study
areas.
Irrigated agriculture in California is expected to
occupy 10.8 million acres by the year 2020 , an increase of
2.7 million acres over the I96O total. Urbanization of agri-
cultural lands in the principal metropolitan areas of the San
Francisco Bay and South Coastal areas is expected to continue
to cause the agricultural acreages to be reduced. The increase
in irrigated acreages outside those areas reflects not only the
statewide growth in requirements for irrigated agricultural land
but also the acreage required to compensate for such land dis-
placed by urban development.
Irrigable Lands
Field surveys to determine the extent of irrigable
land have been made by the Department of Water Resources. The
fundamental physical characteristics evaluated include soil
texture, topography, depth of soil, degree of soil profile de-
velopment and concentration of salinity. On the basis of these
properties, soils have been grouped according to suitability for
the production of different crops.
The Department's estimates of irrigable land are
summarized in Table 4 and on Figure 6 and the odd-numbered
figures from Figure 7 through 27.
-47-
MARCH igt+O
Looking east alonp; U. S. Highway nq in the vicinity of
West Covina, Los Angeles County. U. S. Highway 1'^ inter-
section in right foreground. (Spence Air Photos)
JULY 1963
J,.^.
Exclusive of lands occupied by urban development, it
is estimated that the irrigable lands in California in 196O
totaled about 22.6 million acres. Part of the projected urban
growth to the year 2020 is expected to occupy irrigable lands.
Thus, irrigable lands are expected to be reduced to I9.I million
acres by 2020. Deducting the projected irrigated acreage for
that time leaves an estimated eight million acres of irrigable
land that will be available for further development. This
estimate does not allow for other uses of land such as areas
required for freeways, rural park and recreation sites, water
development and other purposes. Nevertheless, it is anticipated
that there will be undeveloped irrigable lands in the State for
many years beyond 2020,
Present and Projected Water Requirements
Estimates of both applied water requirements and net
water requirements are presented in this section. Applied water
requirements represent the totals of quantities needed annually
at all farm headgates and urban distribution system intakes
within each hydrologic study area. Net water requirements
allow for probable reuses of water within each area. Such
reuses may take the form of rediverslons from drains or natural
stream courses, repumping of ground water which has percolated
from previous applications, or reclamation and reuse of sewage
and waste water. If there were no opportunity for reuse in an
area, net v;ater requirements would equal applied water require-
ments.
-k9-
Applied Water Requirements
Quantities of applied water in the various hydrologic
study areas of the State have been estimated on the basis of the
population and Irrigated agricultural acreage Information
described in the preceding section. The use of water for urban
development has been estimated from per capita uses of water in
various parts of the State. These values vary from 95 to 33O
gallons per day per capita, as shown in Table 5. Projections
of the future values, given in Table 5, have been based on
historical trends and on anticipated further technological
advances, industrialization and changes in habits of the popula-
tion.
Future studies are planned to refine municipal and
Industrial water use estimates by accounting separately for
domestic and industrial use. Domestic use would be estimated
on the basis of per capita values, while Industrial use would
be derived from projected Industrial development and unit use
values appropriate for the respective industries or groups of
industries.
Agricultural applied water requirements have been
estimated from projected acreages of various crops and unit (acre-
feet per acre) applied water values. The unit values have been
derived on the basis of statistics on the consumptive use of
applied water obtained from field measurements by the Department
of Water Resources and others. Allowances have been made for
the excess applications needed for farm operation. Probable
■ 50-
TABLE 5
ESTIMATED URBAN VJATER USE
(gallons per capita per day)
Hydrologic i i
Study Area : 196O : 2020
North Coastal
San Francisco Bay
Central Coastal
South Coastal
Sacramento Basin
Delta-Central Sierra
San Joaquin Basin
Tulare Basin
North Lahontan
South Lahontan
Colorado Desert
17 Reflects projected introduction of pulp
and paper industries into the North
Coastal area.
_2/ Prediction of decrease in unit value
based on assumed conditions of high
water prices and limited water supplies.
95
36ol/
150
170
170
180
170
220
240
270
250
270
330
350
320
390
170
190
230
250
310
250^/
■51-
changes in applied water requirements for the various crops
V7ith improved agricultural practices have been given weight in
the estimates.
The resulting estimates of applied water requirements
for urban and irrigated agricultural developments are summarized
for the State in Table 6 and Figure 6 and are shown for each
hydrologic study area on the odd-numbered figures from Figure 7
through 27.
Several important points are indicated by these esti-
mates. As developments approach 2020 conditions , it is antici-
pated that there will be a substantial increase in the proportion
of water required for urban purposes in comparison with that
required for agriculture. Figure 5 demonstrates this graphically.
Agriculture will still require the most water in 2020.
One of the most significant aspects of the growth in
applied water requirements is shown by the statistics for the
individual hydrologic areas. These Indicate the relative magni-
tudes of water requirements for urban and agricultural purposes
expected in the various areas of the State. In the Central
Valley and particularly In the Tulare Basin^ substantial in-
creases in applied agricultural water will occur. This will be
in response to the grov/lng demands for irrigated agricultural
land described previously. Although applied urban water require-
ments in the Central Valley will become important (approaching
4.3 million acre-feet by 2020) _, they will remain far belovi the
agricultural requirements of 28 million acre-feet.
-52-
o o o
888
ooo
o o o
ooo
888
ooo
888
OOO
ojo in
cow o
t^o o
ir*co o
CM^ O
o^o ir\
mo o
t--co t--
S>'8
rH^_0^
00 OJ iTi
cvj mm
ma3^
rHO a^
m^co
oj mm
888
oo o
888
ooo
888
ooo
ooo
ooo
mo o
r^o^O^
r^OO
\o \r\r-\
r-i m
^oo
vS rH t--
rHfHCJ
fH ir\o
>jD mco
H O M
3 C
O O
to sz
4J *J
o o
Sm
OOO
ooo
ooo
ooo
OOO
ooo
ooo
ooo
OOO
ooo
ooo
ooo
mo IT.
^o o o
ino Lr\
iniTNO
^ OJO
ir«X)r-
m<TiOj
^ mrH
cr,\D
j:J-\0 t^
OJ Oj m
ooo
OOO
o oo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
OOO
OOO
ooo
ooo
OOO
ooo
ooo
ooo
OOJO
^^ c\j rn
r-tct m
O t--E^
it^ ITi
jj^ in
OJ Oj m
OOO
ooo
ooo
OOO
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
o_o o^
ooo
ooo
ooo
o"o'o'
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
o mo
o mo
mt^^
^3^ 0^
mt^'Xt
G\r-i iTv
OMAOO
^^o^o'"
rH
t^O (M
lAoO a^
r^
r^ rH
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ojvo cy
mc^o
ir>moj
VO OJ t^
•^^o
iH PJ'O
t^t--uD
O OMTv
C a)
(U u
o <a
l/i o
c <s
(U o
u o
ooo
OOO
ooo
o o o
ooo
ooo
ooo
°°°
ooo
ooo
ooo
o^o^o"
ooo
ooo
ooo
■J^OOCO
o a\<y\
\£) t^t--
H rH t--
CTiO OJ
.H OJ ir>
o mco
oo rH m
OJ mm
mmm
rH OJ OJ
OOO
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
OOO
ooo
ooo
ooo
OrH ITv
irL=f o^
ifMnj=f
moco
CT^O^O^
OJt-^^
r-f^^
voce h-
in-o c^
iH
M3 t^CT*
m^ ir>
OOO
ooo
OOO
ooo
ooo
ooo
OOO
ooo
OOO
ooo
ooo
ooo
COVO*^
^ lAvO
OJHOJ
00 t^m
OCO N-
\X) OMTi
r-oo m
rH O f-
.H
iH mir\
OJ^VD
oj^ ir\
ooo
ooo
ooo
OOO
OOO
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
OOO
ooo
ooo
ooo
voco in
rHVJ3CO
r-^ m
h-OJQO
v£i t^a\
rH mt—
N-rH t--
KD OMA
ooo
ooo
ooo
0*0*0'
(n::J-CO
000
000
000
0*0*0*
crsco OJ
lfV=)- rH
000
000
000
000
OJ OJ o
000
000
000
0*0" O*
vD ajy:i
coco OJ
U u}
O tC
z o
000
000
000
0*0*0*
OJ mm
000
000
000
0*0*0"
OJ C^OJ
i-\ m
000
000
000
0*0*0*
Jd- OJ in
^CO O)
000
000
000
000
invD o
cn\x3 o
(0
u
+J
<u
c
+J
OJ
a]
e
^
(U
u
"O
0)
;3
a
r-\
d)
a
DS
p
<
000
c^o^o
rH rH OJ
000
\D CTvOJ
a^O^O
000
>X) o^OJ
a^o^O
000
\0 ONO)
o^o^O
-53-
The situation is somewhat reversed in those areas with
the greatest projected population. In the South Coastal and
San Francisco Bay areas, urban water requirements will increase
by about 5.5 million acre-feet by 2020 , but agricultural re-
quirements will decline and will almost disappear in some of
the counties of those areas. Urban water requirements in the
Central Coastal and South Lahontan areas are expected to increase
substantially by that year.
Net Water Requirements
Net v;ater requirements are the quantities of water
which must actually be made available in the various hydrologic
study areas either through development of local resources or
through importation of water from sources outside the area.
Net water requirements are the quantities of applied water
which remain after consumptive uses and irrecoverable losses.
Consumptive uses Include disposal by plants through evaporation
and transpiration and evaporation from the ground, pavements or
water surfaces. Outflow to the ocean and percolation of water
to a ground water basin, where depth to water or quality con-
siderations make reuse impracticable, are examples of irrecover-
able losses.
Net v;ater requirements have been estimated for each
hydrologic study area by applying percentages to the estimated
applied water requirements. The percentage values have been
based on historical records and on estimates of changing condi-
tions. The estimated percentages vary from 98 percent for the
-54-
FIGURE 5
I960
Urban water requirement 3,260,000 AF
Agricultural water requirement 28,480,000 AF
Total water requirement 31,740,000 AF
1990
Urban woter requirement 8,480,000 AF
Agricultural water requirement 32,320,000 AF
Total water requirement 40,800,000 AF
2020
Urbon water requirement 14,000,000 AF
Agricultural water requirement 35,700,000 AF
Totol water requirement 49,700,000 AF
PROJECTED GROWTH OF APPLIED WATER REQUIREMENTS
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
-55-
Colorado Desert area^ where reuse of the large quantities of
water applied for irrigation in the Imperial and Coachella
Valleys is impracticable because of water quality considerations,
to 4l percent for the South Lahontan area, where water of good
quality permits a high degree of reuse.
The net water requirements for the State as a whole
and for each of the hydrologic study areas are summarized in
Table 6. The lower portion of Figure 6 indicates the estimated
growth (from I96O to 2020) of net water requirements in each
hydrologic study area and of the total statewide net water re-
quirements. The growth of net water requirements in each hydro-
logic study area is also depicted by the heavy line sloping
upward to the right on each of the lower diagrams on the odd-
numbered figures from Figure 7 through 27. In the discussions
of the water supplies for each hydrologic study area (presented
subsequently in this chapter) , the projected methods by which
these net water requirements will be met from local and imported
supplies are presented.
i
Requirements for Other Water Project Services
Traditionally, water resources development has provided
for irrigation, municipal and industrial supplies, flood control
and hydroelectric power generation. So often in the past, however,
a project was undertaken to serve one or the other of these
functions on a "one stream - one use" concept. Recently the
continued pressures and competition for land and water use has
become so acute as to render this concept inadequate. The need
-56-
to protect the fish and wildlife resources, expand recreational
facilities, provide additional flood protection, provide water
quality control, and accomplish other possible project purposes
has indicated to the responsible policy-making bodies and water
agencies the need for a broader approach to water resource de-
velopment -- both in terms of geographic scope and purposes.
This section presents general discussions of the needs
for project services besides water supply and hydroelectric power
development. The role of electric power is discussed subsequently
in this chapter.
Flood Control
Many agencies have built extensive works in California
to provide flood protection. Most active in this field have been
the reclamation and flood control districts and the U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers. Although much has been accomplished, the
Christmas flood of 1964 in Northern California and other recent
floods elsewhere in the State have demonstrated that much remains
to be done.
Because of the expected growth of California's popula-
tion and the increasingly intense use of its land resources,
solutions to the flood control problems will become more urgent
and critical. The State Legislature has declared repeatedly
that the people of the State have a vital interest in preventing
flood damage.
■57-
AMERICAN RIVER AT FLOODSTAGE, DECEMBER 2^, 196^+
During the flood of December IQfi'l , peak Inflow to Folsom Reser-
voir was ?80,000 cubic feet per second. Discharge from the
dam was held to 115,000 cubic feet per second, the maximum
capacity of the American River levee system. Disastrous
flooding in Sacramento and vicinity was thus prevented.
-58-
The Department of Water Resources has recently reviewed
available Information on flood control requirements. Additional
study Is needed to gain knowledge, at least on a reconnaissance
level, of present and future urban and agricultural developments
that will be subject to flood damage along with important
physical, economic and social factors related to prevention of
such damage throughout the State. Studies by the U. S. Army,
Corps of Engineers, which are In progress or authorized, are
discussed subsequently In this chapter.
The degree to which Improvements are exposed to floods
varies considerably from area to area of the State. Much of the
North Coastal area Is subject to staggering periodic flood
damage, as evidenced by the Christmas 1964 flood. In the San
Francisco Bay area, a number of flood control facilities have
been built, but there are still problems to be solved. Examples
of the kinds of development needing further protection are urban
and agricultural improvements along the Russian and Napa Rivers
and urban areas adjacent to restricted natural channels, par-
ticularly in the zones of tidal Influence near the San Francisco
Bay. In parts of the Central Coastal area, provision for channel
improvements, bank revetment, flood control reservoirs or levees,
or floodplaln management will be needed as urbanization proceeds.
Considerable progress has been made by federal and
local agencies in developing and Implementing comprehensive flood
control programs in the South Coastal area. Nevertheless, in
certain areas the rate of construction of flood control works
■59-
is not sufficient to keep up with the growing need. Ploodplain
management in portions of the area would assist in alleviating
flood damage.
In the Central Valley Basin, reservoirs in the mountains
and foothills and levees and bypass channels on the valley floor
provide a significant level of flood protection. The major
streams that will still require reservoir flood control storage,
or other protective works, include the Upper Sacramento, Bear,
Yuba, American, Cosumnes, Stanislaus, Tuolumne and Merced
Rivers and Cache Creek. Bank erosion, which in places threatens
the integrity of Sacramento River Flood Control Project levees,
calls for continual maintenance and additional bank revetment.
Bypass channels and levees in Butte Basin would eliminate the
present periodic flood damage of agricultural lands. A number
of small streams on the valley floor that pass through urban
areas occasionally overflow their banks. There will be a growing
need for projects to prevent such damage as the urban areas
expand. Problems in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta area during
major flood periods are caused by poor levee foundation conditions,
subsiding land surfaces, high tides and winds during flood
periods and the difficulty of fighting floods.
Flood damage in the North Lahontan area occurs chiefly
in the vicinity of Lake Tahoe and along the Truckee, Carson and
Walker Rivers. Flood control facilities provide a measure of
protection to developments along the Truckee River in California
but additional facilities are needed to protect the Reno-Sparks
area in Nevada. In the South Lahontan area, floods occasionally
■60-
affect developments along the Moj'ave River. Infrequent flood
damage in the few highly developed portions of the Colorado
Desert area results chiefly from intense summer thunderstorms.
Recreation
The publication entitled, "Economic Report of the
Governor", dated March 2, 1964, classifies recreation as a
major sector of the State's economy. It indicates in part that
"with each succeeding year recreation becomes a more important
part of California life, its wealth and its economy." No one
knows exactly what the magnitude of the recreation industry is
in terms of dollars. If tourist expenditures and estimates of
average outlays by recreationists are indicative, it is cer-
tainly a multibillion dollar business.
As would be expected, the growth of this industry has
accompanied the rise of population. But other factors, such as
increasing incomes, mobility and leisure time of the people
have been significant additional contributors to the trend.
Recreational activity in recent years has, in fact, grown three
times as fast as population.
The increasing demand for recreation is of special
importance to the development of California's water resources.
In this State, outdoor recreation is characteristically water
oriented. The California Public Outdoor Recreation Plan of I96O
indicated that about 60 percent of all recreation is so oriented.
The plan further stated that public access to thousands of acres
of potential recreation lands and waters was sorely needed. ':''ais
-61-
FOLSOM LAKE STATE RECREATION AREA
Recreation use at Folsom Lake State Recreation area during
IQ65, almost i], 000,000 visitor-days, was greater than any
other state or federal nark in California.
-62-
need v/111 be magnified many times in the future. The magnitude
of the demand for all kinds of outdoor recreation is shown by
the following Department of V/ater Resources' estimates of annual
statewide recreation use:
Statewide Outdoor
Year Recreation Use
(Visitor-Days)
i960 218,100,000
1990 2,586,000,000
2020 4,954,000,000
The portions of these uses that will be water oriented will
cause keenly felt if not overwhelming pressures on water
resource developments in all areas of the State. Even now,
the demand for water recreation is so great in Southern California
that expensive water, imported from outside the area, is used to
maintain water levels adequate for recreational use at Lake
Elsinore, Hansen Reservoir and Puddingstone Reservoir. As
additional reservoirs are added in Southern California and in
most other areas of the State, recreation use will be limited
more by the physical characteristics and capacities of the reser-
voirs themselves and by the facilities provided than by lack of
demand.
Thus far, estimates of applied and net water require-
ments in recreational developments has been limited to a few
specific Investigations where this type of use was an important
factor. Consequently, little is known about this aspect of
water use on a statewide or even on a regional basis. It has
been estimated, however, that recreatlonlsts need about 40
-63-
gallons of water per user day (applied water) for domestic
use. This may be significant in certain recreational
areas of the State. It has been estimated that the summer pop-
ulation around Lake Tahoe increases by some 70,000 due to the
inflirx of recreationists and that additional water use amounts
to about 2.8 million gallons daily. Because of the tremendous
growth expected in recreational activity, this facet of water
use will assume increasing importance in the future. .
Fish and Wildlife
Hunting and fishing are among the more important
recreational activities in California. Commercial fishing for
anadromous species is a valuable component of the State's
economy. For these reasons, and to leave for future generations
as much of the natural heritage of the State as possible, it is
important that fish and wildlife resources be preserved and
enhanced.
Salmon and steelhead in the North Coastal and Sacramento
Basin areas are the objects of both sport and commercial fishing.
In the North Coastal area particularly, these resources are most
important economically and must be preserved to the maximum
practicable extent as water development proceeds.
There are also opportunities for enhancement of anad-
romous fish resources. One example is the planned use for
spawning of part of the Bureau of Reclamation's Tehama-Colusa
Canal on the west side of the Sacramento Valley, and the release
of water from that canal dovm tributaries of the Sacramento
-64-
TRINITY FISH HATCHERY
Hatcheries have been used to preserve anadromous fisheries
at a number of water projects in California.
This facility is the first installation in California of this
particular method of anadromous fisheries preservation.
(Photo by Lodi News-Sentinel)
ARTIFICIAL SPAWNING CHANNEL-CAMANCHE DAM
River to increase the available spawning areas. Salmon and
steelhead, as v;ell as shad^ sturgeon and the extremely important
striped bass, which are in or migrating through the Sacramento-
San Joaquin Delta, can be protected and possibly enhanced by
construction of the Peripheral Canal. There may be an oppor-
tunity to rehabilitate and enhance the king salmon run of the
San Joaquin River system. Through streamflow augmentation, re-
juvenation of stream gravels, removal of vegetation, construction
of hatcheries, abatement of damaging water pollution and other
measures, it is estimated on a very preliminary basis that
salmon runs in the San Joaquin River system, averaging 500,000
fish annually, could be developed by 2020. Additional studies
would be required to determine the economic feasibility of such
a program.
Reservoirs proposed on mountain trout streams must be
capable of releasing sufficient water to sustain existing trout
populations below the dams, and possibly to enhance these popula-
tions if necessary to compensate for fisheries lost upstream.
California's significant waterfowl populations are
found from the northern gateway at Lower Klamath Lake and Tule
Lake through the marshes and sloughs of the Central Valley and
the Delta to the Salton Sea and the Colorado River marshes in the
southern extremity of the State. These populations should be ,
I
protected and, if possible, enhanced by preservation of marshes,
provision of rest areas along fly ways and other means.
-66-
Water Quality Control
In California's major water supply areas - the North
Coastal area and the Sacramento Basin - water is of excellent
mineral quality and suitable for all "beneficial uses. In other
areas of the State, most of which are water-deficient to some
extent, the qualities of natural surface waters vary greatly.
Certain waters, such as those originating in the Sierra Nevada
and in the higher mountains of the coast ranges, are of excellent
quality. Waters in the more southerly areas, particularly in
the lower portions of closed drainage basins, are of poorer
quality.
In some areas serious water quality degradation has
occurred. Sea water intrusion, for example, has adversely
affected portions of ground water basins adjacent to the coast
or inland bays in the San Francisco Bay, the Central Coastal,
and the South Coastal areas. Adverse salt balance conditions
have impaired the quality of ground water in parts of the Tulare
Basin and elsewhere. There is an Increasing need to prevent
undesirable effects of pollution caused by the discharge of man-
made wastes into fresh water bodies, such as Lake Tahoe and
channels of the Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta; into saline water
bodies, such as San Francisco Bay; and even into the ocean
adjacent to public beaches. The State and Regional Water Quality
Control Boards play an Important part in preventing pollution
and in furthering water quality control.
-67-
Existing water development projects have j)rovlded
control of the quality of water supplies to Insure their suit-
ability for Intended urban and agricultural uses, and future
projects can do the same. In many areas, regulated local
supplies or Imported water may be blended with poorer quality
local water, either In surface reservoirs and conduits or In
ground water basins. For example, the Sacramento River not
only carries local and export water supplies but also consti-
tutes the means of conveying enormous quantities of municipal.
Industrial and agricultural wastes out of the Sacramento Valley.
In the future, management of the quality of this vital resource,
through dilution at times of low streamflow and possibly convey-
ance of the more objectionable wastes through separate drains,
will be required.
In the Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta, potential Intrusion
of salt water from the San Francisco Bay system, as well as degra-
dation of water quality from agricultural and mvmlclpal and In-
dustrial waste discharges, may be controlled by dilution and
maintenance of salinity control outflows to Sulsun Bay. This
has been accomplished since 1944 by the Central Valley Project.
The proposed Peripheral Canal will improve the present situation
by prroviding a physical separation between Sacramento River
waters ;^- to be pumped for export and waters in the Delta channels.
It will also constitute a positive means of distributing dilution
water in the Delta channels.
-68-
V/ater quality control has already become essential
In the San Joaquin and Tulare Basins. The San Joaquin Master
Drain, to separate wastes from local waters of good quality,
has been authorized and is in the process of advance planning.
Dilution of water in the drain or in stream channels may be
found necessary as a part of the overall water quality management
program. The drain will provide the means for controlling salt
balance in the San Joaquin and Tulare Basins to prevent the
buildup of minerals in the ground water and soils.
In the large ground water basins of the South Coastal
area, water quality improvement can be achieved by several means.
Good quality water from Northern California can be delivered at
higher elevations in each basin. This will dilute local supplies
and permit a greater degree of reuse of water at successively
lower elevations. In coastal ground water basins, imported and
reclaimed water is being injected near the ocean to check sea
water intrusion. The present recharge systems in the South
Coastal area are being expanded and extended to other basins.
Water Supplies and Water Development
by Hydrologic Study Areas
Studies leading to The California Water Plan demon-
strated that the State has within its boundaries sufficient
water resources to meet ultimate water requirements amounting to
an estimated 51.1 million acre-feet per year. This conclusion
is still believed to be valid, notwithstanding subsequent reduc-
tions of California's rights to the Colorado River as a result
-69-
of Arizona v. California. Certainly there is sufficient water
available physically within the State to meet the currently
projected 2020 level of net water requirements, amounting to
38.0 million acre-feet.
This section presents for each hydrologic study area
of the State (Figure h) , estimates of water supplies available
from local water developments. It gives brief descriptions of
conservation features proposed by local agencies and of those
proposed under the State Water Resources Development System,
which are primarily for local use. For areas having surplus
supplies, estimates of quantities being exported and required
to be exported in the future are also presented. This section
also gives estimates of the capabilities of present facilities
for importing water to certain of the areas and derives the
additional Importations that will be required to overcome local
ground water overdrafts and to meet the growing net water re-
quirements described previously. Where specific Import projects
have been proposed, the effects of these on meeting future water
requirements are Indicated. The locations of the major water
conservation and conveyance facilities that appear to be among
the more favorable of those proposed, are shown on the even-
numbered figures from Figure 8 through 28. Many features described
In The California V/ater Plan, or proposed after the preparation of
that Plan, are not included on these figures. A summary of the
estimated water supplies for the various hydrologic study areas,
described in this section, is presented in Table 7.
-70.
'§ "
cd -p
4-> m
■o -P
05 U
O m
a) -H
O w
> a!
J
w
C >)
0) cd
u pq
*j -p
^ (A
O 05
S O
OOO
o oo
OOO
rH OCO
COCO^
■=f-=j-o
OOO
OOO
OOO
mo m
OOO
OOO
OOO
mo H
mtnvo
OOO
OOO
OOO
aoo
irwo o
mv£i o
OOO
vD <T\CM
CT\cr\0
CO
C
^
(U
Li
•H
■H
r-i
3
>J
ft
a
^
p.
0)
:3
(X
P
W
4)
^.
E
■o
o
<1>
p
4->
fl]
;h
3
0
p
1
OOO
OOO
OOO
iTio r^
CM ov=r
\0 0\<H
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
t~-ir\iri
^ OO
<DC>t~
CJ>mm
CnCTvON
mmm
OOO
OOO
OOO
o o
OOO
OO
int^in
CO m
moo o
O rH
oj r^
Oj c\j
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
0\0\0\
r-i r-{ f-\
CO mm
r-\ f-ii-i
H CM m
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
coco m
mcr>o>
CArH O
ONmj-
j^ mrr>
irwD
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
O^O^O^
OOO
©"©"o'
C3v=tH
C-CO^
OCO ON
(j\o m
Oj OJ OJ
■^ rH
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
c^t^t-
c-c-t^
mmo^
t-vovo
^VD
OOO
o o
o o
o"o"
o Ln
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
CO o o
<J\0 0
OOO
o t--o\
OJ O i-H
rH iH
H mm
o o o
888
OOO
88
O CMrH
t-^DO
COON
tnco
rH rH
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
\D CT\C\J
ONONO
'"i
p
c
0)
,s
p
QJ
<D
t^
s
■H
3
bQ
cr
C
0)
-H
K
c
T^
Jh
<u
p
Oj
cc
^
OJ S5 .H
u
<v
«
P
0)
C
3
OJ
e
p
<u
<u
(h
s
iH
13
iH
CT
oJ
<U
p
PS
O
H
OOO
OOO
OOO
^ o o
o r-o
rHJ^- O
OOO
OOO
OOO
r^ mo
yD mco
rH O iH
OOO
OOO
OOO
mmo
mc7NC\j
CM OJ m
OOO
oo o
OOO
o o o
oh-h-
CM CM mi
OOO
OOO
OOO
o'o'o
mt^^
CTMTvOD
ooo
OOO
ooo
r- ^ ^
-a >
OOO
0) 05
"^ CM t^
■rl
o cr>m
(m oj
•H Jh
mm^
P 0)
c s
<u
■a m
-r^ 0)
OO o
•H
OOO
CrH
oo^o^
a> ft
0) ft
OOO
P 3
rHH t--
(0
00 rH m
U -P
•1> O t4
rH CM OJ
•H C 0)
■p -p
■H 0) a!
rH > S
-H Oj
cjx:-p
OOO
Q] (0
OOO
<M j: o
o^o^o^
CJ o
lU -rH
OOO
ojC S
moco
• C S O
"jDco r-
P Oj rH
'^ >> '■
mLit m
Oj <U 0) (•-.
(^ > <1) ^
a c -H
(-. 0 P t.
0) O -H 3
OOO
> rH o
ooo
0 t.^ o
OOO
QJ O O
V, +J 0)
o^o"©*
m o! <i-. -o
CO t~m
P * rH
rH O h-
0] 0) 3
S -o o 0
CM^ in
(U C o
■O (0 05
C O >iP
OOO
3 ft 4> <U
OOO
O O > (l>
OOO
J^ t^ C tn
Wft O 1
OOO
a (D
t--OJCO
W -CJ t<
\D ONm
3 C 0) U
H ttJ I-. 05
r-^
ft 3
"P C
Jh -D 3 0
0) QJ tM ^
P N rH
OOO
03 -H >,rH
OOO
? t4 ^ ^
OOO
O E
o x: p
OOO
C 4-> ttJ t--
\0 CMMD
3 3 E •
COCO OJ
O 0) CM
U 0)
rH OJ
hC *J3 P
O C O O
C-H P J3
Sp 05
OOO
« w
OOO
(1> ^ p tn
OOO
O X C O
Ol (U 0)
OOO
i^- e w
m^o o
t. E 0) P
my3 o
3 0 tH C
W ^^ fH Q)
r-i
^ 3 E
^ CttJ
o n 0) ^
C ^^-H
o o p
-1^ j^ &
<U -P 0) 0)
'^ od p ^
>^-p cd
J- SP
tu O (U
<M P.P C
td E (u
«-H C rH
td
ta Vi la C
0) O 0) O
ooo
■O TJ T3 -H
\D cr>CM
3 3 3 *J
a\o\o
rH rH rH -H
rH rH CM
0 0 0-0
C C CO
MMH <:
^^J^l
-71-
Expansion of waste water reclamation Is mentioned as
a possible source of future water supply In the South Coastal
area. Although this source Is not considered In this report
for other areas. It Is possible that a portion of their net
water requirements could also be supplied In this manner.
Present estimates of local water supplies In certain
of the hydrologlc areas have been based on limited Information.
The needs for further studies in these areas have been identified,
where possible.
North Coastal Area
The North Coastal area has the most abundant water
supplies of any of the State's hydrologlc study areas. The
long-term mean annual runoff of all streams in the area totals
29.7 million acre-feet. This is more than 40 percent of the
total for the State.
Despite its copious water supplies, the North Coastal
area will have to depend on water development facilities for its
in-area water requirements because of the maldistribution of
runoff within the season. Some of the great rivers which account
for much of the area's winter runoff are little more than small
creeks during the summer and fall. Ground v/ater resources are
limited to widely scattered alluvlated valleys and coastal
plains.
-72-
FIGURES
1020
1990
1960
10
1
20 30
1 1
40 50
1 1
60
1
1
1
1
1 URBAN
IRRIGATED |
REMAINING IRRIGABLE |
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
1 II
1,000,000 PERSONS
POPULATION
1.000,000 ACRES
LAND USE
40
Totol net woter requirements
AGRICULTURAL
MUNICIPAL a INDUSTRI
^
10 20 30 40 50
_l \ \ \ L
1,000.000 ACRE -FEET
APPLIED WATER
REQUIREMENTS
^. .^ r .1 Son Froncisco Boy
Nortel I Coostol '^ '^" I I
I960
1970
1990
YEAR
2000
2020
NET WATER REQUIREMENTS
STATEWIDE TOTALS
FIGURE 7
2020
1990
I960
2 4
1 1
6
1
8
1
100.000 PERSONS
POPULATION
1
n
~] URBAN
IRRIGATED
REMAINING IRRIGABLE
1 2 3 4 5 6
1 1 1 1 1 1
100.000 ACRES
LAND USE
AGRICULTURAL
^
MUNICIPAL a INDUSTRIAL
8 10
100.000 ACRE-FEET
APPLIED WATER
REQUIREMENTS
LlI
q:
o
<
I960
/
/ Possible odditionol
/ exports from the
/ Lower Eel ond/or
/ Klomatti Rivers.
^
Conjunctive local use/expoi
I Local ground lond surface wGtef| development ■ projects i I
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
YEAR
PROJECTED WATER SUPPLIES AND NET WATER REQUIREMENTS
NORTH COASTAL HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
FIGURE 8
.%
Cufin LAKl
■R£S ■ ~-
Y
?
NOTE The numerous plans under study for
pment of the lower Trinity and Klomoth^
are indicated by the damsites shown on
these streams. Potential yield of the plans '
ranges from 3,000.000 to 6,000,000 af/yr
TRINITY RIVER DIVISION CVP
960,000 AF/YR
KEY TO STUDY AREAS
WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
EXISTING OR
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
4UTM0BI2ED
PROPOSED
RESERVOIRS
AQUEDUCTS
■•^
77)^7^
■•^
POwesPLflNTS
■
0
■
PUMPING PLANTS
•
0
•
IMPORTS/EXPORTS
(1990 CONDITIONS!
^
K//4;>
^
HHHj UR8AN
I960 LA
r^^^^Di iRR
ND USE
GATED 1
1 IRHIMBLE
1
VI II I f^ 700,000 AF/YR
UPPER EEL RIVER DEVELOPMENT
ALTERNATIVE EXPORT ROUTES
500,000 AF/YR
NORTH COASTAL
HYDRGLOGIC STUDY AREA
POTTER VALLEY
DIVERSION
PRESENT AND PROPOSED
167.000 AF/YR ^^jQp yVATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
SCALE OF MILES
FIGURE 9
2020
1990
I960
2
1
4 6
1 1
8 10
1 1
12
1
1,000,000 PERSONS
POPULATION
URBAN 1
J IRRIGATED
1 REMAINING IRRIGABLE
1
1
1
1
2 4 6 8 10 12
1 1 1 1 1 1
100,000 ACRES
LAND USE
f
AGRICULTURAL
MUNICIPAL a INDUSTRIAL
!)
4 8 12 16 20 24
J I I \ \ L
100,000 ACRE-FEET
APPLIED WATER
REQUIREMENTS
2.400
2,000
West Sacramento Valley Canal-
In-oreo net water requirements
2020
PROJECTED WATER SUPPLIES AND NET WATER REQUIREMENTS
SAN FRANCISCO BAY HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
POTTER VALLEY
DIVERSION
167,000 AF/YR
SAN FRANCISCO BAY
HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
FIGURE 10
PRESENT AND PROPOSED
MAJOR WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
SCaLE OF MILES
e
'—
LEGEND
Knights \
Valley fies >.
WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
RESEBVOIBS
AQUEDUCTS
POWERPLANTS
PUMPING PLANTS
IMPORTS/EXPORTS
(1990 CONDITIONS)
EXISTING OR
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
AUTHORIZED PROPOSED
ZZ27^
I960 LAND USE
URBAN [ I IRRIGATED
~\ IRRIGABLE
PUTAH SOUTH CANAL
55,000 AF/YR
ssey I
WEST SACRAMENTO CANAL
25,000 AF/YR
NORTH BAY AQUEDUCT
,000 AF/YR
Foirfield
MOKELUMNE AQUEDUCT
300,000 AF/YR
CONTRA COSTA CANAL
175,000 AF/YR
SOUTH BAY AQUEDUCT
161,000 AF/YR
HETCH HETCHY
AQUEDUCT
290,000 AF/YF
KEY TO STUDY AREAS
NOTE:
Red crott-hatch indicotat tatimoted
«l«nt of urbon comptax.
SAN FELIPE DIVISION
55.000 AF/YR
FIGURE II
2020
1990
I960
100,000 PERSONS
POPULATION
URBAN
IRRIGATED
REMAINING IRRIGABLE
8
_L
100,000 ACRES
LAND USE
-^
AGRICULTURAL
MUNICIPAL a industrial'
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
I I I I I I I I I I
100,000 acre-feet
APPLIED WATER
REQUIREMENTS
1,600
1,200 —
I
iij
a.
o 800
<
<
CO
Z)
o
X
H
400 h-
I960
—
•
^^^Required additional supply
—
^^^ Colifornia Aqueduct
In-orea net woter
requirements -.^^
^^""^ " San Felipe Division
^^^
.
""kT
^^
' Imported supplies —
-\
Ground water overdraft
—
^_Safe yield of in-oreo ground ond
surface water supplies —
—
—
1
1 1
1 1 1
1970
1980
1990
YEAR
2000
2010
2020
PROJECTED WATER SUPPLIES AND NET WATER REQUIREMENTS
CENTRAL COASTAL HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
FIGURE 12
CENTRAL COASTAL
HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
NORTH SANTA CLARA SERVICE AREA
SAN FELIPE DIVISION
55,000 AF/YR
PRESENT AND PROPOSED
MAJOR WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
SCALE OF MILES
SAN FELIPE DIVISION CVP
130,000 AF/YR
LEGEND
WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
EXISTING OR
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
AUTHORIZED
PROPOSED
RESERVOIRS
aOUEDUCTS
POWERPLANTS
PUMPING PLANTS
IMPORTS /EXPORTS
(1990 CONDITIONS!
*^
0
0
■
•
■
•
y//A>
1 ■ ^ " j URBAN
I960 LAND USE
1 1 IRRIGATED |
1 IRRIGABLE
1
^ I COASTAL AQUEDUCT
^YUH^ 83,000 AF/YR
-l—fK^
sr ^'•
1.
< en ;.
KEY TO STUDY
AREAS
SANTA BARBARA
'^iY'^T^^fh^^
FIGURE 13
2020
1990
I960
1.000.000 PERSONS
POPULATION
]remaining irrigable
URBAN
irrigated
4
8
I
12
16
_1_
20
I
100,000 ACRES
LAND USE
^
AGRICULTURAL
MUNICIPAL a INDUSTRIAL
^
I 2 3 4 5 6
1.000.000 ACRE-FEET
APPLIED WATER
REQUIREMENTS
lij
li.
I
llJ
cr
o
<
z
o
_l
_1
i
In-oreo net woter requirements
•Ground water overdroft
Safe yield af in-areo ground ond surface water supplies
1
1
1
I960
1970
1980
1990
YEAR
2000
2010
2020
PROJECTED WATER SUPPLIES AND NET WATER REQUIREMENTS
SOUTH COASTAL HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
O _R_E__C o N
FIGURE 14
fNLl
SB
CALIFORNIA AQUEDUCT
WEST BRANCH
.502,000 A F/YR
ISFT DC.
\
'LOS ANGELES AQUEDUCT
470,000 AF/ YR
tK-—^^"^
\ \.'
VcV TB
)-
o\_\^
N.. r
-^ V.
<^
^c <
. rn }:
V
KEY TO STUDY AREAS
CALIFORNIA AQUEDUCT
EAST BRANCH
677,000 AF/YR
COLORADO RIVER
AQUEDUCT
540,000 AF/YR
LEGEND
WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
EXISTING OR
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
AUTHORIZED
PROPOSED
RESERVOIRS
AQUEDUCTS
POWERPLANTS
PUMPING PLANTS
IMPORTS/EXPORTS
(1990 CONDITIONS)
las^^m^
0
0
■
•
YJ/J"'
I960 LAND USE
1 1 URBAN
1 1 IRRIGATED |
1 IRRIGABLE
1
SOUTH COASTAL
HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
PRESENT AND PROPOSED
MAJOR WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
SCALE OF MILES
6 0 8 16
FIGURE 15
2020
1990
I960
12 3 4 5
1,000,000 PERSONS
POPULATION
1
1
1
~| URBAN
IRRIGATED]
REMAINING IRRIGABLE |
1 2 3
1 1 1 1 1 1
1,000,000 ACRES
LAND USE
^AGRICULTURAL
V
^
MUNICIPAL a
INDUSTRIAL
y
2 4 6
1 1 1
8
1
10
1
1,000,000 ACRE-FEET
APPLIED WATER
REQUIREMENTS
UJ
t
UJ
cc
o
<
7 —
6 —
5 —
4 —
-, 3 —
2 —
staging of projects wtiicti involve
imports to and exports from f tils orea
under ttie Delto Pooling Concept are
indicated on Figures52and 33
—
In-area net woter requirements ^^
-
—
^^^-^0^^^^^^
—
—
—
—
1
•— In -area surface water supplies
—
"■"
J
—
"~- Ground water supplies
—
1 1
1 1 1
1
I960
1970
1980
1990
YEAR
2000
2010
2020
PROJECTED WATER SUPPLIES AND NET WATER REQUIREMENTS
SACRAMENTO BASIN HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
LEGEND
WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
EXISTING OR
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
AUTHORIZED
PROPOSED
RESERVOIRS
■•^^
e2c^
■•^^
nOuEOUCTS
PjWERPLflNTS
■
0
■
■^LIMPING PLANTS
•
0
•
EXPORTS
■.(MTIONSI
^
K///0
^
I960 LAND USE
i:^^ .»B.-,
( 1 iRBlGOTtO 1 1 IBSICABLE
SACRAMENTO BASIN
HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
Jeoi
FIGURE 16
PRESENT AND PROPOSED
MAJOR WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS J^
SCALE OF MILES
\ s r 7s K 1 1' Y 0 u
TRINITY RIVER
DIVERSION CVP
961,000 AF/YR
700,000 AF/YR l^////J> ^^
UPPER EEL RIVER DEVELOPMENT
ALTERNATIVE IMPORT ROUTES
500,000 AF/YR
LITTLE TRUCKEE
RIVER DIVERSION
7,000 AF/YR
ECHO LAKE !
DIVERSION
,000 AF/YR
CAMINO CONDUIT CVP
FOLSOM-MALBY 12,000 AF/YR
CONDUIT CVP
10,000 AF/YR
PUTAH SOUTH CANAL
125,000 AF/YR
KEY TO STUDY AREAS
«
WEST SACRAMENTO
CANAL CVP
85,000 AF/YR
FOLSOM SOUTH CANAL
CVP 425,000 AF/YR
FIGURE 17
2020
1990
I960
100,000 PERSONS
POPULATION
1 URBAN
IRRIGATED
REMAINING IRRIGABLE
4
_L
6
_L
8
J_
10
100,000 ACRES
LAND USE
AGRICULTURAL
>
\
MUNICIPAL a INDUSTRIAL*^
i
1
1 2 3
1 1 1
4
1
1,000,000 ACRE -FEET
APPLIED WATER
REQUIREMENTS
UJ
iij
u.
I
UJ
o
<
z
o
I960
Staging of projects which involve
imports to and exports from this area
under the Delta Pooling Concept ore
indicoted on Figures 32and 33.
In-areo net water reguirements
(exclusive of salinity-control
requirements)
PROJECTED WATER SUPPLIES AND NET WATER REQUIREMENTS
DELTA-CENTRAL SIERRA HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
LEGEND
WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
RESERVOIRS
flOUEOUCTS
POWERPLANTS
PUMPING PLANTS
EXISTING OR
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
4UTH0BIZED
0
PROPOSED
I960 LAND USE
HMM IRRIGATED
c
^ IRHIGOBLE
FIGURE 18
CAMINO CONDUIT CVP
12,000 AF/YR
FOLSOM-MALBY CONDUIT CVP
10,000 AF/YR
ssss^
Sopiago Rei, ■• j ^^^ -
Jackson
FOLSOM SOUTH CANAL CVP X(K^ <j^\k T"''?^ ^ % A
425.000 AF/YR ^^^ ' \ Vj^' - Son
Andreas
WEST SACRAMENTO CANAL CVP>A
85,000 AF/YR rVT
PUTAH
SOUTH CANAL'
125,000 AF/YR
^%^ '? 4?^'* ^^
^°^%-^.
-Co
/
PUTAH SOUTH CANAL
55,000 AF/YR
WEST SACRAMENTO CANAL CVP^
25.000 AF/YR
MOKELUMNE AQUEDUCX
300,000 AF/YR
EAST SIDE CANAL CVP
1,250.000 AF/YR
CONTRA COSTA CANAL
175.000 AF/YR
SOUTH BAY AQUEDUCT
161,000 AF/YR
SAN JOAQUIN DRAIN
370.000 AF/YR
DELTA-MENDOTA CANAL CVP
2,840,000 AF/YR
(Including San Luis Unit CVP)
CALIFORNIA AQUEDUCT
4,024,000 AF/YR
(Including San Felipe Division CVP)
HETCH HETCHY AQUEDUCT
290,000 AF/YR
DELTA -CENTRAL SIERRA
HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
PRESENT AND PROPOSED
MAJOR WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
SCALE OF MILES
KEY TO STUDY AREAS
FIGURE 19
2020
1990
I960
2
1
4 6
1 1
8 10 12 14
1 1 1 1
16
1
100,000 PERSONS
POPULATION
URBAN
IRRIGATED
REMAINING IRRIGABLE
—J
1
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
100,000 ACRES
LAND USE
AGRICULTURAL
J\
MUNICIPAL a INDUSTRIAL
I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
J \ \ \ I I I I
1,000,000 ACRE-FEET
APPLIED WATER
REQUIREMENTS
I960
In-oreo ground and surfoce water supplies
1970
1980
1990
YEAR
2000
2010
2020
PROJECTED WATER SUPPLIES AND NET WATER REQUIREMENTS
SAN JOAQUIN BASIN HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
FIGURE 20
..■••CALIFORNIA AQUEDUCT
4,024,000 AF/YR
(Including San Felipe Division CVP)
• DELTA MENDOTA CANAL CVP
2,840,000 AF/YR
(Including San Luis Unit CVP)
LEGEND
WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
EXISTING OR
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
Authorised
PROPOSED
RESEfivOfRS
aqueducts
powerplants
■•^
£2^^-
•^
■
0
■
PUMPING PLANTS
•
0
•
IMPORTS /EXPORTS
(1990 CONOlTiONSl
■^
K///t>
[^^^^^ URBAN
I960 LAND USE
1 , 1 ,RR
GATED 1
.;j IPRICABLE
1
a\iDn K^
SAN JOAQUIN BASIN
HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
PRESENT AND PROPOSED
MAJOR WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
SCALE OF MILES
FIGURE 21
2020
1990
I960
1
1
2 3
1 1
4
1
1,000,000 PERSONS
POPULATION
1
URBAN
IRRIGATED
REMAINING IRRIGABLE
2
J_
3
_L
1,000,000 ACRES
LAND USE
AGRICULTURAL
MUNICIPAL a INDUSTRIAL
f
2 4 6
J I L
8 10 12
J I L
1,000,000 ACRE-FEET
APPLIED WATER
REQUIREMENTS
LlI
O
<
2010
I960 1970 1980 1990 2000
YEAR
PROJECTED WATER SUPPLIES AND NET WATER REQUIREMENTS
TULARE BASIN HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
2020
FIGURE 22
EAST SIDE FRIANT-KERN CANAL
CANAL 1,115,000 AF/YR^^»rr«r//^
SAN JOAQUIN 1,500,000 AF/YR f ''^
DRAIN MillerlonLake^^fJ , ^.^ ^ /
(Including San % 330,000 AF/YR % Vf^i^^'/^^-f*?^
Luis Unit CVP)
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
5,149,000 AF/YR
O _"__£ G 0 N
COASTAL BRANCH
83,000 AF/YR
KEY TO STUDY AREAS
LEGEND
CALIFORNIA AQUEDUCT
2,466,000 AF/YR
WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
RESERVOIRS
AQUEDUCTS
POWERPLANTS
PUMPING PLANTS
IMPORTS /EXPORTS
(1990 CONDITIONS)
EXISTING OR
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
m
AUTHORIZED
G
I960 LAND USE
I I URBAN I . I IRRIGATED
~| IRRIGABLE
TULARE BASIN
HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
PRESENT AND PROPOSED
MAJOR WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
SCALE OF MILES
FIGURE 23
2020
1990
I960
1,000 PERSONS
POPULATION
URBAN
IRRIGATED
REMAINING IRRIGABLE
3
_L
100,000 ACRES
LAND USE
5
J_
AGRICULTURAL
MUNICIPAL a INDUSTRIAL^
I
2
I
100,000 ACRE-FEET
APPLIED WATER
REQUIREMENTS
^uu
^^^^
In-areo net water requirements v
^^
^^^^^^^^
300
—
^<^
-^^^^^
—
H
UJ
UJ
Exports: J
Little Truckee Diversion ^__^^^
Ectio Lake Diversion >. ^^"'"^^^^^^^
^
^ Innport ,
Tule Loke Reservoir
U-
_— -— r^^^^^^^^*^
UJ
u 200
<
^^^^^
—
THOUSAND
8
—
In-orea ground and surface water supplies-.
1 1 1
1
I 1
—
I960
1970
1980
1990
YEAR
2000
2010
2020
PROJECTED WATER SUPPLIES AND NET WATER REQUIREMENTS
NORTH LAHONTAN HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
LEGEND
WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
EXISTING OR
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
AUTHORIZED
PROPOSED
HESERVOIRS
■•^
Eaz=^
■*^
flOUEOUCTS
POWERPi afj-";
■
0
■
PUMPING PLANTS
•
0
•
IMPORTS /EXPORTS
(1990 CONDITIONS)
^
y//A>
■^
I960 LA
^^^^n iRR
ND USE
j^Hil URBAN
GATED 1
1 IRRIOABLE
O R E G O W
KEY TO STUDY AREAS
FIGURE 24
S I E ^R R A CO
LITTLE TRUCKEE RIVER .^ v, i-
DIVERSION
7,000 AF/YR
ECHO LAKE
DIVERSION
2,000 AF/YR
NORTH LAHONTAN
HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
PRESENT AND PROPOSED
MAJOR WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
kBridijeoorf s
FIGURE 25
2020
1990
I960
100.000 PERSONS
POPULATION
URBAN
IRRIGATED
24
1
REMAINING IRRIGABLE
—I
4 8 12 16 20
100,000 ACRES
LAND USE
^
AGRICULTURAL
MUNICIPALS INDUSTRIAL
t>
\
12 3 4 5 6 7 8
100.000 ACRE-FEET
APPLIED WATER
REQUIREMENTS
800
700
600
uj 500
ii.
I
UJ
oc
^ 400
o
2
<
in
ID
O
X
300
200 —
100 —
Exported from area , Los Angeles Aqueduct
In-areo net woter requirement
Import -Californio Aqueduct
Loco! ground woter safe yield
J \ L
I960
1970
1980
1990
YEAR
2000
2010
2020
PROJECTED WATER SUPPLIES AND NET WATER REQUIREMENTS
SOUTH LAHONTAN HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
EXISTING OR
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
AUTMOniZEO
PROPOSED
RESERVOIRS
■•p-
E2iy—
■a^
AQUEDUCTS
POWEBPLflNTS
■
:?
■
PUMPING PLANTS
•
•
IMPORTS/EXPORTS
(1990 CONDITIONSl
■^
KZ4>
I960 LAND USE
1 1 URBAN
1 \ (RR.MTEO 1
1 IRRIGABLE
1
FIGURE 26
'/
\ i '' E2ZZZZr>
es V'-
^/f SP/i,
KES
WEST BRANCH
CALIFORNIA AQUEDUCT
1,502,000 AF/YR
EAST BRANCH
CALIFORNIA AQUEDUCT ri
677,000 AF/YR V
SOUTH LAHONTAN
HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
PRESENT AND PROPOSED
MAJOR WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
SCALE OF MILES
8 0 a 16
I I
FIGURE 27
2020
1990
I960
2 4
1 1
6 8 10
1 1 1
12
1
100,000 PERSONS
POPULATION
IL
URBAN
IRRIGATED
REMAINING IRRIGABLE
1
12 3 4 5 6 7 8
J I I I I I I L
100,000 ACRES
LAND USE
AGRICULTURAL
MUNICIPAL a INDUSTRIAL
^
12 3 4
J I I I [ I L
1,000,000 ACRE- FEET
APPLIED WATER
REQUIREMENTS
LlI
o
<
7 —
6 —
5 —
In-oreo net woter requirement
7
X/
Possible odditionol agnculturol
woter demond If low cost supplies
become ovoiloble
Ground woter overdroft
2 —
Colorodo River -
0
I960
:y-
Import - Calitornio Aqueduct"
Required additional supply
Safe yield of in-areo woter supplies
1970
1980
1990
YEAR
2000
2010
2020
PROJECTED WATER SUPPLIES AND NET WATER REQUIREMENTS
COLORADO DESERT HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
FIGURE 28
LEGEND
WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
SESERVOIRS
aOUEDUCTS
POWERPLANTS
PUMPING PLANTS
IMPORTS/EXPORTS
(1990 CONDITIONS)
EXISTING OR
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
AUTHORIZED
0
0
I960 LAND USE
■■■ IRRIGATED
I I
COLORADO DESERT
HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREA
PRESENT AND PROPOSED
MAJOR WATER DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
SCALE OF MILES
0 8 16
\
#1^
NOTE:
Water imported to tfie Colorado Desert Hydrologic Study Area
by the Californio Aqueduct will be transported through the
woter contractors' distribution systems.
:alifornia
AQUEDUCT r
9,000 AF/YR »
ezzzzz^
■-Ttl
-^/.
^
SAN
B
E
R
N
A R D
N
0
1
V
E
R
S
1 D E
C
0
Palm Springs
^
COLORADO RIVER
AQUEDUCT
540,000 AF/YR
MPERIAL CO
juna Res
KEY TO STUDY AREAS
There are a number of opportunities for local surface
water developments. An example is the proposed Butler Valley
Dam and Reservoir on the lower Mad River about 20 miles east of
Eureka. Its location is shown on Figure 8. At an estimated
cost of 25 million dollars, this reservoir could be constructed
i-^ith a capacity of 400_,000 acre-feet. It would provide an
annual water yield of about 220,000 acre-feet, flood protection
along the lower Mad River and substantial recreation benefits.
Its water yield could satisfy the growth of water requirements
in Humboldt County and could replace water supplies of the
upper Mad River which in turn could be diverted through the
proposed lower Trinity River system into the Sacramento Valley.
The major conservation facilities being planned in
the North Coastal area primarily for export purposes will also
make water available for in-area use. These are discussed
below and in the next section.
The California Water Plan demonstrated the general
feasibility of conserving and transporting to water-deficient
areas of the State a significant portion of the surplus runoff
in the North Coastal area. Studies in the Department's North
Coastal Area Investigation, which were reported in Bulletin
No. 136, refined this concept and outlined it in more detail.
The new estimates indicate that approximately 10 million acre-
feet of firm water supply could be developed in the area by the
staged construction of a series of major projects. This would
be in addition to the yields of existing developments for local
and export water supplies and in addition to estimated streamflow
maintenance requirements for fisheries preservation.
-73-
Current projections , described in the next section,
indicate that major increments of water supply from the North
Coastal area will be needed for the Central Valley Project and
State Water Project beginning in the late 1980's. Figure 7 shows
the projected staging of developments in the Upper Eel, Trinity,
Mad, and Van Duzen River Basins to meet an estimated combined
water demand on the two projects of between 2.5 and 3.0 million
acre-feet by the year 2000. This indicated staging is predicated
upon the need for new water supplies only. Construction scheduling
of these multiple-purpose projects may also be determined by the
need for other project services such as flood control and water
quality control. Figure 7 further indicates the possibility that
supplies from the Lower Eel and Klamath Rivers may also be needed
after the year 2000. These potential projects are described in
the next section.
San Francisco Bay Area
The San Francisco Bay Hydrologic Study Area, considered
as a whole, has sufficient water supplies developed or projected
for development to meet its requirements until about 2020 (Figure
9). This area has a complex system of water supply, however, and
deficiencies will occur in some local are'as after 1990.
For the purposes of estimating water supplies and
projecting water development, this study area has been divided
into two subareas. The first is the area surrounding San
Francisco Bay proper and extending to the east and south of the
bay. Local surface and ground water supplies in this subarea
have been almost fully developed and there is heavy dependence
on imported water. The southern part of the area, particularly
Santa Clara Valley, has had a condition of significant ground
-74-
water overdraft for a number of years ^ which has caused sea
water intrusion near the Bay. Water now imported through the
South Bay Aqueduct of the State Water Project and importations
"by the proposed San Felipe Division of the Central Valley Project
should eliminate this condition.
The second subarea lies north of San Francisco Bay
and includes the Russian River Basin, Although present and
projected imports to this area provide the primary water supplies
for certain localities, the subarea as a whole has substantial
quantities of developable local supplies. Most of the projected
increase in supplies obtained from local developments (Figure 9)
will serve this subarea. The largest local sources are the
Russian River and its tributaries. Analyses of proposed projects
indicate that over 500,000 acre-feet per year of firm water
supply can be developed in the Russian River Basin to assist in
meeting the growth of net water requirements.
The authorized and proposed projects in the San
Francisco Bay area are shown on Figure 10. Warm Springs Reser-
voir, authorized for construction by the Corps of Engineers,
will provide flood control on the Russian River and will con-
tribute 90,000 acre-feet of new water supply for use in
Sonoma and Marin Counties.
The largest of the proposed projects would be Knights
Valley Reservoir which would be formed by dams on Maacama and
Franz Creeks. These creeks are tributaries of the Russian
River. The reservoir would regulate natural runoff of the two
-75-
streams and would store water pumped from the Russian River
during periods of excess flov/. At a capacity of 1.5 million
acre-feet, the reservoir would provide an annual water supply
of approximately 350^000 acre-feet for Napa Valley and Sonoma
and Marin Counties, v/ould furnish flood control, and would
accommodate exceptionally high recreational usage. The cost
would be about 200 million dollars.
The remaining two proposals are Big Sulphur Reservoir
on Big Sulphur Creek (a tributary of the Russian River) and
Walker Reservoir on Walker Creek. Big Sulphur Reservoir would
be chiefly for flood control, and Walker Reservoir would provide
local water service in Marin County.
Central Coastal Area
In the Central Coastal Hydrologlc Study Area, local
water supplies will not meet the area's long-range water re-
quirements. To sustain the projected growth of the area, water
must be Imported from the Central Valley or obtained from other
sources. By the year 2020, over one-third of the water require-
ments are expected to be met from outside sources, as shown on
Figure 11.
The Central Coastal area now depends entirely on local
water supplies. In portions of San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara
Counties and in the Hollister-Gllroy area, the local supplies
are nearing full development. These localities will shortly be
turning to imported water from the State Water Project and from
-76-
the Bureau of Reclamation's proposed San Felipe Division, shown
on Figure 12. In other areas more water can be developed from
locally available supplies.
A large portion of the local water supply in the
Central Coastal area is derived from ground water, and several
of the ground water basins are being overdrawn. The aggregate
overdraft in the entire area is probably about 70,000 acre-feet
per year, but additional study is required to confirm its magni-
tude. Much of the overdraft is expected to be eliminated by
imported water from the California Aqueduct and from the proposed
San Felipe Division. Conjunctive operation of ground water
basins with existing and future surface water reservoirs would
also help to overcome the overdrafts.
Possible local projects have been identified which
could provide an additional yield of about l80,000 acre-feet
per year. A large portion of this potential supply would come
from development of the relatively minor streams along the coast
of San Luis Obispo County. When developed, probably after 1990,
these supplies would be conveyed by conduit to the San Luis
Obispo metropolitan area for municipal and industrial use.
By the year 2020, the annual yield from local develop-
ment is expected to increase to about 900,000 acre-feet, repre-
senting essentially full development of local ground and surface
water supplies. Present plans are for annual Imports from the
State Water Project and the San Felipe Division totaling 189,000
acre-feet by 2020. With a net water requirement of I.58 million
acre-feet in 2020 it is estimated that the area will require an
-77-
additional annual imported supply of approximately 490,000 acre-
feet. This amount is assumed in this report to be met by imports
from the Central Valley, through future additions to the State
Water Resources Development System.
South Coastal Area
The South Coastal Hydrologic Study Area presently
depends on three sources of water, as shown on Figure 13 . These
are local surface and ground water supplies, which are almost
fully developed and in fact are overdrawn in some areas; the Los
Angeles Aqueduct, which is presently being enlarged to deliver
approximately 472,000 acre-feet per year; and the Colorado
River Aqueduct, which is now delivering water at almost its
full capacity, after conveyance losses, of about l.l8 million
acre-feet per year. Importations to portions of the South
Coastal area are expected to exceed water requirements until
about 1970. This excess will enable additional interim water
replenishment. Beginning in the mid-1970' s, net deliveries
through the Colorado River Aqueduct are expected to be gradually
reduced to about 540,000 acre-feet per year, as a result of the
U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Arizona v. California, which
v;as discussed in Chapter I.
The major local surface water supply development which
has been proposed in the South Coastal area is the Sespe Creek
development in Ventura County. This has been studied by both
the United V/ater Conservation District and the Bureau of Reclama-
tion. The Bureau's proposal would consist of Topatopa and Cold
.78-
J
Springs Reservoirs, with capacities totaling 410,000 acre-feet,
and a conveyance conduit. The project would have a total annual
yield of about 27,500 acre-feet. The cost of the development
would be about 68 million dollars.
Figure 14 shows the locations of the principal existing
and proposed local surface storage features and the routes of
import works.
Before the impact of the Colorado River loss is felt,
deliveries from the State Water Project to The Metropolitan Water
District of Southern California and other cities and water
agencies in the South Coastal area will begin. Annual deliveries
are scheduled to commence in 1971 at 251,000 acre-feet and to
increase to a maximum of 2,l80,000 acre-feet per year by 1990.
This import, together with the supplies described above, should
meet the area's water needs until shortly after 1990, when
additional supplies will be needed.
It is expected that by 2020, this requirement for
additional water will have increased to about 1.5 million acre-
feet per year. This will probably be met from several sources.
Significant technological advances are being made in saline
water conversion. This process and additional waste water
reclamation will probably meet a portion of the requirement.
It is assumed conservatively for this report that, by 2020, a
total of 300,000 acre-feet per year could be produced at favor-
able costs in parts of the South Coastal area by these two
methods. It is assumed that the remaining requirement of
-79-
approximately 1.2 million acre-feet per year will be met by
additional imports from Northern California through the State
Water Resources Development System.
Sacramento Basin
With a long-term mean annual runoff totaling slightly
more than 20 million acre-feet, the Sacramento Basin Hydrologic
Study Area is second only to the North Coastal area in terms of
water supply. V/ater development for a v;ide range of purposes
has been proceeding for many years. At present in the basin,
there is a total of about l6 million acre-feet of surface reser-
voir storage either existing or under construction. In addition,
there are many miles of canals for conveyance of surface water
supplies. The locations of the major water development facilities
are shown on Figure l6.
Ground water is used extensively for agricultural and
domestic purposes throughout the Sacramento Basin, particularly
on the valley floor portion. The projected increase in ground
water usage, indicated on Figure 15, is predicated upon continua-
tion of the present pattern of ground water development in the
basin, which is largely independent of surface storage facilities.
The Department has made preliminary estimates that con-
junctive operation of ground water basins of the Sacramento
Valley with surface storage facilities could develop an addi-
tional annual yield of about 1.2 million acre-feet for both
local and export use. Additional study of this possibility is
required to evaluate Its feasibility. The costs of such yield
-80-
should be compared with costs of water from surface developments
in the basin and of water Imported from the North Coastal area.
It has been assumed for this report that use of In-area
surface v;ater supplies will Increase by about 1.2 million acre-
feet from the present to 2020 (Figure 15). This growth would be
accommodated by storage and transportation facilities existing
and under construction and by proposed additional facilities.
Examples of proposed new facilities are shown on
Figure l6. The West Sacramento Valley Canal Unit of the Central
Valley Project, including Sites Reservoir as an off stream pumped-
storage feature, v;ould provide a firm water supply of about
355jOOO acre-feet per year at a cost of about l66 million dollars,
The proposed New Bullards Bar Reservoir, on the Yuba River, would
have a capacity of 930^000 acre-feet and would provide flood
control, power, recreation and about 370^000 acre-feet of new
water supply yield at a total cost of about l88 million dollars.
Other facilities proposed in the Sacramento Basin include the
Allen Camp Unit of the Central Valley Project on the Pit River;
Millville, Hulen and Dippingvat Reservoirs on upper tributaries
of the Sacramento River, and Wilson Valley Reservoir on Cache
Creek or Indian Valley Reservoir on the North Fork of Cache
Creek.
Delta-Central Sierra Area
The Delta-Central Sierra Hydrologic Study Area is the
hub of the major state and federal water development facilities
in California, The locations of important features are shown
on Figure l8.
-81-
The aggregate quantities of water which either origi-
nate within, or flow into the Delta-Central Sierra area far
exceed the present and projected water requirements of the area
itself. The geographic distribution of these water supplies,
however, is such that ground water overdraft conditions have
developed along the eastern edge of the valley floor portion
of the area and northwest of the Delta.
Construction of the authorized Folsom South Canal by
the Bureau of Reclamation will enable substantial reduction of
the ground water overdrafts, and will provide for most of the
anticipated increase in water requirements indicated on Figure
17. The West Sacramento Canal is expected to meet the remaining
requirements in the northwestern portion of the area.
The Peripheral Canal, an authorized feature of the
State Water Project, will convey state and federal water around
the Delta as a link in the system to convey water southward. It
is proposed as a joint facility of the federal Central Valley
Project and the State Water Project. It will also provide for
local water supply, water quality control, fish and wildlife
preservation and enhancement, recreation and other purposes
within the Delta.
Besides these works, the Bureau of Reclamation has
proposed a future development on the Cosumnes River for local
water supply in that watershed and to provide flood control,
recreation, and fish and wildlife enhancement. The major unit
of this development would be Nashville Reservoir with a capacity
of 900,000 acre-feet. This reservoir, together with three
-82-
auxiliary storage \inits and associated distribution and recrea-
tion facilities comprising the Initial phase, would cost about
158 million dollars and would provide a firm yield of 150,000
acre-feet annually for portions of the foothills in Amador and
Sacramento Counties. A future phase, consisting of two more
reservoirs, would cost an additional 25 million dollars and
would yield about 25,000 acre-feet annually.
The proposed East Side Canal, shown on Figure I8,
would constitute an extension of the Folsom South Canal, but
would not provide water service within the Delta-Central Sierra
area. It would include a pumped diversion from the Sacramento
River near Hood,
San Joaquin Basin
Water resources originating within the San Joaquin
Basin Hydrologic Study Area have been largely sufficient to
meet in-area requirements and to support a substantial export
to the San Francisco Bay area (Figure 19). The major existing
import, through the Delta-Mendota Canal, is intended chiefly
to exchange water for that V7hich is exported southward into the
Tulare Basin through the Friant-Kern Canal. The Delta-Mendota
Canal also provides service to lands along the west side of the
valley.
Surface water, which serves about two-thirds of the
area, has been extensively developed and plans now in progress
would augment these works. Ground water serves the remaining
needs of the area, and is in abundant supply considering the
-83-
basin as a whole. There are local areas, however, where ground
water levels have "been declining and where overdraft conditions
are suspected.
By about the year 2020, annual use of in-area water
supplies is expected to reach about 2.9 million acre-feet, an
Increase of about 800,000 acre-feet over 196O use. This increase
will be permitted by facilities under construction, such as New
Exchequer Reservoir on the Merced River, and by those authorized,
such as New Melones Reservoir on the Stanislaus River and New
Don Pedro Reservoir on the Tuolumne River. New Melones Reservoir
is authorized for construction by the Corps of Engineers and for
operation by the Bureau of Reclamation as part of the Central
Valley Project. It will have a capacity of 2.H- million acre-feet
and will provide water conservation, flood control, hydroelectric
power, fish and wildlife enhancement, and recreation. The total
cost will be about 122 million dollars. New Don Pedro Reservoir
will be built by the City of San Francisco and the Turlock and
Modesto Irrigation Districts to provide flood control and to
firm urban water supply exports by the city and local Irrigation
supplies of the districts. It will probably have a capacity of
about two million acre-feet, but this has not been determined
finally. The locations of these authorized reservoirs are shown
on Figure 20.
Additional water requirements in the foothill areas
may also lead to construction of new local facilities. For
example, in the Tuolumne River Basin the Bureau of Reclamation
is proposing the Sonora-Keystone Unit of the Central Valley
-84-
Project. It would provide approximately 46,000 acre-feet of
water per year for agricultural , municipal, and industrial use.
Tuolumne County Water District No. 2 proposes a smaller project
in the same area to provide a water supply of 5,000 acre-feet
and to furnish recreation and fisheries enhancement.
Present and proposed imports, including the proposed
first stage of the East Side Division, Central Valley Project,
when operated in concert with local supplies, should meet the
area's water requirements until about the year 2000. Import
requirements, in excess of the capabilities of present and pro-
posed projects, are projected to increase to about 300,000
acre-feet by 2020.
Tulare Basin
The highly developed agricultural economy of the
Tulare Basin is dependent upon runoff from the Sierra Nevada,
Imports from the Central Valley Project, and ground water over-
draft to supply its vital water needs.
The basin has long had a deficient water supply. The
present and projected water supply picture is presented on
Figure 21. The mean annual natural runoff available for all
purposes on the valley floor, including replenishment of ground
waters, is only about 3.1 million acre-feet. The Central Valley
Project imports about 950,000 acre-feet, which leaves a present
average annual ground water overdraft of about two million acre-
feet. It is apparent that any increase in the water-using
economy of this area must be supported by additional imported
water supplies.
-85-
Until waters from the California Aqueduct of the
State Water Project and the San Luis Unit of the Central Valley
Project become available in 1968, the Basin must increase its
overdraft to meet its needs. By that year, the overdraft is
expected to be about 2.8 million acre-feet annually.
For this report, it has been assumed that some of
the wells in the Basin will be abandoned as all or most of
their economic lives terminate and that future imported water
supplies will be gradually increased to eliminate the overdraft
by about 1995. Yields of the proposed first and second stages
of the East Side Division, Central Valley Project, are shown on
Figure 21. The locations of the proposed features of that
division are indicated on Figure 22.
There is little opportunity to develop additional
yield from surface waters in the Tulare Basin. There may be,
however, the possibility of optimizing the yields of existing
supplies by systematic management of the ground water basins.
This possibility should be studied to determine its feasibility.
The state and federal projects currently being con-
structed or planned are expected to meet the future water needs
of the Tulare Basin until about 2010. The area will then
require an additional supply which will increase to about
300,000 acre-feet by 2020. The alternative would be to allow
ground water overdraft to occur again.
-86-
North Lahontan Area
Water supplies for the North Lahontan Hydrologic
Study Area originate chiefly in the Warner Mountains and on
the eastern slopes of the Cascade Range and the Sierra Nevada.
The estimated magnitudes of in-area supplies and imports are
depicted on Figure 23. General features of the area, including
the locations of water supply developments, are shown on
Figure 24.
That portion of the study area north of the Truckee
River drainage area receives a regulated import of about 11,000
acre-feet per year from the Pit River. With the exception of
this and the releases from minor storage on the Susan River,
the surface supplies for irrigation are used during the spring
and early summer months essentially in their natural regimen.
Present ground water extractions total about 65,000 acre-feet
per year, and extensive increased use of this resource is not
now considered feasible.
The possibilities for local surface water developments
within the northern portion of the area are limited. The
California Water Plan included Devils Corral Reservoir on Susan
River and Long Valley Dam on Long Valley Creek. It also
suggested the Pete's Valley-Eagle Lake development, comprising
a confining dike across Eagle Lake and a dam and reservoir on
Willow Creek. This development would make about 59,000 acre-
feet of water available in the Honey Lake area. About 30,000
acre-feet of this would be considered new yield. The feasi-
bilities of these possible developments have not been determined,
-87-
It is believed that the projected Increase In net
water requirements In the northern portion of the area can be
met by Increasing irrigation efficiencies and by a combination
of the surface developments mentioned above and minor increased
use of ground water. Additional study would be required to
confirm this conclusion.
The southern portion of the study area consists of
the California portions of three Interstate streams: the Truckee,
Carson and Walker Rivers. All of these rivers have been devel-
oped for use within both California and Nevada. Two small
exports, one from the Little Truckee into the Feather River
drainage and the other from Lake Tahoe drainage into the American
River watershed, total about 9,000 acre-feet per year.
Because the potential use of these rivers for irriga-
tion, domestic water supply, recreation and other purposes
exceeds the available flows, water rights have long been con-
troversial. Court decrees, under the administration of federal
watermasters, control the uses of each stream. Since 1956,
the States of California and Nevada have been engaged in the
negotiation of a compact concerning present and future uses
of the interstate waters of Lake Tahoe and the three rivers.
During the Fall of 19^5, the California-Nevada Interstate
Compact Commission provisionally approved a proposed compact
between the States, subject to ratification by them and to
consent of the Congress.
-88-
The major purposes of the proposed compact are: to
provide for the equitable apportionment of water between the
two States; to promote Interstate comity and to further Inter-
governmental cooperation; to protect and enhance existing
economies; to remove causes of present and future controversies;
and to permit the orderly. Integrated, and comprehensive
development, use, conservation, and control of the waters of
the three rivers and Lake Tahoe. This document, when approved,
will confirm present uses In California and provide for alloca-
tion of unused water between the states.
The Bureau of Reclamation Is proposing several
projects In the southern portion of the area. These
Include Stampede Reservoir on the Little Truckee River and
Pickle Meadows Reservoir on the West Walker River. These
facilities would be operated according to the proposed compact,
and would provide service both In California and Nevada.
South Lahontan Area
In the South Lahontan Hydrologlc Study Area, water
ajid Its cost, rather than land, are the factors that limit
future development for both agricultural and municipal purposes.
The principal stream In the area Is the Owens River,
which has been developed for export to the City of Los Angeles.
In recent years, the export of about 320,000 acre-feet per year
has been near the capacity of the aqueduct. A parallel
aqueduct will be completed by I968 and will Increase the
export to a total of about 470,000 acre-feet annually. This
-89-
yield will be obtained by operation of the Owens Valley ground
water basin in conjunction with surface supplies of the Ov;ens
River and streams of Mono Basin. Both aqueducts are expected
to be operated at full capacity by 1969. These facts are
depicted graphically on Figure 25. Figure 26 shows the loca-
tions of the facilities.
Water supplies for local use in the area are obtained
chiefly by diversion of streams flov/ing from the Sierra Nevada
and by the pumping of ground water. A small import of about
2,000 acre-feet into the Mono Lake drainage basin and Little-
rock Reservoir near Palmdale, with a yield of about 2,000 acre-
feet per year, are the principal surface water supply developments
other than facilities of the City of Los Angeles. In the southern
part of the area, the ground water is presently being overdrawn
by about l60,000 acre-feet each year.
In 1972, the area will begin importing water from the
State Water Project, and deliveries are expected to build up to
about 215,000 acre-feet per year by 1991. These imports v;ill
offset the present ground water overdraft and allow for a
modest expansion of the v^ater-using economy of the area.
Colorado Desert Area
Although the Colorado Desert Hydrologlc Study Area
is the driest region in the State, its irrigated agricultural
development is second only to that of the Central Valley area.
This has been accomplished almost entirely by diversion and use
of lov;-cost Colorado River water through facilities shovm on
Figure 28.
-90-
Annual net diversions from the Colorado River are
projected to decrease from the present level of about 4.0
million acre-feet to 3.85 million acre-feet, because of the
U.S. Supreme Court decision in Arizona v. California. It
is estimated that the full reduction will be reached in about
1990 (Figure 27). To achieve the modest increase in level of
agricultural activity projected for the basin, it will be
necessary to make all feasible savings of water by additional
canal lining, phreatophyte eradication, and other improvements.
Because of the costs involved, supplies to be imported
to the area from the State Water Project, totaling approximately
80,000 acre-feet annually by 1990, will be used primarily to
support the projected population growth within the service areas
of the Coachella Valley County Water District and the Desert and
San Gorgonio Pass Water Agencies. These service areas are north
of the Salton Sea. It is estimated that urban expansion will
continue after 1990 and that this will require additional
imports, increasing to about 175,000 acre-feet by 2020.
There is a very close relationship between the
potential demands for agricultural water in the Colorado Desert
area and the availability of low-cost imported water supplies.
It has been estimated that about 1.8 million acre-feet of
additional water supplies could be used to develop some 250,000
acres of desert lands within the service area of the Imperial
Irrigation District alone. There are other large expanses of
undeveloped valley and mesa lands within and adjacent to the
-91-
Palo Verde Irrigation District and the Coachella Valley-
County Water District, on which additional agricultural water
supplies, totaling perhaps 900,000 acre-feet annually, could
be used if low-cost water were available.
The sum of these contingent additional requirements,
amounting to about 2.7 million acre-feet per year by 2020, is
shown by the dashed line on Figure 27.
Statewide Water Supplies and Development
The foregoing discussions have described the water
supplies and existing and proposed or potential water develop-
ments in each of the 11 hydrologlc study areas of the State.
The purpose of this section is first to summarize those aspects
of water supply and development for the various areas that
pertain to required Interarea transfers of water. This leads
to development of a statewide analysis of the capabilities of
existing and authorized large-scale water conservation and
transportation facilities and to projections of the sizes and
timing of required future facilities.
Emphasis in this section is placed on development of
an integrated system of multiple-purpose water conservation and
conveyance projects, conceived as extensions of the federal
Central Valley Project and the State Water Project. As in the
past, a number of federal and state agencies will undoubtedly
participate in these projects and other facilities will be built
by local agencies. Figure 29 illustrates the projected 1990
interbasln transfers of water supplies among the 11 hydrologlc
study areas of the State.
-92-
FIGURE 29
- NORTH COASTAL
- SAN FfTANQSCO BAY
- CENTRAL COASTAL
- SACBAMENTO BASIN
- DELTA -CENTRAL SIERRA
- SAN JOAQUIN BASIN
- TULARE BASIN
- NOnTM LAHONTAN
- SOUTH LAHONTAN
- COLORADO DESERT
KEY MAP TO
HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREAS
NOTE:
Transfers shown correspond to nominal
quantities through water conveyance
works during years of average runoff.
The following items related to water
transfer are not shown: unregulated spills
from the Delta i controlled releases
through the Delta for salinity repulsion,
navigation, and fisheries-, regulated and
unregulated streomflow passing from the
San Joaquin Basin to the Delta
HETCH-HETCHY AQUEOUC
290,000
PROJECTED INTRASTATE WATER TRANSFERS FOR
1990 LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT
-93-
Required Water Supply Capability of State and Federal Facilities
The Burns-Porter Act recognizes the need for Implementa-
tion of a coordinated statewide approach to v;ater development as
envisioned and recommended in The California Water Plan. Implicit
in the Act is the premise that, as water development in California
becomes more complex and costly, larger organizations and greatly
Increased financial capability will be required. This v/111 make
necessary an increasingly active role by the state and federal
water agencies.
The principal projects comprising the State Water
Resources Development System, as defined in the Act, are the
State Water Facilities and the federal Central Valley Project.
The term "State Water Project", used in this report, encompasses
the State Water Facilities and additional features of the System
to be constructed by the State. The projected increasing role
of these projects in meeting California's long-range water re-
quirements is discussed in the following paragraphs.
In i960 the Central Valley Project provided about 23
percent of California's total net water requirements. By 1990
the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project combined
will be serving about 15.^ million acre-feet annually or about
50 percent of the State's total projected net v/ater requirements
of 31 million acre-feet per year. By 2020, these two projects
will be providing 20.4 million acre-feet or 54 percent of the
projected total net water requirements of 37.8 million acre-
feet.
-94-
The projected Increasing role of these projects in
meeting the future water requirements of California after 1970
is shown on Figure 30. This figure also indicates the other
sources from which the future total net water requirements of
the State are expected to be met and the projected phasing out
of ground water overdraft by about 1990. Figure 31 shows the
portion of the projected water requirement in each hydrologlc
study area, which estimates Indicate will be met by the State
Water Project and the Central Valley Project beginning in 1970.
The statewide summation of this information is also included.
The North Lahontan area is the only one of the 11
hydrologlc study areas for which water service is not forecast
under these two major projects of the State Water Resources
Development System. Its requirements will probably be met by
development of local water supplies, as previously described.
Capability of State and Federal Conveyance Facilities
Figure 32 shows the various projected water require-
ments that can be met by authorized facilities of the Central
Valley Project and the State Water Project. These requirements
are distinguished by (l) the identified water conveyance features
or (2) service areas covered either by water supply contracts or
by the May l6, I96O Agreement between the Department and the
Bureau of Reclamation. This figure also indicates the probable
additional service from these projects which will require future
transportation facilities.
-95-
FIGURE 30
z
<
<
X
1-
a
z
<
3
Q
uJu
1-
>
o
oo
UJ
— >
o
en
Q-
H
O
UJ
o
>- z
cr
o >
oc
m lli
o
z
UJ _l
5<
UJ
>
O
UJlu
>-
UJ
_J
_J
Q.
cr
UJ
1-
<
Q. O
O
_I_I
_l
5
oo
<
<<
<
_l -I
cr
crcc
cr
UJ
UJ
o
UJH
h-
1—
>Q
_i
QZ
z
<
UJZ
o
UUJ
UJ
1-
Q<
1
U.O
u en
ir>\
—
V"!
\
2^1
\
Ul\
\
^\
\
UJ\
I
*\
\
1
^\
\
c»\
\
ui\
\
ct\
\
^^_
*\
\
Ul\
\
"^v
)
i \ \
5\
I \ \
j\
\ \ A
1—
'iX
\ \ I
u.
\ \\
<
cr
Q
d\
\ \ 1
a:
ui\
\ \
UJ
Vl
1 \
>
<->\
1 1
o
UJ\
I \
o\
1 1
cr
o\
1 \
UJ
o^\
\ y
h-
1 1 1 1 1
0-\
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
l\lll
1 1 1 1 t\
1 1 w
<
Q
Z
=)
o
cr
o
/
X 1
1 1
(/)
UJ
o
^
OJ
iij
o
(T.
(VI
3
O
liJ
q:
>-
-Jtr
0. LlI
Q-t-
z><
o
co$
o
CM
DC Q
UJ UJ
h-H
cr
<o
<
UJ
$UJ
-3
>-
li- o
oq:
Q.
o
(/)
o
o
CM
RCE
lA'S
32
oq:
(/) o
u.
-I
<
o
o
CD
H
<r>
UJ
UJ
o
CO
oo
*
o
en
CsJ
CD
•T
o
'J-
'^r
•i-
K)
to
CM
<>J
CM
CD
CM
CD
O
(D
o-
133d-3aOV Nomiw
-96-
FIGURE 31
, t-
_<I
<8o
Z(D
<
UJ
cr
<
<
<
zo
of
xo
in
o R
o
<2
03
O -1 Q
o
>-
< <
UJ
n
I cr tr
I
cc
1-
t'-o
1-
h-
<
ccz _J
Z)
3Z
_J
OuJ o
o
o<
3
(/)
zoo
to
in</)
1—
cn
<
ffi
O
<
o
<
o:
a:
<
a:
o
I
<
CO
</5
<
CD
o
I-
z
<
tr.
o
<
o
liJ
->
o
a:
Q.
>-
UJ
_i
_j
<
>
_i
o
<
Cd
a:
o
CO
\-
Z </)
Ul <
O UJ
§5
< >-
o
o
Cd
UJ 1-
-, CO
o ,
tr <->
0- 5
q:
<
UJ
>■
o
WATER
DROLO
o
>-
o
CJ
UJ I
CO
en
O-
I-
^^
(/)
I a
CO
UJ
o
1^
UJ u.
CC UJ
3 Q;
o
UJ
a:
01
UJ
o
\-
(D
<
0}
^
a
UJ
H
O
UJ
-3
o
O
a.
I
Present annual deliveries of dependable water supplies
through existing facilities of the Central Valley Project total
about five million acre-feet. Deliveries by state and federal
systems will Increase to about seven million acre-feet per year
by 1968 when the federal San Luis Division and the California
Aqueduct commence service in the Tulare Basin. The total annual
dependable water supplies to be distributed by the authorized
systems will total approximately I3 million acre-feet by the
year 1990, and will increase to l4 million by 2020 (Figure 32).
Completion of presently authorized conveyance systems
of the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project will
still leave a requirement of over 6.5 million acre-feet per year
in 2020 to be supplied by expansion of these projects or by some
other means. A portion of this additional requirement could be
met by proposed transportation facilities of the Central Valley
Project as shown on Figure 32. On the basis of the Department's
current estimates (discussed in connection with water supplies
of the various hydrologlc study areas) , the San Felipe Division
will be required for the Central Coastal area by the early 1970's
West Sacramento Canal Unit will be needed by the mid-1970 's for the
Sacramento Basin, Delta-Central Sierra and San Francisco Bay
areas; and the East Side Division should be available for the
San Joaquin and Tulare Basins not later than the early 1980's.
The estimated capital costs of these conveyance facilities are
90, 155 and 800 million dollars, respectively.
-98-
Additional water supplies (to be delivered via
conveyance facilities not yet Identified) will also be needed
In the San Joaquin Valley, Central Coastal, and Southern
California areas beginning In the 1990's. Current studies
Indicate that by 2020, the Central Coastal and South Coastal
areas will require some 490,000 and 1.2 million acre-feet per
year, respectively. The additional requirement within the San
Joaquin Valley might be met most favorably through enlargement
of the proposed second phase of the East Side Division of the
Central Valley Project. There may also be the need for addi-
tional transportation facilities on the west side of the valley.
In general, water service v/lthln the North Coastal
area from federal or state projects can be provided most econom-
ically as an adjunct to future developments which will also serve
to export water from that region. It has been assumed for this
report that all North Coastal conservation features, which will
be needed to Increase the firm v/ater supplies of the State Water
Project and the Central Valley Project, will also make water
supplies available locally, as required to supplement the yields
of local facilities. The estimated amounts of such supplemental
service, beginning In the late 1980' s, are Indicated on Figure 32.
Capability of Central Valley Project and State Water Project
CoJ^seJ^v^tion Facilities
To determine the timing and sizes of required additional
conservation facilities under the State Water Resources Develop-
ment System, it was necessary to estimate the water yield capa-
bility of existing and authorized features of the system. This
-99-
was accomplished by performing coordinated operation studies
of the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project.
In these studies, the Delta was recognized as the
central collection point for all surplus water in the Central
Valley. The studies also anticipated that depletions of
natural surplus flows reaching the Delta, as a result of
further water resource development in the tributary area, will
reduce the yield of export projects and require additional con-
servation developments. This principle is manifest in the Area
of Origin Statutes contained in Sections IO505 and ll460 through
11463 of the Water Code.
The operation studies were conducted using monthly
water supplies during the critical period, I928 through 193^*
and monthly water demands for projected levels of development
until 2020. They were based on full operational coordination
of the basic Central Valley Project and the State Water Project
facilities listed below,
1. Central Valley Project
a. Trinity River Division
Clair Engle Lake
Trinity Powerplant
Lewiston Reservoir
Lewis ton Powerplant
Clear Creek Tunnel
Whiskeytown Reservoir
Judge Francis Carr Powerplant
Spring Creek Powerplant
b. Shasta Division
Shasta Reservoir
Shasta Powerplant
Keswick Reservoir
Keswick Powerplant
-100-
c. American River Division
Polsom Reservoir
Folsom Powerplant
Nimbus Reservoir
Nimbus Powerplant
d. Delta Division
Tracy Pumping Plant
Delta-Mendota Canal
2. State Water Project
a. Oroville Division
Orovllle Reservoir
Oroville Powerplant
Thermalito Diversion Dam
Thermallto Powerplant
Thermalito Canal
Thermallto Forehay
Thermalito Afterbay
b. North Bay Aqueduct
c. South Bay Aqueduct
d. North San Joaquin Division
Delta Pumping Plant
Portion of California Aqueduct
3. Joint-Use Facilities
a. Peripheral Canal
b. San Luis Division
San Luis Reservoir
San Luis Pumplng-Generatlng Plant
San Luis Porebay
San Luis Forebay Pumping Plant
San Luis Canal to Mile l8
Dos Amigos Pumping Plant
Other local-agency and federal storage and transporta-
tion features within the Central Valley Basin were also considered
In the operation studies. These units were operated separately
for their respective project purposes, and the net effects on
-101-
streamflow were reflected in the coordinated operation studies.
The authorized Auburn and New Melones Reservoirs were Included
as units of the Central Valley Project-State Water Project
system in this manner.
The operation studies considered the project functions
of irrigation. Industrial, and municipal water supply; power
production; navigation on the Sacramento River; minimum reservoir
releases for fish; flood control; recreation; and salinity
control in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
The monthly operation studies were performed on a
digital computer. The procedure involved first the estimation
of flows at key points along the Sacramento River, on its
tributaries, and in the Delta at the particular level of devel-
opment in the valley chosen for a given study. This initial
calculation assumed that all inflows to the Central Valley
Project and State Water Project reservoirs during the month
would be held in storage. Releases were then made from the res-
ervoirs to meet assumed power requirements and minimum flows for
fish life. Further releases were made, if necessary, to meet the
mandatory flow requirements at the key downstream points. The
machine program selected the reservoirs from which releases were
made for power and other purposes so as to minimize demands on
storage.
The results of the operation studies Included estimates
of dependable commercial power production at load center and the
firm water yield available for future demands after the projected
upstream diversions and present contractual obligations of the
•102-
state and Federal Governments were satisfied. The estimated
firm water yield of the system is shown hy the lowest blue line
sloping downward to the right on Figure 33. The downward slope
of this line reflects the loss of yield due to increasing use
of v/ater in the area tributary to the Delta.
This analysis assumed an idealized, fully coordinated
operation of the Central Valley Project and the State Water
Project. In this manner the benefits of public development
were optimized. The two projects operated separately would
provide less power generation and slightly less water yield.
Additional Conservation Facilities Required for Water Supply
Future water conservation projects considered in this
section are those required to sustain and increase the water
yield capability of the Central Valley Project-State Water
Project system. These projects and the more or less independent
projects, mentioned previously in connection with individual
hydrologlc study area water supplies, will provide local water
supplies and other services in the areas where they are con-
structed.
Figure 33 illustrates the required timing and additional
water yield capability of future conservation projects within the
Central Valley Project-State Water Project system. As previously
stated, the lowest blue line on the figure shows the combined
dependable water supply capability of existing and authorized
features of the system. The red line depicts the combined net
-103-
FIGURE 32
0)
<
liJ
<
bJ
u
>
o:
iij
(0
I-
o
Ui
-3
o
oc
a.
a
bJ
o
</)
z
H
UJ
z
cc
u
[li
s
u.
UJ
o
UJ
tr.
o
tr
1-
3
o
o
UJ
UJ
-3
o
^ (T
Q.
^ UJ
>-
O
<
UI
_l
1
o
o
^
<
OJ
>
Q
_l
UJ
<
H
a:
o
h-
UJ
z
III
~3
<)
o
o
0.
<
0>
0)
1-
u
UJ
o
a:
a.
cc
UJ
!5
o
5
CO
CTl
UJ
!5
co
UJ
i33d-3yov NomiiM
-104-
FIGURE 33
O
tr.
a.
>■
lU
%
<
a:
I-
z
UJ
o
CO
LJ Q
— Z
I- <
—
o
<>
LJ
<
o
Ll_
q:
Q.
7^
O
UJ
§
<
5
q:
UJ
III
1-
CO
<
1-
^
V)
o
o
X
1-
fr
o
o
-3
<
CO
S
Z
u.
UJ
o
UJ
cr
o
-)
^
o
^—
UJ
o
q:
<
1-
u.
Ill
(/)
1-
<
$
o
a:
a.
Ill
111
2
i33d-3a3V NOmilM
-105-
water requirements which are to be met by these projects. It
Is the same as the uppermost lines shown on Figures 31 and 32.
The point of Interesectlon of the Increasing require-
ment graph (red line) and the decreasing supply graph (blue
line) Indicates the timing of need for the first additional
water conservation facility. This occurs late In the 1980's.
This derived timing Is based on projections of net
water requirements and on estimates of water yields of existing
and authorized conservation projects. It Is entirely conceivable
that deviations of actual future values of one or both of these
variables from the projections could either advance or delay by
several years the date on which the additional facility will be
needed. Thus Figure 33 is indicative of the need for the
facility in the late 1980's or early 1990 's in the event of a
drought similar to that of the 1928-34 period.
This indicated timing is predicated upon the need
for developing additional water supplies only. It does not
reflect the possible earlier scheduling of developments in the
interest of flood control, recreation, water quality control,
hydroelectric power generation, or other project services, if
this should be found feasible. Considerations regarding early
construction of multiple-purpose projects for flood control
are discussed briefly in the next section.
The stair-stepped series of four bands outlined in
blue Indicates the staging of conservation developments of the
-106-
Central Valley Project-State Water Project system, which Is
believed at present (1966) to be the most favorable sequence
until about the year 2000. These projects will be located on
the upper Eel River, the lower Trinity River and the Mad and
Van Duzen Rivers, as shown on Figure 8. Feasibility studies for
all of these proposed developments are in progress by the Depart-
ment of Water Resources or the Bureau of Reclamation. The projects
are described subsequently in this section.
The dates shown on Figure 33 for the additional conser-
vation facilities indicate when the projects must first become
fully operational and capable of producing portions of the in-
dicated dependable water yields (widths of the blue bands) when
added to the Central Valley Project-State Water Project system.
A certain lag time is required for completion of feasibility
studies, design, construction, and, in the case of the larger
reservoirs, a period for filling the conservation storage pools
to operational levels. Although studies are not completed for
this detailed scheduling, past experience has indicated that a
period of 10 to I5 years, and sometimes longer, is required
from initiation of final design until a major conservation
project is fully operational. The need for the present feasi-
bility level planning studies for these facilities is apparent.
There are other projects which might also prove v;orthy
of consideration to meet the growth of net water requirements
from the late 1980's to 2000. Nashville Reservoir shown
on Figure I8, has been mentioned In connection with the
-107-
water supplies of the Delta-Central Sierra area. In addition
to providing local water supply and flood control, this project
could also contribute water for export under the Central Valley
Project-State Water Project system. Paskenta-Newville, Marysville
and Sites Reservoirs, shown on Figure l6, could increase the
Central Valley Project-State Water Project potential for export
from the Sacramento Basin as well as provide local water supply
and/or flood control. There are also large potential conserva-
tion storage units within the Central Valley Basin that would
provide long-term carryover storage. Examples are: the Glenn
Reservoir Complex, in Glenn and Tehama Counties (Figure l6);
Los Meganos Dam and Reservoir, on Kellogg Creek in Contra Costa
County; Los Banos Dam and Reservoir, south of San Luis Reservoir
in Merced County; and the Greater Berryessa Project on Putah
Creek in Napa and Yolo Counties. Further reconnaissance studies
will be necessary to determine the probable costs of these reser-
voirs.
It is possible also that a portion of the future re-
quirements under the Central Valley Project-State Water Project
system may be met at favorable costs by the intensive develop-
ment of the vast Sacramento Valley ground water basin. This
development might involve conjunctive operation of the basin
with present and anticipated surface storage facilities. Addi-
tional studies will be necessary.
-108-
After about the year 2000, further alternative sources
of supply may become available to meet emerging water require-
ments. These possibilities include desalination of sea water,
a western states regional water plan obtaining surplus waters
from the Pacific Northwest, and additional development within
Northwestern California in the lower Eel and Klamath River Basins.
These longer- range developments are shown on Figure 33 by the
lighter stair-stepped blue lines beginning about the year 2000.
No attempt has been made in this bulletin to determine the
chronology of these possibilities.
The possible alternative developments to meet water
requirements from the late 1980's to 2000 and the unscheduled
more remote possibilities are described briefly in the ensuing
paragraphs .
Upper Eel River Development. The Upper Eel River
Development is authorized as an additional conservation facility
of the State Water Project. It will include Spencer and Dos Rios
Reservoirs, or alternatives, on the Middle Pork of the Eel
River. Also included will be facilities to convey the water
to the Sacramento Basin either by gravity to Thomes or Stony
Creeks or through a pumped diversion to the upper main Eel River
and thence by gravity via Clear Lake and Lake Berryessa to the
Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta (Figures 8 and l6). It is
estimated that the costs of these alternative developments
will be between 200 and 300 million dollars.
-109-
Spencer and Dos Rlos Reservoirs , with a combined
gross capacity of approximately 1.4 million acre-feet, v;ill
provide a dependable water supply for the Round Valley area
of Mendocino County, fisheries preservation flov;s, and an
additional water supply of about 600,000 acre-feet annually at
the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Consideration is also being
given to inclusion of the functions of flood control and
fisheries enhancement. The addition of the Rancheria Compart-
ment of the Glenn Reservoir Complex in the Stony Creek route
or of English Ridge Reservoir in the Clear Lake route could
Increase the firm water yield of this development by about
300,000 acre-feet annually.
Trinity, Mad, and Van Duzen River Developments. Con-
struction of proposed projects in these river basins could add
about 1.5 million acre-feet of dependable water supply per year
to the Central Valley Project-State Water Project system. Their
locations are shown on Figure 8. Although a construction
sequence of three stages Is presently envisioned, work on
these developments would probably be started at close intervals,
if not simultaneously, because all of the facilities would be
required within three or four years (Figure 33).
The first stage would consist of Helena Dam on the
Trinity River about 40 miles downstream from the existing Lewlston
Dam of the Central Valley Project. A 590-foot Helena Dam would
create a 2,9 million acre-foot reservoir and back water to the
toe of the existing Lewlston Dam. Its annual export yield of
-110-
about 500,000 acre-feet would be conveyed through a second Clear
Creek tunnel or a Cottonwood Creek tunnel to the Sacramento Basin.
The total cost of Helena Dam and Reservoir including relocations
is estimated to be 165 million dollars. The 13-mile tunnel to
Clear Creek, designed to convey the 1.5 million-acre-foot yield
of the developments on the three rivers, would cost an estimated
60 million dollars.
The second stage of development would include Eltapom
Reservoir (South Pork of the Trinity River) and Burnt Ranch Reser-
voir (main Trinity River) . Also included would be a pumping
plant and 10-mile tunnel leading to Helena Reservoir. This de-
velopment would provide an incremental new water yield of 400,000
acre-feet annually at a cost of about I70 million dollars.
Additional water supplies, derived from the Mad and
Van Duzen Rivers under a third stage of development, would be
diverted via a system of reservoirs and interconnecting tunnels
through the earlier staged facilities to the Sacramento River
Basin. A new export yield of approximately 600,000 acre-feet
annually would be provided by this development. The capital
cost is estimated at about 182 million dollars.
Paskenta-Newville Project. This project could act as
a regulating reservoir for importations from the Eel and Trinity
Rivers or could be built as a separate project. The reservoir
would be formed by Paskenta Dam on Thomes Creek and Newville
Dam on the North Fork of Stony Creek. The project would con-
stitute the northern two "compartments" of the Glenn Reservoir
Complex (Figure 16). The reservoir would have a capacity of
-111-
approximately 1.6 million acre-feet and would cost about 92
million dollars. It could provide about 200,000 acre-feet per
year of nev/ water. About 20 percent of the new supply would
be required in local service areas and the remainder would be
available for use elsewhere. The project would also provide
flood control, fisheries enhancement and recreational
opportiinlties.
Marysville Project. Marysville Dam and Reservoir on
the Yuba River (Figure l6) would supplement the New Bullards
Bar Project, currently under consideration by the Yuba County
Water Agency, by providing the balance of flood control storage
necessary to regulate the Yuba River. A one million acre-foot
reservoir, including primary flood storage space of 200,000
acre-feet, would yield about 100,000 acre-feet per year at the
Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta, and would provide new opportunities
for recreation. The cost of the dam, reservoir, recreational
facilities, and fish hatchery is estimated at about 100 million
dollars.
Sites Reservoir. This facility would be an off -stream
storage feature of the West Sacramento Canal Unit (Figure l6).
With a gross capacity of about 1.2 million acre-feet, it would
regulate surplus winter flows of the Sacramento River conveyed
via the Tehama-Colusa Canal. There would be approximately
150,000 acre-feet per year of dependable water supply developed
for use within the Sacramento Basin area and for export to the
Delta-Central Sierra and San Francisco Bay areas. The cost
would be about 42 million dollars.
-112-
Lower Eel River and Lower Klamath River Developments.
The developments on the lower Eel River would Include Sequoia
Reservoir, with a capacity of 6.7 million acre-feet, and Bell
Springs Reservoir, containing 1.35 million acre-feet. These
features together would provide an export yield of approximately
one million acre-feet annually. The total capital cost of the
reservoirs and pumping facilities for delivering the water
supply into Dos Rlos Reservoir would be about 460 million
dollars. This includes I30 million dollars for the relocation
of the Northwestern Pacific Railroad.
The lower Klamath River development would include the
15-milllon acre-foot Humboldt Reservoir on the lower Klamath
River, Ironside Reservoir on the Trinity River, three pumping
plants to lift the water up the Trinity River into Helena Reser-
voir, and a second tunnel between Helena Reservoir and the
Sacramento Valley. It could develop an annual yield of approxi-
mately six million acre-feet, at a cost of about 1.6 billion
dollars. Mitigation of damages to the Klamath River fisheries
would be a serious problem in this plan. There are alternative
plans with a lesser impact on the fisheries, which would yield
smaller quantities of water.
Desalination. Extensive research and development in
the desalination of brackish and sea water has been sponsored
recently by the Office of Saline Water, United States Department
of the Interior, and by colleges and universities. Demonstration
plants to study several processes have been built and others are
planned. The State of California participated with the Office
-113-
of Saline Water in the financing and marketing of v/ater from
the Point Loma Demonstration Plant at San Diego and will do the
same for a new plant soon to be built in that area.
Progress in desalination during the last decade, as
a result of this work, has been significant. About four basic
methods are now being studied to separate salts from water.
These are the evaporation or distillation, membrane, crystalliza-
tion, and chemical processes. Because of the difference in re-
quirements of plant capacity, relative costs of different forms
of energy, salinity of the available water and local conditions,
no one process is likely to be the choice for all areas. The
methods currently showing the most promise for large-scale
operation are the multi-stage flash distillation process for
desalting sea water, and the membrane processes of electro-
dialysis or reverse osmosis for brackish water desalting.
In the mid-1950 's the cost of desalting sea water in
existing small-capacity plants was estimated at four to five
dollars per 1,000 gallons, or more than $1,000 per acre-foot.
At that time, projections of costs indicated that sea water
might eventually be desalted for about $l40 per acre-foot. This
figure was for a plant of 50 million gallons per day capacity.
Recent estimates have indicated that with large-capacity
dual-purpose plants (electricity generation-desalination) it would
be possible to produce fresh water from sea water at a seacoast
plant site for about $70 to $100 per acre-foot, depending on the
powerplant size. It appears that these estimates have been
-114-
o
o
liJ
2:
<
<
_J
Z
o
<
IT)
<
H
z
o
LU
Q
(1)
x:
-p
>.
Xj
Ti
(D
O
:3
x;
o
flj
-p
<D
o x:
K -P
O ~
I- C
O
-P
c
E
O
Cm
3 'U
bl OJ
OJ >
fn O
E
- X3
o c
(D
•H ^
cr
C r^
cr >.
x: rt
-P D
•H ^
S Xi
(D
CD
X C
•H -H
E
in 0)
o
•H
-P
CO
;h
CD
o
K
4J
(in
O
CO
cti
O
0
x:
-p
bf,
C
•H
CT3 rH Cti
S -P X3
C D
P CO o
C E
cti [/: '■
r-\ -H >.
CO
C C/3
O CO
■H S
C/3
f-, P
O
E
CO
C
CD C CC'
> Ct pi
CMC
O C cti
CD O
fn x:
CD £-■ -P
-p cd
CO
& • CD
>i to
CO cH CO
(D P-CQ
p.
:3 rH
CO to cO
>
fn CO
CD 2
-P
-P cO •
c ^ w
•H
O Ct-H •
to
E
O
►J
-115-
based on the favorable assumption that desalination would be
charged only the incremental costs in excess of costs for a
single-purpose powerplant. The costs would probably be greater
if desalination v/ere allocated its full share of costs on a
proportionate-use or similar basis. Development plans for full-
sized modules and components of desalination plants, now being
proposed, will permit more firm estimates of desalination costs
within the next few years.
The costs of conveying water inland from desalination
plants must be added for comparison with costs of other supplies,
such as those imported from Northern California. Present estimates
Indicate that water delivered from the State Water Project will
cost about $49 per acre-foot to The Metropolitan Water District of
Southern California, for delivery from Castaic and Perris Reser-
voirs at elevations of about 1,500 feet, and about $64 per acre-
foot to Santa Barbara County, for delivery near Santa Maria at
an elevation of about 400 feet.
Western States Regional V/ater Planning. Events of the
past two years indicate increasing activity in western states
regional water planning. The State of California must maintain
a leading role in such planning. Current projections indicate
that California has sufficient water resources to develop and
meet its water requirements until well after the turn of the
century. But, regional importations could conceivably prove less
costly than some of the sources, such as the lov;er Eel and lower
Klamath Rivers.
-116-
Besides these reasons, it has become Increasingly
apparent that the welfare of California cannot be divorced from
the economies of the other western states. California must
continue to work with the other states in developing a regional
water plan for the benefit of all. The need for comprehensive
and systematic regional water planning studies is shown by the
many suggestions since publication of the Pacific Southwest
Water Plan report by the Secretary of the Interior in 19^3 .
Considerable additional study is necessary.
An important step in this direction in 19^5 was the
drafting of compromise federal legislation authorizing a Colorado
River Basin Project. This legislation was negotiated by repre-
sentatives of the seven states of the Colorado River Basin. Upon
passage, it would authorize the Department of the Interior to
investigate all potential sources of supply for the Pacific South-
west, including importation of surplus flows from the Pacific
Northwest and v;ould require the submission of possible plans and
recommendations by 1971. It would permit the formation of a
Pacific Northwest-Southwest Regional Commission, composed of
state and federal representatives, to assist the Department of
the Interior in the studies.
California has also been working with the other western
states to create the Western States Water Council. This council
was approved by the eleven governors at the Western States
Governors' Conference in June 19^5, and is being implemented.
Its purpose is to achieve cooperation among the western states
and the Federal Government in planning of integrated water
-117-
resource development. Its functions are: (l) to prepare
criteria for use in the formulation of plans for regional
development of water resources to protect and further state
and local interests; and (2) to undertake continuing revlev/ of
all large-scale Interstate and Interbasin plans and projects
for development, control , or utilization of water resources in
the western states.
Although much work remains to be done in regional
water planning, the progress made during the last two years
toward a solution to v;estern v;ater problems is encouraging.
Further progress during the next fev; years is expected to be
equally encouraging.
Flood Control as a Project Purpose
Flood control requirements have been discussed earlier
in this chapter. This section identifies projects v/hich v/ould
include flood control as a purpose and indicates the flood
control studies which are authorized or in progress. The section
ends with a discussion of the desirable scope of future flood
control investigations.
Authorized and Proposed Flood Control Projects
The Corps of Engineers has a number of authorized flood
control projects in California. These are listed by hydrologlc
study area in Table 8.
Earlier sections of this report have presented
descriptions of multiple-purpose water conservation facilities,
proposed either as local projects within hydrologlc study areas
-118-
TABLE 8
AUTHORIZED FEDERAL FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS
(Construction and planning status, I966)
i : Capital Costl/
Principal Features : (thousands of dollars)
Project
North Coastal Area
Eel River Delta
Area
Levees and channel
work
14,300
San Francisco Bay Area
Alameda Creek
Corte Madera
Creek
Napa River
Russian River
Sonoma Creek
Warm Springs
Reservoir
Walnut Creek
Levees and channel
improvements
Channel improve-
ments
Channel work and
possible storage
Bank stabilization
and channel work
Levee and channel
work
Multiple -purpose
project
Levees and channel
improvements
17,900
6,100
15,600
1^1,200
9,800
^19,000
21,800
South Coastal Area
Los Angeles
Drainage Area
Lytle and Warm
Creeks
San Diego River
Santa Paula
Creek
Existing project
extensions
Existing project
extensions
Existing project
extensions
Channel lining and
Improvement
318,000
9,800
17,400
2,300
-119-
TABLE 8 (Continued)
AUTHORIZED FEDERAL FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS
(Construction and planning status, 1966)
■ : Capital Costl^'
:Principal Features : (thousands of dollars)
Project
Sacramento Basin
Bullards Bar
Reservoir
Oroville
Reservoir
Sacramento River
Scotts Creek
Reservoir
Multiple-purpose ISP.'JOO
reservoir
Multiple-purpose 66,400
reservoir
Bank protection 67,000
Reservoir and channel 10,100
improvements
Delta-Central Sierra Area
Morman Slough
Channel and levee
improvements
2,100
San Joaquin Basin
Buchanan Reservoir
Hidden Reservoir
Lower San Joaquin
River
New Don Pedro
New Exchequer
Reservoir
New Melones
Reservoir
Multiple -purpose
reservoir
Multiple -purpose
reservoir
Levees and channel
improvements
Multiple -purpose
reservoir
Multiple -purpose
reservoir
Multiple -purpose
reservoir
15,300
16,700
12,500
5,900
9,900
122,000
-120-
TABLE 8 (Continued)
AUTHORIZED FEDERAL FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS
(Construction and planning status, 1966)
Capital Costi.'
t/
Project ;Princlpal Features : (thousands of dollars)
Tulare Basin
Kings River and Channel improve- 1,200
Tributaries ments
North Lahontan Area
Martis Creek Multiple-purpose 3,100
reservoir
South Lahontan Area
Mojave River Single-purpose 13,300
reservoir
Colorado Desert Area
Tahqultz Creek Levees and channel 3,900
work
TOTAL QqR,000
1/ Federal cost
-121-
or as components of the Central Valley Project-State Water
Project system. Those projects, which would Include the purpose
of flood control, are listed in Table 9. This table omits the
authorized flood control projects sho^-m in Table 8,
The Corps of Engineers is authorized to conduct flood
control investigations of several of the projects listed in
Table 9 and of many more projects in California. These can be
separated into four categories: (l) completed investigations for
which formal reviews leading to authorization are under v;ay;
(2) active investigations begun in I965 or continuing which have
a tentative completion date assigned; (3) inactive investigations,
on v;hich work has been deferred; and (4) indefinite investiga-
tions, which are authorized but for which no funds are available.
A list of these investigations is given in Table 10.
Desirable Scope of Flood Control Investigations
It is apparent that the broadest practicable approach
to flood control must be taken. Flood control studies should
be comprehensive and should give balanced consideration to all
feasible means of flood control and prevention of flood damage
including storage facilities, levee and stream Improvements, bypass
channels, warning systems, and floodplain and watershed management.
Section 1258O of the Water Code declares that the State
should engage in studies of water development, including flood
control projects, by all agencies in order that expenditures of
public funds will bring the maximum benefits to the people of
the State.
-122-
TABLE 9
PROPOSED MULTIPLE- PURPOSE RESERVOIRS
WITH FLOOD CONTROL POTENTIAL
Project
River
North Coastal Area
Butler Valley Reservoir
Sequoia Reservoir
Upper Eel River Development
San Francisco Bay Area
Big Sulphur Reservoir
Knights Valley Reservoir
South Coastal Area
Topatopa Reservoir
Sacrajnento Basin
Allen Gamp Reservoir
Millville Reservoir
Wilson Valley Reservoir*
Indian Valley Reservoir*
Marysville Reservoir
Paskenta-Newville Reservoir
Delta-Central Sierra Area
Nashville Reservoir
North Lahontan Area
Stampede Reservoir
Pickle Meadow Reservoir
Mad River
Eel River
Eel River
Sulphur Creek
Maacama Creek
Sespe Creek
Pit River
Cow Creek
Cache Creek
North Fork Cache Creek
Yuba River
Thomes Creek
Cosumnes River
Little Truckee River
West Walker River
*Alternatlve Projects.
-123-
TABLE 10
U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS'
FLOOD CONTROL INVESTIGATIONS
Title
: Estimated
: Completion
;Loca- : Date of
tion* ; Investigation
Category (1) - Completed
Atherton Creek
Knights Valley, Russian River Basin
San Franc isqui to Creek
Pajaro River
Pajaro Valley, Pajaro River Basin
Tia Juana River
Jack & Simmerly Slough
Category (2) - Active
Eel River
Klamath River
Mad River
Smith River
Alhambra Creek
Fairfield Vicinity Streams
Guadalupe River & Adjacent Streams
Pescadero Creek
Richardson Bay Streams
Russian River
San Gregorio Creek & Tributaries
Walnut Creek Basin
Wildcat & San Pablo Creeks
Soquel Creek
Cucamonga Creek
Deer, Day, Etiwanda, & San Sevaine Creek
San Dieguito River
San Luis Rey River
Santa Ana River Basin & Orange County
Santa Barbara County Streams
South of Santa Ynez Mountains
Santa Barbara County Streams
(Atascadero Creek)
Santa Clara River
Sweetwater River
University Wash & Spring Brook Drainage
Upper Warm Creek
Bear River Basin
Chester, North Fork Feather River
Coon Creek Stream Group
SF
SF
SF
cc
cc
sc
SB
NC
1969
NC
1970
NC
1968
NC
1969
SF
1965
SF
1967
SF
1967
SF
1966
SF
1965
SF
1967
SF
1968
SF
1970
SF
1966
CC
1965
sc
1966
sc
1967
sc
1969
sc
1966
sc
1969
sc
1969
sc
1966
sc
1969
sc
1965
sc
1967
sc
1967
SB
1970
SB
1966
SB
1969
-124-
TABLE 10 (contd. )
Title
: Estimated
: Completion
Loca- : Date of
tion* ; Investigation
Category (2) - Active (contd.)
Morrison Creek Basin
Northern California Streams
Sacramento River & Tributaries
Upper Putah Creek
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Recreation
Kern River Basin, Isabella Reservoir
Poso Creek Stream Group
Category (3) - Inactive
Cache Creek Basin
Cache Creek Settling Basin
Red Bank & Fancher Creeks
Cosumnes River
Category (4) - Indefinite
Novate Creek & Tributaries
Burlingame, Streams in Vicinity of
Petaluma River
Redwood Creek, San Mateo County
South San Francisco, Streajns in
Vicinity of
Arroyo Grande Creek
Carmel River & Tributaries
Salinas River
San Lorenzo River & Tributaries
Lagxina Canyon
Santa Ynez River & Tributaries
Switzer Creek
Battle Creek, Sacramento River
Big Valley, Lassen County
Shanghai & Starr Bends, Feather River
Sacramento- San Joaquin Delta (Model)
Los Banos Creek
Caliente Creek Stream Group
Antelope Valley
SB
SB
SB
SB
DC
DC
TB
TB
1968
1969
1969
1970
1966
1966
1966
1965
SB
SB
SB
DC
NC
SF
SF
SF
SF
cc
cc
cc
cc
SC
SC
SC
SB
SB
SB
DC
SJ
TB
SL
-125-
TABLE 10 (contd. )
Title
: Estimated
: Completion
Loca- : Date of
tion* : Investigation
Category (4) - Indefinite (contd.)
Imperial & San Diego Counties,
Streams Flowing into Salton Sea
Whitewater River
CD
CD
* Symbols for hydrologic study areas shown on Figure 4,
NC - North Coastal
SF - San Francisco Bay
CC - Central Coastal
SC - South Coastal
SB - Sacramento Basin
DC - Delta-Central Sierra
SJ - San Joaquin Basin
TB - Tulare Basin
SL - South Lahontan
CD - Colorado Desert
■126-
Projections of requirements should be made to determine
the earliest feasible time for construction of flood control
projects to achieve these maximum benefits. The need for these
studies vras further recognized in several resolutions adopted by
the 1965 Legislature, including SCR 14 (Petersen), SJR 11 (Collier)
and AJR 10 (Belottl). These resolutions requested the Department
and the Federal Government to accelerate planning and construction
of flood control developments in the North Coastal area and else-
where.
Justification of flood control projects should be based
on both historical and predicted economic factors. Provision should
be made for the early construction of multiple-purpose projects in-
volving flood control when the flood control benefits exceed the
costs, providing the earlier construction is deemed feasible in
view of the considerations discussed below.
When estimates of flood control needs indicate that a
multiple-purpose project possibly should be built for flood con-
trol before it is needed for other purposes, the added costs of
the project, including interest, must be compared with the addi-
tional flood control benefits that would occur with early con-
struction to determine overall project feasibility.
The financing and repayment of early construction costs
of multiple-purpose projects must also be considered and the
availability of capital must be determined. Normally, repayment
of reimbursable costs by beneficiaries would begin at or near
the completion date of the project. If a multiple-purpose project
were completed sooner than necessary for some project purposes,
it might be desirable for repayment for those purposes to be
deferred. This vrauld be contingent upon the ability of the con-
struction agency to meet its financial obligations. The Water
-127-
Supply Act of 1958 J mentioned in Chapter 1, provides the means
of deferring for 10 years the repayment of costs of federal
projects allocated to future municipal and industrial water
supply.
It is probable that analyses will indicate that pro-
tection of some areas is not economically justified, hov/ever.
In many instances the solution may be provided by floodplain
management .
Role of Electric Power
Future v/ater development in California will be tied
closely to the development of electric power, as it has been in
the past. The market for hydroelectric power will be a factor
in determining the economic and financial feasibility of, and
costs of water from, many vjater conservation facilities. Costs
of power for pumping will continue to play an important role in
determining costs of transporting v;ater over long distances.
Forecasts of Pov/er Requirements and Development
California's projected electric power and energy re-
quirements to the year 2020 are shown on Figure 3^. These
estimates were derived from population forecasts, anticipated
increases in per capita use of electricity, and projections of
annual load factors. The State's maximum power demand in 1965
was estimated at about 17.2 million kilowatts. Projected state-
wide pov;er demands for the years 1990 and 2020 are 80 million
kilowatts and 245 million kilowatts, respectively.
-128-
X
\
—
UJCt ^
\ 2<
\ °= z
•^^^
X o
1— u.
oc — ,
>
z <
o
<
X\
2
^ ^
NERGY
TION
O
u.
<
o
X\
ijj<
tl.
^v ^\
V
cr.
o
N. \
-ILU
llJ
\\
<2
»-
^A
3UJ
?
\N
ZC3
en
V^
Z
<
\-l
FIGURE 34
O
CM
o
CM
O
o
in
o
m
(M
O
o
o
o
in
o
o
If)
a:
<
UJ
o >■
cr>
<n
o
in
(VI
in
o2
sanoH-iivMonix Nonnia
q:
UJ
o
O
q:
h-
o
UJ
_l
UJ
u.
o
o
o
o
o
in
CM
^
UJ Q^
^
xo
;
^<
l-^w y
•^ I
s
2 —
8-V
q:z
I
UJCt
oo< TV
■ \
xo
<->/ >
.
t-li.
»
/ :
V
f
.9
3/
/ '
X
1-^
V
«
\
/ruf
! V-S/X |^~?
/•'/^i *
• 1 z'
f •K'\\K
° (3-\ ) : ^\-
-r^ \ • ■■( t *
;
M^H
V-NiAjAvk
'•% ^^'^Sypj.
/~f — °
— \c^
V^^T^^
c^Pn^tCc/^'* ,
y'
i
I lY
1^®
^^P-^
z.r~T^
cp^
iin '
►
'■>-?
Li>u
— ^*'- /^
:
'^^
ujo:
xo
i-u.
q: — ,
o
UJ
\
\
in
\
\
ujcr
xo
3 —
(/>
V
o
\
\
l^o
<4:
\
\
tn,
o
o in
SiiVMOlIM NOiiniw
o
o
o
UJ
o
UJ
o
q:
Ql
-129-
The forecasted increases in the per capita use
reflect the expanding applications of electricity, such as
electric house heating, and the declining cost of power from
fossil fuel and nuclear fired thermal plants. This decrease
is expected to continue to improve the competitive position
of electricity in relation to other forms of energy such as
oil and gas.
The per capita use is expected to remain higher in
Northern than in Southern California. More industrial plants
of the types which require large amounts of power will probably
locate in Northern California. A higher proportion of multiple
residential dwellings, having a lower per capita use, are
anticipated in Southern California.
The industrial power load is predicted to increase
at a faster rate in California than in most other parts of the
United States. This is expected to occur as the State develops
Industrial maturity commensurate with its expanding market and
labor potentials. It is forecast that residential and commer-
cial power loads will increase more rapidly than other load
classes, including industrial. Because of the projected low
cost of fuel for coal-fired plants and the even lower cost of
nuclear fuel, it is anticipated that relatively low cost off-
peak energy will become available. As a result, off peak loads,
such as electric car battery recharging, may increase
markedly.
-130-
Market for and Value of Hydroelectric Pov/er
With the rapidly expanding power requirements In
California, (Figure 34) a potential market should exist for
the relatively limited additional hydroelectric power potential
in the State. The marketability will depend, however, upon two
main interrelated factors.
The first is the extent to which hydroelectric power
can he absorbed in the peak portion of the total power load.
The degree of peaking supplied from a particular source is
expressed in terms of the capacity factor (which is related
directly to the percentage of time the plant operates). For a
given hydroelectric development possibility, as the capacity
factor decreases, the installed plant capacity must be increased,
Current projections of power load and power supply
show that the power market will probably be able to absorb
hydroelectric production at the following minimum dry-period
capacity factors:
1965-1974 1975-1984 After 1984
Dry Period
Capacity Factor {%) 30 25 20
For comparison, estimates of hydroelectric power value for The
California Water Plan were based on a dry-period capacity
factor of 40 percent, which was assumed to remain constant.
The forecasted utilization of hydroelectric generation
in the Intermediate dry-period capacity factor range (20 to 30
percent), results from the estimate that California's needs
for peaking at capacity factors lov/er than 20 percent will be
-131-
supplied by other sources. These will probably Include
surplus peaking capacity from the Pacific Northwest, additions
to existing plants, and special design thermal-electric peak-
ing units. It Is anticipated that conventional hydro plants
will not be able to compete, from the standpoint of cost,
with these other peaking facilities at the very low capacity
factors.
The second factor governing the marketability of
hydroelectric power is the competitive cost of other potential
pov;er sources which might supply the same portion of the power
load. This factor is closely related to the first, because it
is partly on the basis of cost that the estimates of capacity
factor for hydro have been made.
The principal measure of value of hydroelectric
power is the cost of producing equivalent power through the
alternative thennal-electrlc unit which would be installed
In the absence of the hydroelectric plant. Other factors
considered include the greater reliability and operational
flexibility of the hydroelectric machinery.
The estimated values of hydroelectric power for
future developments are as follows:
-132-
Date of Initial Operation
1965-197^" 1975-19^^" After 19^^
Capacity Component at
Load Center 17.90 18.35 19.20
(dollars per
kilowatt-year)
Capacity Component at
Plant Sites 16.65 17.10 17.95
(dollars per
kilowatt-year)
Energy Component at
Load Center and
Plant Sites 3.0 2.1 0.7
(mills per
kilowatt -hour)
These estimated values were based on fossil fuel units only for
the initial period; fossil fuel and nuclear units, in the pro-
portion of two fossil fuel units to one nuclear unit, for the
1975-1984 period; and nuclear units only after 1984. The
capacity components of value at the hydroelectric plant sites
were estimated hy deducting transmission costs and losses from
the values at load center, assuming a transmission distance of
about 125 miles. Energy losses in transmission, which would
be small at assumed high transmission voltages of 345 and 5OO
thousand volts, were neglected for these estimates.
The above estimates of values at plant sites compare
to the constant values of about $22 per kilowatt-year and 2.8
mills per kilowatt-hour used for The California Water Plan.
The decline in the estimated value of the capacity component
of hydroelectric power between the time of The California Water
Plan studies and the present is due to reductions in the
-133-
capital costs of fossil fuel generating units. The decrease
in the value of the energy component, after the initial period,
is the result of the projected use of low-cost nuclear fuel.
The decrease in the components of value of hydro-
electric power, discussed above, would be offset by the
increase of total unit value, or revenue, due to the loiver
capacity factor for such power. The total unit value of power
at hydroelectric plant sites, given in The California V/ater
Plan, was 7.8 mills per kilowatt-hour. Based on the current
estimates of the capacity and energy components of value and
the lower capacity factors, the total unit values at plant
sites would be 8.1, 8.4 and 8.9 mills per kilowatt-hour for
the respective periods named above. Proposed individual hydro-
electric power installations will have to be appraised in the
light of cost factors and power load conditions prevailing
and forecasted when advance planning and design are undertaken.
Sources and Cost of Power for Pumping
Recent technological advances have resulted in
several sources of low-cost power for water project pumping.
These include developments in nuclear power generation,
decreases in the costs of mining and transporting coal, and
reductions in the cost of electric power transmission. The
Pacific Northwest-Pacific Southwest Interties v/ill provide a
source of relatively low-cost power for pumping in California
in the near future. This source consists of surpluses antici-
pated in Pacific Northv;est and Canadian Entitlement power,
which ultimately will be withdrawn for use closer to the points
of generation.
-134-
The costs of pumping power are expected to exhibit
a continuing decline as nuclear power approaches fulfillment
of its promising potential. This reduction in cost is ex-
pected to increase the feasibility of higher pumping lifts
and aqueduct routes, with the result that associated tunnels
will be shortened. The low costs predicted for offpeak power
will tend to Increase the feasibility of offpeak pumping,
which will require, in some instances, greater pumping capacity
and larger aqueducts. Low cost offpeak power for pumping
would also be conducive to pumped storage development of hydro-
electric peaking pov;er.
-135-
CHAPTER III. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS
Since publication of The California Water Plan by the
Department of Water Resources in May 1957, many events have
occurred that pertain to implementation of the Plan. Population,
rranufacturing and agricultural producation have advanced to
higher levels, thus causing substantial increases in requirements
for applied water. Federal, state and local agencies have spent
over two billion dollars on v;ater project construction. The use
of pov/er has grown at a phenomenal rate, and there have been
important technological changes affecting the cost of power pro-
duction and the cost of power for water project pumping. Funda-
mental policies in the field of water development have been
affected by many legislative acts and court decisions. Substan-
tial progress has been made in planning features of The California
Water Plan and in coordination of the activities of federal, state
and local agencies engaged in planning, design and construction
of water resource development.
On the basis of events of the last decade and other
available information, analyses have been made of the probable
course of development of the State's water resources until the
year 2020. The conclusions resulting from these studies are as
follows :
-137-
1. Projections of growth of the State indicate
that between I96O and 2020 the population
will increase by nearly four times to more
than 5^ million persons, urban land use will
roughly triple to nearly six million acres,
irrigated lands will increase by more tha.n
25 percent to almost 11 million acres, and
undeveloped irrigable lands will be reduced
by nearly 50 percent to a little more than
eight million acres.
2. From 196O to 2020, annual applied water require-
ments for agricultural purposes are expected to
increase about 25 percent to almost 36 million
acre-feet, applied water requirements for urban
purposes will more than quadruple to over
l4 million acre-feet, and total applied water
requirements will rise nearly 60 percent to
about 50 million acre-feet. Applied urban
water requirements are expected to increase
from 10 percent of the total in I96O to 23
percent in 2020.
3. Between I96O and 2020, net v;ater reauirements ,
which allow for probable reuses of water In
each hydrologic study area, are expected to
increase more than 60 percent to 38 million
acre-feet .
-138-
4. With the projected growth of California's
population and its industrial and agricul-
tural activity, the need for water project
services in the fields of flood control,
recreation, fish and wildlife enhancement,
and water quality control will increase
substantially.
5. Between I96O and 2020, water developed and
used locally in each of the 11 hydrologic
study areas will increase to a total of
about 17 million acre-feet statewide (a
13 percent increase). Imported water (water
moved from one hydrologic area to another)
must be increased three times above present
levels to 21 million acre-feet. Only in
the North Coastal, North Lahontan and
Sacramento Basin hydrologic areas will
imported water needs not increase.
6. The Central Valley Project and the State Water
Project will play an expanding role in pro-
viding for California's water needs. Between
i960 and 2020, the portion of the State's net
water requirements to be met by these projects
is expected to increase from approximately 23
to '^h percent. The North Lahontan area is
the only area for which service from the State
Water Project-Central Valley Project system is
not forecast.
-139-
7. Completion of the presently authorized convey-
ance features of the Central Valley Project-
State V/ater Project system will leave a
remaining net water requirement of over 6.5
million acre-feet by the year 2020 to be
supplied either by expansion of these projects
or by other water resources developments.
Additional conveyance facilities of the Central
Valley Project should be authorized and
completed approximately as follows: the San
Felipe Division by the early 1970's, the
West Sacramento Canal Unit by the mid-1970' s,
and the East Side Division by not later than the
early 1980's. The capital costs of these
features will be over one billion dollars.
Between 1990 and 2000, additional conveyance
facilities not yet identified will be required
to serve the San Joaquin Basin, Central Coastal,
South Coastal and Colorado Desert areas.
8, The conservation facilities of the State Water
Project-Central Valley Project system, which
are under construction or authorized, should
develop sufficient water supplies to meet the
projected net water requirements to be served
by these projects until the late 1980's. Water
supply needs of the State Water Project and
Central Valley Project between the late I98O ' s
-140-
and 2000 can be met from water conser-
vation projects in the upper Eel, Trinity,
Mad and Vxn Duzen River Basins. The projected
cost of these conservation developments is
between 800 and 900 million dollars. There
are alternative means of meeting the needs
for new water supplies after about the year
2000. These include reservoirs on the
lower Eel and Klamath Rivers, desalination
and a regional water plan. Additional sur-
face reservoirs and ground water development
in the Sacramento and Delta-Central Sierra
areas may also contribute toward satisfying
the system yield between the late I98O ' s and
2020. The schedule for construction of multiple-
purpose reservoirs may be determined by the
need for flood control and water Quality
control, rather than for water conservation
purposes alone.
9. Construction of the proposed federal portion
of the water conveyance and conservation
facilities of the Central Valley Project-
State Water Project system, together with the
completion of facilities already authorized
for state or federal construction, and other
necessary federal water conservation, con-
veyance and flood control projects, will
-141-
require a.verage annual federal appropriations
between I966 and 1990 consi.derably higher than
the average for the last 10 years. Construction
scheduling would undoubtedly cause the max-
imum annual expenditure to exceed this necessary
I966-I99O average. Because of the competition
for obtaining federal appropriations, it is in
California's best interest to ensure that each
project proposed for construction in the Central
Valley Project-State Water Project system and
those features not a part of this system conform
to an orderly and timely staging to meet statewide
needs for v/ater, flood control and other project
functions .
10. Flood control should be included as a project
purpose in many of the multiple-purpose reservoirs
to be constructed. Single-purpose flood control
projects will also be reouired. The U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers has a number of authorized
flood control projects in the planning or con-
struction phase, and it is authorized to conduct
investigations of additional flood control
possibilities .
11. Flood control investigations by federal, state
and local agencies should give balanced con-
sideration to all feasible methods of flood
control and prevention of flood damage. These
■l42-
methods should Include storage facilities,
levee and stream improvements, bypass channels,
warning systems and floodplain and watershed
management. Projections of flood control needs
may indicate that it might he deslrahle to con-
struct a multiple-purpose project for flood
control before it is required for its other
purposes. Such early scheduling is possible,
if it is sound from the standpoint of economics.
The solutions to many flood control problems
that cannot be solved economically by project
construction, may have to depend on floodplain
management .
12. Power requirements in California are projected
to increase by over 10 times to a maximum power
demand of nearly 25O million kilowatts by the
year 2020. The cost of generation of thermal-
electric pov/er, which determines the value of
hydroelectric power, is predicted to be sub-
stantially less than estimated for The California
V/ater Plan. Hov/ever, the projected lov;er capacity
factors at which hydroelectric power is predicted
to be used will increase the total value of hydro-
electric pov;er to slightly over that estimated
for the Plan. Lov;ered costs of power for pumping,
as a result of technological advances, are
expected to affect the selection of pumping lifts
and aqueduct routes, and could increase the use
of power for off peak pumping.
-143-
'J
THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE
STAMPED BELOW
RENEWED BOOKS ARE SUBJECT TO IMMEDIATE
RECALL
o'fT' 5 1974
JUN 5 1976
: i REC'D
APR 1 3 2000
AUG t 0 2000
PSL
JUN 1 6 197B
JUNlgREC'D
JAN 18 2006
DEC 1 1 2005
JAN 1 9 2000 I PSL
JAN 2 7 2000 ftEC'O kJANJ 8 2(?j;
i
LIBRARY, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, DAVIS
Book SIip-40m-8,'67(H4313s4)458
N5 482536
nslifomia. Dept.
of Water Resources.
Bulletin.
PHYSICAL
UBRARY
||l|i|ifl?|'fi>?i';i.'^?Vf9f!N'A,e*y's.
3 1175 019
Iniilnliiiliijiil
5 1847
C2
A?
no.l60:66|
C.2
ii82g36
California, Dept,
of Water Resourcec
Bulletin.