(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Children's Library | Advanced Microdevices Manuals | Linear Circuits Manuals | Supertex Manuals | Sundry Manuals | Echelon Manuals | RCA Manuals | National Semiconductor Manuals | Hewlett Packard Manuals | Signetics Manuals | Fluke Manuals | Datel Manuals | Intersil Manuals | Zilog Manuals | Maxim Manuals | Dallas Semiconductor Manuals | Temperature Manuals | SGS Manuals | Quantum Electronics Manuals | STDBus Manuals | Texas Instruments Manuals | IBM Microsoft Manuals | Grammar Analysis | Harris Manuals | Arrow Manuals | Monolithic Memories Manuals | Intel Manuals | Fault Tolerance Manuals | Johns Hopkins University Commencement | PHOIBLE Online | International Rectifier Manuals | Rectifiers scrs Triacs Manuals | Standard Microsystems Manuals | Additional Collections | Control PID Fuzzy Logic Manuals | Densitron Manuals | Philips Manuals | The Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly Debates | Linear Technologies Manuals | Cermetek Manuals | Miscellaneous Manuals | Hitachi Manuals | The Video Box | Communication Manuals | Scenix Manuals | Motorola Manuals | Agilent Manuals
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "The California water plan : outlook in 1974"

■^ 



Physicai 



~S Sci.LiB. 

^1 


^^■^ 


■ tc 


^^■^ 


I 82^ 


^^^B^ 


■ C2 


^^^Hi' 


fl A2 


H^^B 


1 NO. 160: 


^^^Hi: 


■ 74 


■ 


1 


^^^^^^^^^^B^ 



il.C 



9 m 



ivii m^ ^' 



-^ w\ 



m 



1 The California 
1 Water Plan 


^^^ 1.^78 ^ 
^^1 1 


j^^^ 


■Outlook in 1974 


^1^ 




jm7cnnvn ^^^^ ^^ VnIT^ 


' — ^ ti_ 




1197? ^^^^^^^ ^^W .J ^ 


^^^^ 





aK 1 G [^tC'Q 




State of California 
The Resources Agency 



Department of 
Water Resources 
Bulletin No. 160-74 



ft 



*• -m^m 







Department of 
Water Resources 

Bulletin No. 160-74 



The California Visiter Plan 

Outlook in19^ 



November 1974 



^ • ^ ^^1 ^ nl |j 



The State of Camornia TDepartment of 

Resources Agency Water Resources 



Norman B. Livermore,Jr. Ronald Reagan John R.Teerink 

Secretary for Resources Governor Director 




Satellite "photograph" of Colifo 
ERTS "photo" (See page x) 



FOREWORD 



Water development has done more to enhance the 
economy and environment of California than any of 
man's other activities. From a hostile climate has come 
the livelihood of 20.9 million people and a major por- 
tion of the nation's food supply. California today is 
the result of the planning and management of its water 
resources by local, state, and federal agencies. Califor- 
nia tomorrow will also depend on continued wise re- 
source management but is challenged by increasingly 
complex issues that will affect the quality of life. 
Water development is a part of these interrelated 
issues and must be viewed in a broader context than 
in the past. An affluent society with its water demands 
satiated can afford to consider a larger value system. 

Momentous events and trends have occurred during 
the past four years since our last statewide water re- 
source assessment was made. Some of these events 
and trends have already affected the water picture in 
definable ways, while the effects of others are yet to 
mature. Some major examples are the establishment of 
stringent goals for water quality improvement and 
waste management, the substantial new demands for 
cooling water for thermal electric power plants, the 
reservation of one-fourth of the State's surface water 
resources in a Wild and Scenic River System, the in- 
creasing worldwide demand for agricultural products, 
widespread litigation seeking delay or curtailment of 
water development programs, and the escalating costs 
of energy. 

While these and additional events have occurred, 
other significant trends have continued that also affect 
the State's water resources. Population has continued 
"to increase, but at a rate less than during the 1960s, 
reflecting the national trend, and thereby stretching 
our presently developed water supplies. Irrigated ag- 
riculture has continued to increase at about the same 
rate as during the previous reporting period. 



On a statewide basis, the California water outlook 
is favorable. There are, however, areas facing distress 
and some uncertainties in the future that will require 
corrective action. The continued increase of salinity 
in many of the local ground water basins and in wa- 
ter from the Colorado River will be detrimental to 
many water users. The continued overdraft, currently 
over one and one-half million acre-feet per year, in 
the San Joaquin \'alle\- will have a permanent ad- 
verse economic effect on the user and will deplete 
some portions of the basin. Conveyance facilities are 
necessary to bring developed water supplies to the 
areas of need in the valley. 

The inland siting of thermal electric power plants 
will impose a significant water requirement on water 
deficient areas of the State. To meet this requirement 
every effort should be made to use our poorer quality 
water supplies such as agricultural drainage and other 
waste water to the extent feasible. Where agricultural 
waste water can be used, the drainage disposal prob- 
lem could be reduced. 

Current litigation, if successful, will have a serious 
adverse effect on several areas of the State. Alterna- 
tives to projects in contention are limited and costly. 
The full ramifications of these law suits cannot be 
determined at this time. 

Thorough study needs to be given to alternatives 
that would continue to stretch our water supplies. 
The reclamation of waste water, including demineral- 
ization of brackish water, appears to be the most 
promising today. While research and development of 
alternatives continues, it is incumbent on all users to 
achieve more eflicient use of the water supplies now 
available. Several significant policy issues relating to 
water resource management need careful and thought- 
ful public and legislative consideration if we are to 
most effectively meet our future water needs. 



V John R. Teerink, Director 

Department of Water Resources 
The Resources Agenc\' 
State of California 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

FOREWORD i 

ORGANIZATION _ viii 

CALIFORNIA WATER COMMISSION _ ix 

INTRODUCTION ^ _ _ _ i 

The Outlook in 1974 i 

General _ _ j 

Concerning Growth _ _ _ j 

Concerning Water Demands — _ 2 

Concerning Present Water Supplies _ 2 

Concerning New Water Supplies _ _... 2 

Concerning Regional Water Supply and Demand _. 3 

Concerning .\Jtemative Futures . _ _ 4 

California's Water Resources . ._ ._ 5 

State Responsibility for Water Development . 5 

Organization of Bulletin 160-74 _ 7 

CHAPTER I. HISTORIC AND RECENT EVENTS 9 

California Water Plan 9 

Transition to the Present .._ _ 10 

National Water Commission Report _ 11 

Environmental Considerations in Water Management _ 14 

Public Involvement _ 14 

Water Rights Decisions _ _ _ _ 14 

California Wild and Scenic Rivers Act _. 16 

NEPA and CEQA _..._ _ 16 

Litigation 18 

Comprehensive Water Quality Control Planning 19 

State-Federal and Interstate Activities ._ 20 

Cooperation with U. S. Water Resources Council 20 

Western U. S. Water Plan Study . 21 

Salinit\- of Colorado River . _ _ _ 21 

Western States Water Council _ 23 

California State-Federal Interagency Group 23 

Interstate Water Compacts _ _ 24 

Land Use Planning and Controls 24 

Land Use Policy and Control Legislation 24 

The "Quiet Revolution" _ 26 

Land Use Planning and the Department of Water Resources 29 

CHAPTER II. KEY WATER POLICY ISSUES 31 

Cooling Water for Electric Energy Production 31 

Water Deficiencies —_ 33 

Cost Sharing of Environmental Enhancement 34 

Water Quality Improvement 35 

\Vater Supplies as a Growth Regulator 36 

Role of Water Exchanges in Water Management 36 

Public Interest in Agricultural Drainage ..._ . 38 

Flood Damage Prevention 39 

Water Pricing Policy and Its Effect on Demand _... 40 

Water Use Efficiency and Its Effect on Demand _... 40 

Economic Efficiency as a Basis for Water Management 42 

Supplemental Water Through Waste Water Reclamation 42 



TABLE OF CONTENTS-Continued 

Page 

CHAPTER III. ALTERNATIVE FUTURES FOR CALIFORNIA _ 45 

Projected Needs _ 45 

Population . _ 45 

Trends and Influences 45 

Alternative Population Projections , 46 

Agricultural Production _ 49 

Trends and Influences 49 

Alternative Projections of Irrigated Crop and Land Acreage _.. 54 

Electrical Energy 58 

Trends and Influences 58 

Alternative Future Projections _ 59 

Thermal Power Plant Siting 60 

Trends and Influences on Other Water Related Needs 61 

Recreation, Fish and Wildlife 61 

Flood Control „ — _ 64 

Environmental Quality 65 

Water Quality _ 65 

CHAPTER I\'. DEMANDS FOR WATER 67 

Urban Water Use 67 

Agricultural Water Demands 69 

AVater for Power _._ 72 

Recreation, Fish and Wildlife 75 

Strcamflow .Maintenance 75 

Wildlife Habitat Protection 76 

Fisher>- Mitigation and Enhancement _ 77 

Applied Water Demands 78 

Other Water Demand Considerations 80 

Environmental Enhancement 80 

Water Qualit>- Control . 82 

Flood Control 8 J 

Energ>' Generation 85 

Navigation _ 88 

^^ummary of Water Demands 88 

CHAPTER V. SOURCES OF WATER AND WATER MANAGEMENT 91 

Surface Water Regulation . 91 

Recent Water Projects . 91 

Central \'alle>' Area Water Projects 95 

North Coast Area Water Projects 96 

i*'Ground Water _ . __.. 96 

Activities by the Department of Water Resources 97 

Ground Water Conditions _. _ _ 101 

Waste Water Reclamation 104 

Use of Reclaimed Waste Water 106 

Potential Future of Waste Water Reclamation 106 

Cost of Waste Water Reclamation .'. 108 

Activities by the Department of Water Resources : 109 

Legal Requirements and Public Acceptance 109 

Costs of Desalting 110 

Energ>' Required _ 1 1 1 

Activities b>- the Department _ Ill 

Future Potential of Desalination 113 

Gcothernial Water Potential 113 



TABLE OF CONTENTS-Continued 

Page 

Weather Alodification _ 115 

Management Concepts and Practices 117 

More Effective Use of Water 117 

■ More Effective Use of Facilities _ 119 

Ground Water Modeling _ 119 

Waterway Management Plans 120 

Flood Control . _. 122 

Water Quality Control Planning 124 

Introduction 124 

Purposes of the Plans __ __ 125 

Plan Preparation _ 125 

Planning Criteria and Constraints 126 

Planning Strategy . 127 

Plan Reports 1 30 

Public Participation _ _. _ _... 1 30 

Basin Problems _ 131 

CHAPTER VI. WATER SUPPLY AND SUPPLEMENTAL DEMANDS 139 

Available Water Supplies _ 141 

Local Surface Water Projects 141 

Ground Water Safe Yield 141 

The Central V^alley Project 142 

Other Federal Water Developments 144 

The California State Water Project 144 

Waste Water Reclamation 146 

Desalting 146 

Summary of Available Water Supplies 146 

Effect of State Water Resources Control Board — Decisions on Water Supply 150 

Decision 1379 150 

Decision 1400 150 

Decision 1422 150 

Supplemental Water Demands 151 

Analysis of Central \'alley Project and State — Water Project Capability and Demands.. 152 

Project Water Supplies 152 

The Peripheral Canal 152 

Water Demands on the Central Valley Project 152 

Water Demands on the State Water Project 155 

Comparison of Supply and Demand 155 

Summary of Regional Water Supply and Demand 157 

APPENDIX. WORKSHOPS FOR BULLETIN NO. 160-74 181 

TABLES 

Number Title 

1 California and U. S. Population and Percent Increase by Decades, 1920-1974 46 

2 Population Factors ._ _ 46 

3 California and United States Populations _ 46 

4 Population in California 1972, 1990 and 2020 47 

5 1972 and Projected Irrigated Land Area and Irrigated Double Crop Acreage 55 

6 Projected Requirements for Electrical Energy 60 

7 Projected Additional Generation Requiring Cooling Water 60 

8 Additional Inland Thermal Power Generation 61 

9 Existing and Projected Fishing and Hunting Uses of California's Fresh Water Fish 

and Water Fowl Resources ._ _ _ 62 

10 Per Capita Water Use in Selected Communities . 67 

11 1972 and Projected Urban Applied Water Demand 68 



TABLE OF CONTENTS-Continued 

TABLES (continued) 

yumhcr Title Page 

12 1972 and Projected Agricultural Applied Water Demand _ 72 

13 Power Plant Fresh Water Cooling Requirements 74 

14 Summary of Flow Maintenance Agreements 75 

15 Applied Water Demands for Fish, Wildlife and Nonurban Area Recreation 78 

16 1972 and Projected Applied Water Demands by Alternative Futures 89 

17 1972 and Projected Net Water Demands by Alternative Futures 90 

18 Projects Completed by Local Agencies 1971-1974 94 

19 Summary' of Urban Waste Water Production, Disposal, and Reclamation 

Practices, 1972 105 

20 Intentional Use of Reclaimed Water in 1972 106 

21 Municipal and Industrial Waste Water Production in Coastal Metropolitan Areas 107 

22 Mandatory Waste Treatment Requirements, Public Law 92-500 125 

23 Basin Planning Organizations 126 

24 Base Conditions for Planning _ 128 

25 Major Features of the Central Valley Project , 142 

26 Other Federal Water Projects in California 144 

27 Summary of 1972 and Projected Water Supplies, Net Water Demands, and 

Supplemental Demands by Hydrologic Study Areas ._ 146 

28 Comparisons of Supplemental Demand between Bulletin No. 160-74 

and Previous Bulletin 151 

29 Net Water Demands on the Central Valley Project 15J 

30 Possible Additional Demands on the Central Valley Project 153 

31 Net Water Demands on the State Water Project under Present Contracts 155 

32 Possible Demands on the State Water Project in Addition to Present Contracts 155 

FIGURES 

Number TitU 

1 H>'droIogic Cycle 5 

2 Hydrologic Study Areas of California 6 

3 Average Annual Runoff in Million Acre-feet 7 

4 Water Quality Control Planning Basins 19 

5 California Historical and Projected Population Growth 47 

6 United States Historical and Projected Population Growth 48 

7 Per Capita Consumption of P'arm Products in the United States 50 

8 Average Yields of Selected Farm Crops in California 53 

9 Historical and Projected Irrigated Land Area 54 

10 Irrigated and Urban Areas 56 

11 Highlights of Changes in Irrigated Land Use, 1967-1972 57 

12 Historic and Projected Electric Energy Requirements 59 

13 California Population and State Park System Attendance 62 

14 Heat Balance Diagram _ _ 73 

15 Projected Demands for Fresh Cooling Water 74 

16 Water Use for Recreation, Fish and Wildlife 77 

17 Pumped Storage Sites Under Consideration 85 

18 Geothermal Resource Areas 86 

19 Major Surface Water Supply and Conveyance Facilities 1974 . _. 92 

20 Projects Completed Under the Davis-Grunsky Act 1971-1974 _. 94 

21 Ground Water Change During Dry Period, 1960-1965 98 

22 Ground Water Change During Wet Period, 1965-1970 . 99 

23 Waste Water Reclamation Facilities 107 

24 Thermal Anomalies in the Imperial Valley Area 114 

25 Weather Modification Target Areas in 1971-1972 116 

26 Statewide Planning Strategy for Water Quality Management 129 

27 Distribution of Natural Runoff in California by Hydrologic Study Area 139 

28 Total Surface Water Supply and Present Uses and Commitments 140 



TABLE OF CONTENTS-Continued 

FIGURES (continued) 

Number Title Page 

29 Statewide Water Demand and Usable Water Supply 148 

30 Projected Net Water Demands and Dependable Water Supply — Central 

Valley Project _ 154 

31 Projected Net Water Demands and Dependable Water Supply — State 

Water Project __ „ _ _ 155 

32 Net Water Demands and Water Supply — North Coastal Hydrologic Study Area .. 158 

33 North Coastal Hydrologic Study Area _ 159 

34 Net Water Demands and Water Supply — San Francisco Bay 

Hydrologic Study Area -^ 160 

35 San Francisco Bay Hydrologic Study Area _ 161 

36 Net Water Demands and Water Supply — Central Coastal Hydrologic Study Area .... 162 

37 Central Coastal Hydrologic Study Area 163 

38 Net Water Demands and Water Supply — South Coastal Hydrologic Study Area .... 164 

39 South Coastal Hydrologic Study Area _ 165 

40 Net Water Demands and Water Supply — Sacramento Basin 

Hydrologic Study Area 166 

41 Sacramento Basin Hydrologic Study Area _ 167 

42 Net Water Demands and Water Supply — Delta-Central Sierra 

Hydrologic Study Area 168 

43 Delta-Central Sierra Hydrologic Study Area 169 

44 Net Water Demands and Water Supply — San Joaquin Hydrologic Study Area 170 

45 San Joaquin Hydrologic Study Area 171 

46 Net Water Demands and Water Supply — Tulare Basin Hydrologic Study Area 172 

47 Tulare Basin Hydrologic Study Area 173 

48 Net Water Demands and Water Supply — North Lahontan Hydrologic Study Area ... 174 

49 North Lahontan Hydrologic Study Area 175 

50 Net Water Demands and Water Supply — South Lahontan Hydrologic Study Area 176 

51 South Lahontan Hydrologic Study Area 177 

52 Net Water Demands and Water Supply — Colorado Desert 

Hydrologic Study Area 178 

53 Colorado Desert Hydrologic Study Area 179 



PLATES 

(In pocket at back of bulletin) 

1. Surface Water Resources Development in California 

2. Irrigated, Irrigable and Urban Lands 



State of California 
The Resources Agency 

DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES 



RONALD REAGAN, Governor 

NORMAN B. LIVERMORE, JR., Secrefory for Resources 

JOHN R. TEERINK, Direcfor, Department of Water Resources 

ROBERT G. EILAND, Depufy Director 



DIVISION OF RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT . 

Herbert W. Greydanus Division Engineer ■( 



This bulleiin was prepared by 

Charles A. McCullough.... ._ Chief, Statewide Planning Branch 

Jerry D. Vayder Supervising Engineer, W. R. 

wUh major assisiance from 

Ralph G. Allison Lionel J. Lerner 

Vernon C. Bengal L. Ernest Moberg 

Earl G. Bingham William G. McKane 

Walter W. Bourez, Jr. Maurice D. Roos 

Stanley W. Cummings Glenn B. Sawyer 

Robert M. Ernst Price J. Schreiner 

John R. Glcvinovich Betty F. Wade 

Caroline J. Grubbs Richard J. Wagner 

Marian P. Hogen Wendell D. Walling 

Jacob W. Holdermon James M. Wardlow 

Jean H. Jaquith Jock H. Wyatt 

Paulyne D. Joe Mitzi A. Young 



Assistance was provided by the District Offices of the 

Department of Water Resources 

under the direction of 

Albert J. Dolcini Disfricf Engineer, Northern District 

Robin R. Reynolds _. District Engineer, Central District 

Carl L. Stetson _ District Engineer, San Joaquin District 

Jack J. Coe _ _ District Engineer, Southern District 



Contributions were made by many individuals in other 
Department of Water Resources units 

Section on Water Quality Control Planning was prepared by 
State Water Resources Control Board 



State of California 
Department of Water Resources 

CALIFORNIA WATER COMMISSION 



IRA J. CHRISMAN, Chairman, Visalia 
CLAIR A. HILL, Vice Chairman, Redding 



Mai Coombs Garberville 

Ray W. Ferguson Ontario 

Ralph E. Graham -- San Diego 

Clare W. Jones — — Firebaugh 

William P. Moses San Pablo 

Samuel B. Nelson .— Northridge 

Ernest R. Nichols Ventura 



Orvilie L. Abbott 
Execufive Officer and Chief Engineer 

Tom Y. Fujimoto 
Assisiant Executive Officer 



Copies of this bulletin at $5.00 each may be ordered froir 

State of California 

DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES 

P.O. Box 383 

Sacramento, California 95802 
Make checks payable to STATE OF CALIFORNIA 
California residents add 6 percent sales tax. 



FRONTISPIECE 

This "photograph" of the State was produced from 
imagery' collected by the Earth Resources Technology 
Satellite (ERTS-1) orbiting at a distance of about 570 
miles above the earth. The electronic instruments in 
the satellite scanned the terrain and recorded light re- 
flected back from the earth in four spectral bands (2 
visible, 2 infrared). This data was then telemetered 
to a data-processing facility and reconstructed into 
four separate black and white "photographs" each 
covering the same 100 x 100 mile area. The Depart- 
ment used three of the four "photographs" of each 
area and a color additive process to create the thirty- 
four color "photographs" used to make this mosaic 
of the State of California, which has been reduced 
from its original 1: 1,000,000-scale for presentation in 
this report. In this format, green vegetation appears 
red. The advantage of the infrared bands are that 
they enhance the presence of green, growing vegeta- 
tion compared to other land features. 

The sharpest, most cloud-free images available were 
selected, therefore, the dates of the individual images 
var\'. This is the principal reason for the color tone 
differences between neighboring photos in the mosaic. 

The resolution obtainable with these images is ap- 
proximately 200 feet, which is sufficient for recon- 
naissance level interpretation of certain aspects of 
vegetation and other land-related conditions consid- 
ered in water resource planning. The Department of 
Water Resources is investigating potential uses, which 
include determining irrigated land use change, extent 
of double cropping, urban land use change, change 
in vegetation cover of watersheds, and areal extent of 
snow cover. 



INTRODUCTION 



Bulletin No. 160-74 is the third in a series of reports 
updating the California Water Plan, originally pub- 
lished in 1957 as Department of Water Resources 
Bulletin No. 3. The California Water Plan is a com- 
prehensive master plan to guide and coordinate the 
use of California's water resources for all beneficial 
purposes to meet present and future needs in all parts 
of the state. The plane is not a specific blueprint for 
construction but is, rather, a flexible pattern which can 
provide information and guidance relating to the use 
of the state's water resources, its future water require- 
ments, and sources of water supply for California. 

In this bulletin, the Department of Water Resources 
has departed from the previous practice of develop- 
ing a single forecast of future water requirements, and 
has used for the first time a concept of "alternative 



futures". Under this concept, four different estimates 
of future water requirements are developed, each re- 
lating to different scenarios as to future conditions 
and events that affect water use and demands. 

Data collected b\' the Department of Water Re- 
sources since publication of Bulletin No. 160-70 four 
years ago show that water use in California between 
1967 and 1972 has increased a moderate 1.4 million 
acre-feet, or some 4 percent, corresponding generally 
to a moderate population increase of 1.4 million peo- 
ple, or 7 percent, and an increase in irrigated area of 
300,000 acres or 4 percent. Anal\'sis of present and 
past conditions, together witii studies and estimates of 
future conditions — using the alternative futures ap- 
proach — indicates the following outlook for water re- 
sources management in California. 



The Outlook in 1974 



General 

1. The status of developed and available water sup- 
plies compared to present demands for water is still 
favorable — the situation affords time for consideration 
of all alternative sources for future water supply, in- 
cluding techniques for more efficient use of water to 
reduce demands. This outlook is premised on comple- 
tion of Auburn Dam on the American River, New 
.VIelones Dam on the Stanislaus River, and Warm 
Springs Dam on Dry Creek in the Russian River 
Basin, and the Peripheral Canal being constructed and 
in operation by 1980. 

2. How far into the future this condition will e.xtcnd 
depends on the completion of additional conveyance 
facilities needed to deliver already- regulated supplies 
to various .service areas in the State. 

3. The extent to which available supplies will cover 
future requirements is considerably less certain in 1974 
than it appeared to be in 1970 because of highly 
significant events and trends that have occurred dur- 
ing the last four years — major factors being the estab- 
lishment of additional water requirements for water 
quality improvement and salinity control; the move- 
ment toward siting of power plants at inland locations 
rather than on the coast, also leading to a sub- 
stantial additional water requirement; and the world- 
wide leap in demand for agricultural products. 

4. In addition, no new water projects that would 
develop additional supplies of any significance have 
been authorized, either by state, federal, or local 
agencies in California during the past four years, and 
virtually every attempt to begin construction of pre- 
viously authorized projects or units of such projects 
has met with litigation seeking to delay or stop such 



construction — a condition which, along with the wild 
river legislation and the coastal zone initiative, clearly 
reflects a widespread public interest and concern with 
protection and preservation of the natural environ- 
ment. 

5. The quality of the State's water supply is gen- 
erally quite satisfactory, with the significant exception 
of the Colorado River and some localized ground 
water problems, and may be expected to be maintained 
and improved as the result of the basin plans for water 
quality management currently being developed by the 
State Water Resources Control Board. 

6. While the urban areas of the State should experi- 
ence no significant or extensive water shortages during 
the next 20 years, the prospects of providing water for 
any large expansion of irrigated agriculture in Cali- 
fornia to meet increased demands for food and fiber 
worldwide arc not considered optimistic under the 
general conditions prevailing at the present time. 

Concerning Growfh 

1. In 1974 the population of California was 20.9 
million people, reflecting a continued slowing in 
growth rates, and it may range from a low of 23.6 to 
a high of 27.4 million by 1990, or an increase of 13 
to 31 percent. By 2020, the population may range 
from 26.5 to 43.3 million, or an increase of 27 to 107 
percent. 

2. Of the total state area of 100 million acres, ur- 
ban development currently occupies 2.6 million acres 
and may increase to between 2.9 and 3.3 million by 
1990. Urban land use in 2020 may range from 3.2 to 
4.4 million acres — still less than 5 percent of the total 
area of the State. 



1 



3. Irrigated agriculture increased at an average rate 
of 60,000 acres per year from about 8.5 million acres 
in 1967 to about 8.8 million in 1972. Irrigated area may 
range between 9.2 and 10.2 million acres by 1990, an 
increase of 5 to 16 percent. In 2020, irrigated land 
may ranage from 9.4 million to 11.4 million acres, an 
increase from 7 to 29 percent. The Department of 
Water Resources' land classification surveys show 22 
million acres of irrigabl land in California. 

Concerning Water Demands 

1. Urban water use is now about 5 million acre-feet 
annually, and future demands are expected to range 
from 6.2 to 7.1 million acre-feet in 1990, an increase 
of 22 to 41 percent. By 2020, urban use may range 
from 7.2 to 11.4 million acre-feet. Urban water use 
today accounts for about 1 3 percent of total ^\•ater use 
in the State. 

2. Present agricultural water use is 32 million acre- 
feet of applied water annually, or about 85 percent of 
total water use in the State. Demands for agricultural 
water in 1990 are expected to range from 34 million 
to 38 million acre-feet, an increase of from 7 to 19 
percent. By 2020, agricultural water demands may 
range from 35 to 42 million acre-feet annually. 

3. If two-thirds of the projected increase in thermal 
electrical generation is located at inland sites, up to 
400,000 acre-feet of cooling water will be required by 
1990, and as much as 1.1 million acre-feet could be re- 
quired by 2020. 

4. Total annual applied water demands for all pur- 
poses in California are projected to increase from the 
present 37 million acre-feet, and may range from 41 
to 46 million acre-feet in 1990, an increase from 10 to 
24 percent annually. By 2020, the total applied water 
demands may range from 43 to 55 million acre-feet 
annually. 

5. Net water demands in California, which reflect 
the opportunities to reuse return flows, are projected 
to increase from the 1972 level of 31 million acre-feet 
annually, and may range from 34 to 38 million acre- 
feet by 1990, an increase of 11 to 23 percent. By 2020, 
total net water demands may range from 36 to 46 mil- 
lion acre-feet annually. 

6. With full use of presently foreseen supplies, the 
supplemental water requirements are expected to range 
from 1.6 million to 3.8 million acre-feet annually by 
1990, and from 2.6 to 9.6 million acre-feet annualK* 
by 2020. 

Concerning Present Water Supplies 

1. California's present water needs are being met by 
existing state, federal, and local projects, and in some 
areas, especially the San Joaquin Valley, by overdraft- 
ing ground water supplies. More water is available 
from the existing projects than is being used now, and 
this reserve can be used to satisfy increasing demands 



for a number of years, providing necessar\' conveyance 
facilities are constructed in a timely manner. One such 
facility is the Peripheral Canal which will provide con- 
veyance of water for several regions. Other facilities 
are mentioned in the regional outlooks later in this 
section. 

2. Supplemental water requirements currently aver- 
age 2.4 million acre-feet per year and are being met 
primaril)' through ground water overdraft. The major 
overdrafted areas are in the San Joaquin Valley, the 
Central Coast, and Southern California. 

3. Total overdraft of ground water basins has de- 
creased in the past four years by about 500,000 acre- 
feet per year, due to new water brought into the 
western San Joaquin \'alley by the State Water Proj- 
ect and the San Luis Division of the Central Valley 
Project, thus replacing to some extent previous ground 
water use. Remaining overdrafts, of which the largest 
is 1.4 million acre-feet on the east side of the San 
Joaquin \'alley, are not considered permanent sources 
of water supply. The Cross Valley Canal, under con- 
struction by the Kern County Water Agency, will 
alleviate some of the overdraft in the San Joacjiiin 
Valley. Further, a possible mid-valley canal, being 
studied by the Department of W^ater Resources and 
the Bureau of Reclamation, could provide additional 
alleviation of part of the remaining San Joaquin Val- 
ley overdraft. 

4. Intentionally reclaimed waste water furnished 
about 180,000 acre-feet of usable water supply in 
1972, most of which was for agricultural irrigation. 
An additional 530,000 acre-feet of waste water was 
indirectly reclaimed, returned to the surface and 
ground water supply and reused. 

5. In 1974, virtually no water suppl>' from desalt- 
ing plants was being used in California, and none at 
all was furnished from geothermal sources. 

Concerning New Water Supplies 

1. Tiic location, character of streamflow, and pres- 
ent stage of development of California's surface w ater 
resources are such that the only areas in the State 
where there is any substantial physical potential for 
development of additional water supplies arc in the 
north coastal area and the Sacramento Ri\er Basin. 
Alore than 25 percent (18 million acre-feet) of the 
total stream runoff in California is set aside and not 
available for water suppl\' dc\'clopment under existing 
law for wild and scenic rivers in the north coastal 
area (although the law docs require the Department 
of Water Resources to report in 1985 on the need 
for water suppl>' and flood control projects on the 
Eel River and its tributaries). There is a potential for 
additional development of water in the Sacramento 
Basin, although such development will be costly be- 
cause the more economical sites have already been 
developed. 



2. Conjunctive use of ground water basins and sur- 
face supplies can achieve more effective use of exist- 
ing surface water supplies and would help conserve 
water that would otherwise spill from surface reser- 
voirs during periods of high water. Additional study 
and exploration of the State's ground w ater basins arc 
needed to adequately assess the potential for conserv- 
ing additional surface water resources through con- 
junctive operation. 

3. The California Aqueduct will have access ca- 
pacity for several years that could be used to convey 
surplus water from Northern California for recharge 
of overdrawn ground water basins in Southern Cali- 
fornia. 

^■\. Reclamation of \\aste water, including highly 
saline agricultural waste water, may provide an im- 
portant source of industrial water, particularly for 
cooling in power plants. Reservations regarding the 
safet_\' of reclaimed water from a health standpoint 
greatly limit its use for human consumption and re- 
strict projecting future use for municipal water sup- 
ply purposes. To adequately evaluate the role of waste 
water reclamation in meeting the supplemental de- 
mands, the Department of Water Resources is par- 
ticipating in projects of applied research. 

5. Desalting of sea water on a large scale does not 
currently appear practical due to high costs and ex- 
tremely large energy requirements. Desalting may be 
used for a variety of smaller applications, however, 
over the next 10 to 30 years, particularly to treat 
brackish waste water for use as cooling \\ater in power 
plants. In coastal communities requiring supplemental 
water supplies, there may be limited possibilities for 
desalting sea water by distillation. Inland communities 
with brackish ground water supplies may find the 
membrane processes (reverse osmosis and electrodial- 
\sis) practical. 

6. Geothermal resources in the Imperial X'alley 
could provide California with additional energ\', and 
possibly \\ ater supplies. These could help meet local 
municipal and industrial water demands or might be 
blended \\ith Colorado River water to reduce the sa- 
linity of water supplies from the river. To this date 
however, it has not been demonstrated that develop- 
ment of geothermal water supplies is feasible, either 
from an economic or environmental point of view. 

7. There are several operational weather modifica- 
tion programs in California and in other states. It has 
not been possible to determine the extent to which a 
consistent increase in precipitation and streamflow 
can be attained. Several studies and pilot projects are 
under\\a\- but their success is problematical. Conse- 
quently, it is not prudent at this time to rely on 
weather modification as a feasible source of future 
water supply. In addition, there are as yet unresolved 
problems of environmental effects and legal questions. 



Concerning Regional Wafer Supply and Demand 

1. North Coastiil. Overall water supplies are abun- 
dant, amounting to nearly 40 percent of the total 
\\ater resources of the State. However, there are scat- 
tered local shortages during the dry season when 
streams are low. In the interior (upper Klamath River 
Basin including the Shasta and Scott Rivers) present 
supplies are nearlv completely used and significant 
expansion would require additional water develop- 
ment. 

Only minor increases from present water demands 
are projected for the region in 1990, most of which 
is expected to be met from increased ground water 
pumping and remaining surface supplies. The minor 
increase in supplemental demand is mostly due to in- 
creases in wildlife requirements. 

2. San Francisco Bay. This region presently has 
enough water to take care of its requirements, except 
for a few scattered areas in the North Bay and Rus- 
sian River basins. Overall water supplies appear ade- 
quate for 1990, but the distribution of supplies does 
not correspond with the pattern of projected demand. 
Therefore, a supplemental demand of from 30,000 to 
80,000 acre-feet per year is indicated, primarily in 
Santa Clara, Marin, and Napa Counties. The near fu- 
ture supply assumes completion of Warm Springs 
Dam and Reservoir. If that water supply of 115,000 
acre-feet is not available, major shortages in Sonoma 
County also would be expected by 1990. Completion 
of the North Bay Aqueduct of the State Water Proj- 
ect will provide capacity for an additional 12,500 
acre-feet annuall\- for Napa County. 

3. Central Coastal. Water demands in this region 
presently exceed dependable supplies by about 140,000 
acre-feet, per year, with the difference showing up 
as ground water overdraft. This has resulted in sa- 
linity intrusion in certain coastal aquifers. The quality 
of ground water is poor in the area around the City 
of Santa Barbara and some locations along the Santa 
Maria River. New supplies to Santa Barbara and San 
Luis Obispo Counties from the Coastal Aqueduct of 
the State Water Project will help meet demands, but 
projected increases in 1990 water demands would leave 
a shortage between 200,000 to 280,000 acre-feet per 
year. The bulk of the shortage would be in the north- 
ern portion of the region, including the Salinas \'al- 
ley and the service area of the authorized San Felipe 
Division of the Central X'^alley Project. 

4. Soj/tb Coastal. Water demands in 1972 had be- 
gun to outstrip the supplies available from sources 
other than the State Water Project. New supplies 
from the State Water Project should be more than 
adequate to meet 1990 water demands, even with the 
projected reduction of about 780,000 acre-feet per 
year in Colorado River supplies including some re- 
allocations for power plant cooling in the desert areas. 
The increase in State Water Project supply and its 



substitution in part for Colorado River water should 
markedl\' lower the dissolved salts content of South- 
ern California water supplies. Indicated annual 1990 
demands range from 650,000 to 1,030,000 acre-feet 
less than 1990 total water supplies assuming the full 
contractual commitments of the State Water Project 
are available to the region. 

5. Sacramento Basin. Although overall supplies in 
this region appear adequate, not all locations have 
sufficient dependable water supplies at present. The 
indicated current annual deficit is estimated to be 
240,000 acre-feet and could increase to as much as 
500,000 acre-feet by 1990 for the highest demand pro- 
jection, or could be slightly less than current levels for 
the lowest demand projection. Most of the projected 
supplemental demand in 1990 is expected to occur on 
the west side of the Sacramento Valley and in several 
upland basins. 

Significant additions to present water facilities in- 
clude completion of the Tehama-Colusa Canal in the 
Sacramento Valley and Indian \"alley Reservoir on 
Cache Creek, both currently under construction. 

6. Delta-Central Sierra. Estimated 1972 supple- 
mental demand was about 120,000 acre-feet per year, 
mostly in the Folsom South Canal service area in Sac- 
ramento and San Joaquin Counties. Completion of the 
Folsom-South Canal and possibly a Hood-Cla)' intertie 
from the Sacramento River will meet this demand. 
Other supplemental demands ranging from 80,000 to 
220,000 acre-feet would remain. Completion of the 
North Ba\- Aqueduct of the State Water Project will 
enable 43,000 acre-feet annually to be supplied Solano 
County from the Delta. 

7. San Joaquin Basin. The estimated present 
ground water overdraft in this region is about 250,000 
acre-feet per year, mainly in iMadera, southeastern 
Merced, and eastern Stanislaus Counties. The assumed 
additional Central \'alley Project supply of New 
Melones Reservoir, plus some additional use of other 
sources, is not expected to completely end the over- 
draft. Supplemental demands ranging from 130,000 
to 670,000 acre-feet are projected for 1990. 

8. Tulare Basin. Estimated 1972 ground water 
overdraft was slightly over 1,300,000 acre-feet per 
year, significantl\- less than the 1,800,000 acre-feet 
amount in 1967. The improvement is due to new water 
supplies from the Central \'alley Project and the State 
Water Project to service areas on the w est side of the 
basin, with some 1,500,000 acre-feet provided in 
1972. By 1990 projected deliveries would be increased 
by about another 1,300,000 acre-feet per year, but 
increases in demand and continued overdraft in areas 
not served by state and federal facilities would still 
leave supplemental demands or continuing ground 
water overdrafts ranging from 920,000 to 1,920,000 
acre-feet per year. A possible mid-valley canal could 
convey surplus water to the east side of the basin to 



partially alleviate overdrafted ground water condi- 
tions. 

9. North Lahontan. Water demands by 1990 could 
range from a slight decrease to a minor increase over 
the present net demands of 430,000 acre-feet per year. 
Some of the current deficiency in firm water supply, 
about 40,000 acre-feet, is expected to be met by con- 
tinuing ground water development. There is a pro- 
jected 1990 supplemental irrigation demand of about 
20,000 acre-feet per year. The high cost of water 
development, however, will make it difficult to meet 
this requirement. 

10. South Lahontan. Estimated present annual 
ground water overdraft amounts to about 120,000 
acre-feet. Projected State Water Project entitlement 
supplies, if delivered in 1990, could completely elim- 
inate the current overdraft and could add from 70,000 
to 100,000 acre-feet per year to underground storage 
in the Antelope \'alley-Moiave River areas. 

11. Colorado Desert. Only modest increases of 
130,000 to 150,000 acre-feet per year in agricultural 
and urban applied water demands are projected for 
this region in 1990. The estimated 1972 annual ground 
water overdraft of almost 40,000 acre-feet could be 
mostly eliminated by use of State Water Project sup- 
plies. The only significant new t\'pe of demand would 
be that for power plant cooling which could range 
from 40,000 to 130,000 acre-feet per year in 1990, 
part of w hich is expected to be served from the Colo- 
rado River entitlement of the Metropolitan A\'ater 
District of Southern California. 

Concerning Alfernafive Futures 

1. None of the four alternative futures presented in 
this bulletin was designed to represent a most prob- 
able future. If such a projection were to be developed, 
it would most likely result in a statewide water de- 
mand somewhere within the range of alternative fu- 
tures II and III. 

2. Selection of a futurc(s) as a basis for making a 
decision should reflect the degree of flexibility" to 
change a decision. In other words, as long as it is not 
necessar\' to make a final decision, alternative futures 
should be examined and, when it becomes necessary- 
to adopt a course of action, a single future must be 
selected. 

3. In evaluating actions to meet the short range 
1990 needs, the Department of ^^'ater Resources con- 
cludes that alternative future II is a reasonable basis 
since it \\ ould be um\ ise to risk water shortages due 
to unplanned rates of growth. In evaluating actions 
to meet 2020 needs the Department concludes that 
alternative future III provides flexibilit_\- yet is a rea- 
sonable basis as use of this alcernati\e future minimizes 
the likelihood of ovcrsizing facilities and overcommit- 
ment of resources. 



California's Water Resources 



California's natural water supplies are derived from 
an average annual precipitation of 200 million acre- 
feet — the equivalent of more than 65 trillion gallons. 
About 65 percent of this precipitation is consumed 
through evaporation and transpiration by trees, plants, 
and other vegetation (Figure 1). The remaining 35 
percent comprises the State's average annual runolT 
of 71 million acre-feet. 

Water information compiled by the Department of 
Water Resources and presented in this report is shown 
by 1 1 hydrologic study areas covering California, Fig- 
ure 2. Average runoff in the hydrologic areas is shown 
in Figure 3. The wide disparity in runoff, both from 
\'car to year and between major drainage areas, cre- 
ates the need for the storage and conveyance of sur- 
face water and the extensive use of ground water. 
As shown in Figure 3, the greatest amounts of runoff 
are available in areas with the fewest people, i.e., the 
North Coastal area and the Sacramento Basin. As Cali- 
fornia has grown, its surface water s\'stems have been 



expanded to large-scale transfer systems, involving the 
storage and transportation of water almost the entire 
length of the State.^ 

A continuing major water problem todajf'is the 
maintenance of a proper balance bervveen the use of 
the State's water resources and protection and en- 
hancement of the natural environment. Prior to the 
1960s, environmental benefits for the preservation of 
cultural resources and aesthetic areas, including open 
and green space, wild rivers, and wilderness regions, 
iwere not usually included in water project planning. 
Alany such benefits were difficult to identify and are 
still difficult to measure because they cannot be as- 
signed a value, and the technique of cost and benefit 
analysis to determine relative value of a proposed 
project is no longer adequate. Accordingly, to reflect 
today's widespread concern for the natural environ- 
ment, water resources planning has been broadened 
to include consideration of aesthetic and ecological 
effects. 



State Responsibility for Water Development 



California's responsibility for the development and 
wise use of her water resources is set forth in various 
sections of the California Water Code. The Depart- 
ment of Water Resources and the State Water Re- 
sources Control Board each are assigned specific duties 



in the Code. The Board regulates activities that affect 
quality and rights to use of the waters of the State. 
Water Code Section 10005, in addition to establishing 
the California Water Plan, assigns the Department of 
Water Resources the responsibility for updating and 




e 



EVAPORATION 

AND 

TRANSPIRATION 



PRECIPITATION 




Figure 1. Hydrologic Cycle 



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 

NL - NORTH LAHONTAN 

SL - SOUTH LAHONTAN 

CD - COLORADO DESERT 




Figure 2. Hydrologic Study Areps of California 



supplementing the Plan. The Department carries out 
this rcsponsibilit)' through a statewide planning pro- 
gram, which guides the selection of the most favor- 
able pattern for use of the State's water resources, 
considering all reasonable alternative courses of ac- 
tion. Such alternatives are evaluated on the basis of 
technical feasibility and economic, social, and institu- 
tional factors. The program comprises: 

• Periodic reassessment of existing and future de- 
mands for water for all uses in each of the hy- 
drologic study areas of California. 

• Periodic reassessment of local water resources, 
water uses, and the magnitude and timing of the 
need for additional water supplies that cannot be 
provided locally. 

• Appraisal of various alternative sources of water 
— ground water, surface water, reclaimed waste 
water, desalting, goethermal resources, etc. — to 
meet future demands in areas of water deficiency. 

• Determination of the need for protection and 
preservation of water resources in keeping with 
protection and enhancement of the environment. 

• Evaluation of water development plans. 




Figure 3. Average Annual Runoff in Million Acre-feet 



Organization of Bulletin 160-74 



Bulletin No. 160-74 and its summar\- report have 
the same format, which consists of six chapters. Chap- 
ter 1 discusses historic and recent events in water 
resources planning and development in California, in- 
cluding recent environmental planning, mea.sures to 
enhance water quality, and the recent interest and 
close involvement of the public in environmental en- 
hancement. Chapter 1 also touches on a recent Na- 
tional Water Commission report, which indicates pos- 
sible forthcoming changes in U. S. water policies. 
Finally, the chapter reports on California's cooperative 
activities with federal water agencies and other west- 
ern states, and briefly describes recent trends in land 
use planning and controls. 

Chapter 2 presents a discussion of important water- 
policy issues for consideration by legislators, admin- 



istrators and the public. Chapter 3 presents alternative 
future projections — of population, agriculture, and 
electrical energy. In addition. Chapter 3 discusses the 
trends and influences that affect other water-related 
needs, such as (a) recreation, fish, and wildlife, (b) 
environmental quality, (c) water quality, and (d) 
flood control. 

in Chapter 4, the alternative future projections pre- 
sented in Chapter 3 are discussed in terms of future 
water demands. 

Chapter 5 discusses potential supplemental sources 
of water supply and water qualit\- planning. Chapter 
6 relates the alternative future projections of water 
demand presented in Chapter 4 to existing developed 
supplies and gives estimates of future supplemental 
w atcr demands. 



CHAPTER I 

HISTORIC AND RECENT EVENTS 



Water resources development in California during 
the last century has progressed through the efforts of 
numerous private individuals and companies and public 
agencies at the local, state, and federal levels. Although 
many of the resulting water projects and programs 
have been large in compass and purpose, initial efforts 
were primarily directed toward solution of localized 
water requirement problems. The aggregate expendi- 
ture by local agencies exceeds the state and federal 
costs. 

The first irrigation supplies were diverted from 
nearby streams, without storage, and agricultural lands 
irrigated were limited to those that could be watered 
from available low summer flows. However, the need 
for storage reservoirs to capture the winter runoff and 
hold it until the summer irrigation season was soon 
recognized and construction on several important dams 
was started in the 1880s. Later, the large metropolitan 
areas of the State, under pressure of increasing require- 
ments and diminishing resources of local water, found 
it necessary to develop remote sources of water supply 
and construct extensive conveyance systems across 
mountains and deserts to satisfy their needs. 

The need to plan for the development of the State's 
water resources on a broad scale was recognized over 
a century ago, and the first broad investigation of the 
irrigation problems of California was made by a board 
of commissioners appointed by the President. The 
commission's report, published in 1874, outlined a 
hypothetical irrigation system for the San Joaquin and 
Sacramento Valleys. Other investigations by federal 
and state agencies followed during the next several 
decades. Reports on these investigations contain 
meteorological and streamflow data, with notes on 
irrigation, drainage, and flood control, all of which 
proved of great value in planning for water develop- 
ment in the years that followed. 

Comprehensive investigations of the water resources 
of California \\ere first made by the State Engineer 
in the 1920s. Initial reports of these investigations were 
presented in a series of bulletins by the State Division 
of Engineering and Irrigation and later by the State 
Division of Water Resources. A report giving results 
of investigations, and outlining revised proposals, \\ as 
published in 1930 as Division of Water Resources 
Bulletin No. 25, entitled, "Report to Legislature of 
1931 on State Water Plan." It outlined a coordinated 
plan for conservation, development, and utilization of 
the water resources of California. In 1941 the plan 
was adopted by the Legislature and designated the 
"State Water Plan". In a series of bulletins following 
Bulletin No. 25, the Division of Water Resources out- 



lined in greater detail plans for coordinated develop- 
ment of the water resources of the Central Valley 
w hich formed the basis for the Central Valley Project. 

California Water Plan 

In 1947, the Statewide Water Resources Investigation 
was initiated by the Division of Water Resources for 
the State Water Resources Board in response to legisla- 
tion enacted in 1945 and 1947. This investigation en- 
tailed a three-fold program of study to evaluate the 
water resources of California, to determine present and 
probable ultimate water requirements, and to formulate 
plans for the orderly development of the State's water 
resources to meet its ultimate water requirements. 

The first phase of the statewide investigation com- 
prised an inventory of data on sources, quantities, and 
characteristics of water in California. The results are 
available in a bulletin "Water Resources of Califor- 
nia"*, published in 1951. This bulletin comprises a con- 
cise compilation of data on precipitation, runoff of 
streams, floodflows and frequencies, and quality of 
water throughout the State. The Bulletin showed the 
average annual supply from the State's streams to be 
about 71 million acre-feet. In addition CaUfornia uses 
water from the Colorado River. 

The second phase dealt with present and ultimate 
requirements for water. The associated bulletin, 
"Water Utilization and Requirements of California"t, 
was published in 1955. This report comprises deter- 
minations of the 1950 level of water use throughout 
the State for all consumptive purposes, and forecasts 
of ultimate water requirements based, in general, on 
the capabilities of the land to support further balanced 
development. 

The final phase of the Statewide Water Resources 
Investigation was presnted in 1957 as "The California 
Water Plan".t The report describes a comprehensive 
master plan to guide and coordinate the planning and 
construction of works required for the control, protec- 
tion, conservation, and distribution of the water of 
California, to meet present and future needs for all 
beneficial uses and purposes in all areas of the State. 
The Plan is designed to include or supplement, rather 
than to supersede, existing water resource develop- 
ment works, and does not interfere with existing rights 
to the use of water. 



* Bulletin No. 1, "Water Resources of California," State Water Resources 

Board. 1951. 
t Bulletin No. 2, "Water Utilization and Requirements of California," 

State Water Resources Board, 1955. 
I Bulletin No. 3, "The California Water Plan," Department of Water 

Resources, 1957. 



The urgency of California's water problems was 
illustrated at the time by citing the rapid growth of 
the State. In 1940, just before the beginning of World 
War II, California had a population of about 6,900,000. 
By 1950 the population had increased to about 10,600,- 
000, and by 1955 it had increasd to more than 13,000,- 
000. Industrial expansion during the war years was 
needed to supply the United States and her allies with 
vast amounts of food, arms and other material. After 
the war, industry continued to e.xpand in order to 
provide Americans and others with goods and services 
they had foregone. Concurrently, the demand for 
water increased significantly. 

Another result of this growth was the need for 
larger quantities of agricultural products, and Cali- 
fornia had the land and climate to fulfill this demand. 
The State also needed water to irrigate the additional 
acreage, and this represented a dramatic increase in 
water requirements. The total requirement for water 
in California for all consumptive purposes in 1950 was 
about 21 million acre-feet, and it was forecast in Bul- 
letin No. 2 that this would ultimately increase to 
over 51 million acre-feet. 

The California Water Plan includes many facts and 
forecasts. It presents an evaluation of the water supply 
available to the State, and an estimate of water require- 
ments, both present and future, for all purposes that 
could then be foreseen. The plan identifies water- 
sheds where studies indicated that surplus water ex- 
isted and others where a deficiency in supply was 
projected. It identifies existing and prospective water 
problems and it contains suggestions as to the manner 
in which the waters of the State should be distributed 
for the benefit and use of all areas. The plan proposes 
objectives toward which future development of water 
resources should be directed and defines objectives in 
terms of potential physical accomplishments which 
could be used to measure the merits of projects pro- 
posed by any agency. It also took cognizance of other 




Natomas Ditch in Sacramento County 



possibilities for augmenting the State's water supplies. 
It discussed and evaluated the potentialities of sea 
water conversion, waste water reclamation, artificial 
increase of precipitation and waste water management. 
Finally, it demonstrated that the water available to the 
State is adequate for full development of the land re- 
sources of the State. 

The very magnitude of the task involved in the 
formulation of the California Water Plan was such 
that detailed sun-eys and economic and financial 
analysis could not be undertaken. The plan was re- 
garded as a broad and flexible pattern into which fu- 
ture definite projects could be integrated in an or- 
derly fashion when needed. It was also anticipated 
that the plan would be altered and improved as more 
detailed studies were undertaken in the light of future 
events. 

The completion of the California Water Plan and 
the publication of Bulletin No. 3 completed the State- 
wide Water Resources Investigation; it by no means 
signified the termination of planning activities by the 
Department of Water Resources. It marked only the 
beginning of an intensive and continuing program of 
study of the needs for specific, local, and statewide 
water programs, analysis of their economic justifica- 
tion and financial feasibility, and determination of the 
recommended priority of their implementation. It was 
envisioned that the study program would enable the 
planning endeavor to keep pace with the needs of a 
rapidly growing state. 

The State, in 1951, selected the California State 
Water Project, first known as the Feather River Proj- 
ect, as a feature of the California Water Plan to be 
constructed by the State. 

Transition to the Present 

In the decade following publication of the Cali- 
fornia Water Plan, rapid population growth in Cali- 
fornia continued, and with it the demand for devel- 
opment of additional water supplies for all purposes. 
The Department of Water Resources published a re- 
port, "Implementation of the California Water 
Plan",* in 1966. It assessed the changes which had oc- 
curred during the 10-year period since the formula- 
tion of the California ^^'ate^ Plan. 

During this period all areas of economic activity, 
including employment, personal income, construction, 
retail sales, corporate profits, and farm receipts ad- 
vanced to higher levels. 

The growth in population of nearly 5,750,000 peo- 
ple during that decade represented an increase of al- 
most 45 percent over the 1955 population of 13,000,- 
000. California, with 18,750,000 people in 1965, was 
becoming the most populous state in the nation. Con- 
tinued growth at this rate would increase future pop- 

* Bulletin No. 160-66, "Implementation of the California Water Plan," 
Department of Water Resources, 1966. 



10 



ulations to more than 35,000,000 bv 1990 and 54,- 
000,000 in 2020. 

The second report in the Bulletin 160 series,* was 
released 4 years later. In the period between 1966 and 
1970 California experienced a dynamic era, not only 
in water project implementation, but also in the con- 
sideration of water resource development within the 
framework of the overall environment. 

The rapid rate of growth of California's population 
that had occurred during the 1940s and 1950s de- 
creased sharply in the mid-1960s as a result of both 
reduction in births and immigration. By 1970, the 
trend indicated that California's population would 
probably increase to about 29,000,000 in 1990 and 
45,000,000 in 2020, instead of 35,000,000 and 54,000,- 
000 respectively, as projected in 1966. 

Bulletin 160-70 reported that applied and net water 
requirements for 1967 were 36,000,000 and 28,000,000 
acre-feet respectively. Applied water requirements 
are quantities needed annually at all farm headgates 
and urban distribution system intakes. Net water re- 
quirements reflect the allowance for probable reuse 
of water ^\•ithin each area. The bulletin also reported 
that projected applied water demands for California 
in 1990 and 2020 were expected to be 42,000,000 and 
48,000,000 acre-feet respectively. The projected net 
water demands for 1990 and 2020 were given as 35,- 
000,000 and 40,000,000 acre-feet, respectively. 

A significant conclusion in Bulletin 160-70, result- 
ing from the projections of a reduced rate of popula- 
tion grow th, was that projected future water demands 
in California would also grow at a slower rate. As a 
result it was postulated that more time would be avail- 
able to develop new water supplies than had been 
thought in 1966, and that additional conservation fa- 
cilities of the State Water Project would not be 
needed until possibly the mid-1990s. It was pointed 
out, however, that additional conveyance facilities to 
deliver conserved water to areas of need were re- 
quired. 

The temporary adequacy of developed water sup- 
plies was received with loud applause b>' some and 
with reserved dismay by others. The record of the 
public hearings on Bulletin 160-70 held during 1971 
shows that many Califomians were pleased to hear 
that population growth was slowing down signifi- 
cantly and that this would reduce the demands on 
water resources. Others, however, saw this as possibly 
a hasty conclusion and sought to remind the Depart- 
ment of Water Resources that California still had 
numerous water problems for which solutions were 
required. 

A number of significant events have occurred in the 
last four years, some of which have tended to place 
an increased burden on the State's water resources and 



Bulletin No. 160-70, "Water for California, the California Water 
Plan, Outlook in 1970," Department of Water Resources, 1970. 



some of which have directed more attention to those 
factors affecting the future use of water resources. At 
the federal level, the National Water Commission has 
published probably the most comprehensive report 
ever seen on water management; a National Environ- 
mental Policy Act has been adopted; Congress has 
given considerable attention to a National Land Use 
Policy; and principles and standards have been estab- 
lished by the Water Resources Council and adopted 
by the President that add environmental quality as an 
objective for planning. 

At the state level California has adopted a Wild and 
Scenic Rivers Act which dedicates about one-fourth 
of the State's surface water flow to scenic and recre- 
ational use; an Environmental Quality Act similar to 
the federal legislation has been adopted; and several 
major administrative decisions concerning water rights 
have focused attention on natural environmental and 
esthetic uses of water. 

National Water Commission Report 

The National Water Commission's report, "Water 
Policies for the Future", published in June 1973, is 
probably the most comprehensive analysis of federal 
water policies and practices ever seen. It is also the 
most far-reaching in its recommendations. 

The Commission, composed of seven members ap- 
pointed by the President, was established for a 5-year 
term by an act of Congress in September 1968. Duties 
of the Commission were stated in the act to be: 

"The Commission shall (1) review present and 
anticipated national water resource problems, mak- 
ing such projections of water requirements as may 
be necessary and identifying alternative ways of 
meeting these requirements — giving consideration, 
among other things, to conser\'ation and more ef- 
ficient use of e.xisting supplies, increased usability 
by reduction of pollution, innovations to encourage 
the highest economic use of water, interbasin trans- 
fers, and technological advances including, but not 
limited to, desalting, weather modification, and 
waste water purification and reuse; (2) consider 
economic and social consequences of water resource 
development, including, for example, the impact of 
water resource development on regional economic 
growth, on institutional arrangements, and on es- 
thetic values aff^ecting the quality of life of the 
American people; and (3) advise on such specific 
water resource matters as may be referred to it by 
the President and the Water Resources Council." 
Commissioners served on a part-time basis and were 
forbidden to hold any other position as officers or eni- 
plo\ees of the United States. Five million dollars was 
authorized for the five years of work. The Commis- 
sion's final report consists of approximately 600 pages 
and its 17 chapters cover all the items in the foregoing 
statement of duties. 



11 



The Commission in its summary stated that a rela- 
tively small number of themes emerge in the report. 

"First, the report emphasizes that the level of fu- 
ture demands for water is not inevitable but derives 
in large part from policy decisions within the con- 
trol of society." 

"A second recurring theme of the Commission's 
report is that it sees a shift in national priorities from 
development of water resources to restoration and 
enhancement of water quality." 

"Third, the Commission believes that water re- 
source planning must be tied more closely to land 
use planning." 

"Fourth, the Commission recommends policies 
which will lead to the conservation of water — 
policies which will motivate better use of water and 
reduce water losses b\' improved efficiency." 

"Fifth, the Commission believes that sound eco- 
nomic principles should be applied to decisions on 
whether to build water projects." 

"Sixth, the Commission believes that laws and legal 
institutions should be reexamined in the light of 
contemporary water problems." 

"Seventh, the Commission believes that develop- 
ment, management, and protection of water re- 
sources should be controlled by that level of 
government nearest the problem and most capable 
of effectively representing the vital interests in- 
volved." 

The report devotes considerable attention to plan- 
ning for water resources development and control. 
In general, it advocates an increased level of planning 
at local or regional levels supported by federal funding. 

In its consideration of agriculraral matters, the re- 
port relied heavily on a number of alternative future 
models of agricultural development prepared for the 
Commission by professors at Iowa State University. 
The alternatives involved different assumptions for 
farm policy, population, water price, exports and 
technology. In addition, the report discussed the pro- 
jection of past trends in agriculture including the 
OBERS * projections. 

Concluding their discussion of this topic, the Com- 
mission's report states on page 141: 

". . . there appears to be adequate productive 
capacity in the Nation's agriculture to meet food 
and fiber demand under various alternative futures 
at least until the \ear 2000. In such case there would 
be no need in the next 30 \'ears to continue fedcrall\' 
subsidized water resource development programs to 
increase the agricultural land base of the country, 
but where the Federal Government has executed 
contracts to complete water projects alrcad\- begun, 
such projects should of course be completed. 



^ Office of Business Economics and the Economic Research Service. Term 
is still in use although OBE was reorfianized in 1972 and renamed 
Bureau of Hconomic Analysis. 



"Even if none of the alternative futures assumed 
in the Iowa State Universit)' studies adequate!) 
project the actual supply and demand for food and 
fiber for the >ear 2000, there is still no justification 
for subsidizing reclamation projects. If, for example, 
export demand for food and fiber greatly exceeds 
the amount contemplated in an\- of the alternative 
futures considered, that demand should nevertheless 
be satisfied in the most efficient wa\'." 

In leading to this conclusion, the Commission did 
note that the OBERS projections used by federal 
agencies contemplated a much larger need for irrigated 
agriculture than the Iowa State model but it expressed 
the belief that the Iowa State assumptions were rea- 
sonable. 

The State of California in its comments on the re- 
port noted the Iowa State models were "what if" 
models but had been used to set the tone of the report. 
This was believed unrealistic and to have led to some 
erroneous conclusions. The State in its comments also 
termed unrealistic: 

a) Use of a constant level of foreign export in all 
but one model 

b) Assumption of greatl\' increased water prices 

c) Assumed shifts of agricultural production from 
irrigated to nonirrigated lands. 

The effect of the Commission's recommendations 
would probably be to reduce the number and scope 
of future irrigation projects, except those in areas 
where long-growing seasons provide sufficient repay- 
ment capacit\- to pa\' the full costs of extensive w ater 
projects. 

The report dealt in detail \\ ith financing, construc- 
tion, and repa\mcnt of federal water projects. Its 
principal recommendations concerned repayment. It 
advocated that, in addition to elimination of subsidies 
for irrigation, water supply, flood control and navi- 
gation, project costs also be repaid in full b\- the direct 
beneficiaries. While one could suppose that financing 
and construction b\- federal agencies would continue, 
it w ould ccrtainl\ follow that w ithout historic federal 
nonreimbursable capital expenditures for these types 
of projects, the number of such projects w ould rapidly 
decrease. The present program of grants for water 
qualit)' control facilities would be continued under 
the Commission's recommendations for about 10 years. 

The Commission made a number of recommenda- 
tions regarding intcrbasin transfers of water. The 
economic criteria for justifying such projects and the 
amount to be paid 1)\- beneficiaries of such projects, 
including the principle that areas of origin should re- 
ceive monetary compensation for net losses occurring 
as a result of the transfer, appear to be overl)' restric- 
tive and would undoubtcdl\- preclude any intcrbasin 
transfers whatsoever. 

The Commission recommended the definition and 
quantification of Indian water rights. It also rccom- 



12 



mended that Congress make available financial assist- 
ance to Indian tribes. This would enable those tribes, 
which lack the funds, to make economic use of the 
water. 

The Commission made other recommendations too 
numerous to list in detail. However, a few are sum- 
marized here. In its recommendations regarding use 
of water projects to promote regional economic de- 
velopment it stated that, 

". . . under certain conditions, water develop- 
ment may be helpful as one of the several ingredients 
necessary to encourage regional economic develop- 
ment and population growth, or to preserve existing 
development. However, water developments differ 
widely in the effects they induce. Congress, in mak- 
ing judgments as to whether water development 
should be used to aid regional growth, should re- 
quire evaluations of certain critical growth factors 
in order to enhance the effectiveness of develop- 
ments and reduce offsetting losses in other regions. 
These factors include: market demands, availability 
of substitutes for water services, competitive ad- 
vantage of the region, and the potential for capital- 
izing on growth opportunities." 
It commented on population distribution by saying 
that, 

". . . federal water programs can be easily adjusted 
to support whatever population distribution policy 
the nation adopts. However, water programs are not, 
in and of themselves, adequate to effectuate a na- 
tional policy concerning where people will live." 
The Commission recommended that the Principles 
and Standards that were then being recommended by 
the Water Resources Council in regard to Planning 
Water and Related Land Resources be adopted except 
that the discount rate should be the interest rate on 
long-term federal securities rather than the opportu- 
nity cost of money that had then been included in the 
recommended Principles and Standards. The Principles 
and Standards w ere later put in force by the President. 
Subsequently, Congress directed, in a flood control bill 
(P.L. 93-251), use of a discount rate equal to the 
interest rate on long-term federal securities. 

The report recommended a close relationship be- 
tween land use and water and other planning as indi- 
cated in its seven key issues noted at the outset. It 
spoke in favor of water pollution control but recom- 
mended that the Federal Water Pollution Control Act 
Amendments of 1972 should be revised to restore the 
policies that (1) water is polluted when its quality 
has been altered by the activities of man to such a 
degree that reasonable present and pro.spective uses 



as designated by public authorities are impaired, and 
that (2) the objective of pollution control should be 
to protect the designated uses. This and other recom- 
mendations in regard to this subject will undoubtedly 
be given much consideration in studies by the National 
Commission on Water Quality and by the committees 
of the Congress who are engaged in oversight activities 
regarding Public Law 92-500 at the present time. 

Finally, the report touched on basic data and re- 
search for future progress. It recommended that the 
Water Resources Council direct that planning studies 
include an assessment of research needed to support 
planning objectives. It also recommended organiza- 
tional changes in the agencies in Federal Government 
that deal with water resources research. 

The State of California, in commenting on the re- 
view draft, agreed with most of the recommendations 
on water resources planning. The State, however, dis- 
agreed with many of the conclusions regarding the 
future of irrigated agriculture that were expressed by 
the National Water Commission. 

The State observed that the substitution of flood- 
plain management for structural remedies for flood 
control has definite limitations in California due to the 
extensive areas flooded in the Central Valley prior to 
construction of levees. In Southern California much 
development is necessarily located on alluvial cones 
which were built by streams that wandered over the 
surface of the cones in recent geologic time and if not 
restrained will continue to do so. 

The State also disagreed with economic criteria pro- 
posed for interbasin transfers of water. The Com- 
mission's recommendation that an interbasin transfer 
should be the least cost source of water supply for a 
given purpose is contrary to the concepts of multi- 
objective planning w herein all needs, purposes and uses 
are considered in an integrated planning process. 

It is difficult to predict the degree to which the 
Commission's recommendations will be implemented. 
The budgetary programs of the present administration 
and some attitudes of Congress seem to be considerably 
in tune with some of the Commission's recommenda- 
tions in regard to water supply, flood control and 
navigation. Few new starts have been authorized and 
funding of construction has been substantially reduced. 
This is probably due in part to the Commission's re- 
flecting current public expressions of priorities and in 
part to the Administration and Congress recognizing 
the independent views expressed by the Commission. 

It seems unlikely that congressional approval of the 
repayment policies recommended by the Commission 
will occur in the near future if at all. 

The report is worth careful review by anyone with 
serious concern for federal water policies and, in fact, 
for water policies in general. 



13 



Environmental Considerations 
in Water Management 

The term "environment" has more than one mean- 
ing. To many people, it is the surroundings in \vhich 
they live or work. To others, it is more closely as- 
sociated with natural conditions and the land and re- 
sources that have not yet been significantly affected 
by man's activities. 

Under the first usage, much of the desirable en- 
vironment of California has been created by develop- 
ment and use of the State's water resources. This en- 
vironment includes lawns, shade trees, and ornamen- 
tal shrubbery around homes and in cities; orchards 
and green fields that make up several million acres 
of irrigated lands; and the many reservoirs that pro- 
vide recreation activit\^ for millions of the State's 
residents. 

For decades in California multiple-purpose water 
projects have been designed and constructed to pro- 
vide for environmental, as well as many other, uses. 
However, in the last few years, many additional en- 
vironmental factors, largely natural, have been intro- 
duced. 

The Porter-Cologne Water Qualitj' Control Act, 
adopted by California in 1969, reflected a tough new 
attitude toward water pollution problems. At both the 
national and state levels sweeping legislation was en- 
acted to protect environmental quality: the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 and the 
(California) Environmental Quality- Act (CEQA) of 
1970. In addition much litigation has been introduced 
in the federal and state courts with respect to environ- 
mental considerations in the area of water resources 
development and management. 

A new planning thrust at both state and local lev- 
els toward the development of supplemental sources 
of water through waste water reclamation and the 
more efficient use of water is also indicative of the 
emphasis on environmental protection. There is a 
growing awareness that water is a finite renewable 
resource which must be protected — both now and for 
generations to come. 

Public Involvement 

Most of the legislation protecting the environment 
can be traced to firm public support. Public opinion 
polls taken in the late 1960s and early 1970s showed 
strong sentiment toward natural environmental pro- 
tection. 

Governing bodies at all levels — Congress, the Cali- 
fornia Legislature, local boards and commissions — re- 
flected the concern of their constituents in approving 
CEQA, NEPA, the California Wild and Scenic Rivers 
Act, the Federal Water Pollution Control .^ct 
Amendments of 1972, and resolutions supporting "no 
growth". 



In California, citizens also voiced their concern di- 
rectly by passing the California Coastal Zone Conser- 
vation Act of 1972, an initiative. That same year, 
Colorado voters rejected a bid to hold the Winter 
Olympics in their State, largely on an argument that 
the environment would be harmed. 

Individual members of the public, and various or- 
ganizations, have also attempted to achieve environ- 
mental goals through litigation. Public appeal to the 
courts began in the mid-60s. It is generally believed 
that these early cases spawned the federal and state 
environmental laws which became effective in 1970. 

Since 1972, newer considerations have begun to 
weigh heavily on the public mind such as the energy 
crisis and inflation. The environment is still a major 
concern, however. Environmental considerations are 
now a part of the public conscience — and they are 
likely to remain so. 

Water Rights Decisions 

The State Water Resources Control Board 
(SWRCB) in 1971, 1972, and 1973 rendered three de- 
cisions which imposed conditions on water develop- 
ment in California of far greater consequences than 
ever before. These decisions could influence water 
project planning far into the future. At this time, the 
three decisions are under review in the federal or 
state courts. 

Decision 1379 would require greater outflows from 
the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta into San Francisco 
Bay and the Pacific Ocean than had been considered 
in previous planning and operation studies and would 
reduce the quantities of water available for delivery to 
homes, farms and industries served by the Central 
\'alley Project and the State Water Project. Decision 
1400 would require increased flows in the American 
River below the diversion for the Folsom-South Canal 
and thus reduce the quantities of water available for a 
direct gravity diversion to users in the service area. 
Decision 1422 would limit the amount of water that 
could be stored in New Alelones Reservoir on the 
Stanislaus River until water is needed for users in 
service areas in other parts of the San Joaquin \'alley. 

In issuing Decision 1379, the State Water Resources 
Control Board set water quality standards in the Sac- 
ramento-San Joaquin Delta to protect agricultural, 
municipal, industrial, and fishery uses; as \\d\ as for 
the maintenance of neomysis awatschensis, the opos- 
sum shrimp, which is a principal food of juvenile 
striped bass. Salinir>' standards were also set for Sui- 
sun Marsh for \\ ildlife maintenance. 

Decision 1379, in effect, establishes standards and 
directs the Bureau of Reclamation and the Depart- 
ment of Water Resources to operate their valley water 
projects to maintain water qualit\' in the channels of 
the Delta equal to or better than those set out in the 
standards, doing so, either by discontinuance of proj- 



14 




Waterwa/s of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta 



ect diversions or by release of stored water. A further 
provision of the Decision would require increased 
Delta surveillance and water quality monitoring that 
would measure environmental factors and enable the 
correlation of the physical parameters to the key re- 
sources of the area. 

The many ramifications and secondary effects of 
Decision 1379 on water development in California are 
a continuing subject for discussion by water interests 
and environmentalists. The SWRCB will reopen this 
decision not later than July 1, 1978, to consider pos- 
sible modifications of the decision. 

Decision 1400 affects plans of the Bureau of Recla- 
mation to divert much of the flow of the American 
River to users in service areas in Sacramento and San 
Joaquin Counties. In 1957, the Bureau agreed* to fish 
releases of 250 cubic feet per second (cfs) from Jan- 
uary 1 to September 14, and 500 cfs from September 
5 to December 31, below Nimbus Dam. Additional 
releases also are made to meet the existing water rights 
and water supply contracts and agreements with down- 
stream users. 

Decision 1400, which was applied to Auburn Reser- 
voir by the State Water Resources Control Board, 



' State Water Rights Decision D-893, March 18, 1958. 



calls for greatly increased flows for fishery and rec- 
reation purposes in the American River from Nimbus 
Dam to its junction with the Sacramento River. The 
required flows range from 1,250 to 1,500 cfs in normal 
water years. 

For nearly rvvo decades water stored in Folsom. 
Reservoir was released to the American River because 
the Folsom-South Canal had not been constructed. 
This resulted in providing larger summer flows than 
had occurred before Folsom Dam was built. During 
this period an e.\tensive fishery developed in the river, 
and local residents developed plans for and began 
using the new recreational potential of the river area 
during the summer months. Decision 1400 would allow 
the fishery and recreational benefits to continue to a 
greater extent than contemplated for conditions 
authorized by the Congress. The water could flow 
down the American River into the Sacramento River 
and be diverted from that river near Hood. A pumping 
plant and canal would then be used to put the water 
into the Folsom-South Canal near Clay at increased 
cost. 

Decision 1422 restricts storage in the federal New 
Alelones Reservoir to less than half of the total reser- 
voir capacity. The restriction will be reconsidered by 
the State Water Resources Control Board when the 



15 




white water rotting on the Eel River 

Bureau of Reclamation demonstrates a specific need 
for the water that can be obtained from the capacity 
of the upper part of the reservoir. The storage limita- 
tions will preserve a popular "whitewater" area (which 
exists because of releases from headwater reservoirs for 
power generation) and will protect some limestone 
caves and, possibly, some archeological and historical 
sites. D-1422 provides for a project yield that will 
satisfy adjacent service area demands for irrigation, 
water quality control, and fish and wildlife preserva- 
tion and enhancement — and the use of the same waters 
for power generation but with much less output. It 
defers significant impaimient of upstream recreational 
values until a need for the additonal water can be 
demonstrated. The reservoir available at the lower 
water level would provide very limited recreation 
opportunity as compared to recreation on the reservoir 
at the higher level. 

California Wild and Scenic Rivers Act 

During the four year period since publication of 
Bulletin 160-70, the citizens of California have ex- 
pressed a strong interest in preserving certain free- 
flowing rivers in their natural condition and appear- 
ance. These expressions have resulted in two acts by 
the California Legislature. 

In 1971, the Legislature passed SB-1285 (Chapter 
761, Statutes of 1971) which directed the Resources 
Agency to prepare waterway management plans for 
20 rivers and tributaries in Northwestern California. 
These rivers include essentially all of the coastal stream 
systems from the Smith River on the north to the 
Russian River on the south. The Big Sur and Little 
Sur Rivers in the central coastal region were later 
added to this study list. 

The management plans being prepared pursuant to 
Chapter 761 are to include provisions for necessary 
and desirable flood control, water conservation, recre- 
ation, fish and wildlife preservation and enhancement, 
water qualit\' preservation and enhancement, stream- 
flow augmentation and free-flowing rivers. 



In the following year, the Legislature passed and 
the Governor signed into law SB-107 (Chapter 1259, 
Statutes of 1972) known as the California Wild and 
Scenic Rivers Act. This act added provisions to the 
Public Resources Code which established a State Wild, 
Scenic and Recreational Rivers System. The Califor- 
nia Act is similar in concept to that established at the 
Federal level through passage of the Federal Wild and 
Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 (P.L. 90-542). 

Eight rivers were designated for inclusion in the 
State system. These are the entire Smith River and 
major portions of the Klamath, Trinity, Scott, Sal- 
mon, Eel, and Van Duzen Rivers and the American 
River (north fork and lower main stem). 

The Secretary for Resources is required to adminis- 
ter the system in accordance with management plans 
to be prepared by the Resources Agency and ap- 
proved by the Legislature. These plans are presently 
under preparation with the Smith River plan sched- 
uled as the first for completion. 

Each river component of the system is to be ad- 
ministered by the Secretary so as to protect and en- 
hance the scenic, recreational and related values for 
which it was included. This is to be done without 
unreasonably limiting the other resource values, such 
as lumbering and grazing, where the extent and nature 
of such uses do not conflict with public use and en- 
joyment of these values. 

Except for the Eel River, the Wild and Scenic 
Rivers Act precludes state agency participation in 
planning and construction of projects, such as dams 
and reservoirs, which would directly affect the free- 
flowing natural condition of the riv^ers. In the case of 
the Eel, the Department of Water Resources is re- 
quired to report to the Legislature in 1985 on the re- 
sults of authorized studies as to the need for flood con- 
trol and water conservation facilities. That report will 
form the basis for leeislative liea'in-T-; to determine if 
segments of the Eel River should be deleted from the 
system. 

Preparation of the management plans required 
under both Chapter 761 of 1971 and the Wild and 
Scenic Rivers Act is being accomplished by a task 
committee within the Office of the Secretary for Re- 
sources, comprised of members from the Departments 
of Water Resources, Fish and Game, Conservation, 
and Parks and Recreation. The studies in progress are 
discussed in subsequent chapters of this bulletin. 

NEPA and CEQA 

The National Environmental Polic\- Act of 1969 
(NEPA) was signed into law on New Year's Day 
1970. In California, the Environmental Quality Act 
of 1970 — which is more commonly known as the Cali- 
fornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) — became 
effective on November 23, 1970. These two legislative 
acts clearly set forth a national policy and a state pol- 



16 




North Fork of the Smith River, a designated wild river 



u 



icy which requires all public agencies to give full con- 
sideration to environmental effects in planning their 
programs. Both acts emphasize the need to achieve a 
productive harmony between man and nature. 

The broad scope and general language of both laws 
have made their implementation by public agencies 
difficult. Since their enactment, there has been a proc- 
ess of legal challenge, court ruling, and legislation or 
public agenc\' accommodation and implementation. 
While this process is probably far from complete, the 
basic outlines of procedures for implementation of the 
r\vo acts are now becoming apparent. 

NEPA requires that all agencies of the federal gov- 
ernment include in every recommendation or report 
on proposals for legislation and other major federal 
actions significantly affecting the quality of the human 
environment a detailed statement by the responsible 
agency of the environmental impact of the proposal. 
The statement is known as an Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS). Federal agencies must prepare EISs 
for their own proposals and for others' proposals 
which require approval or funding by a federal 
agenc\'. It is in this latter wa\' that many state and 
local proposals come under the provisions of NEPA. 

CEQA, on the other hand, applies to all public agen- 
cies in the State of California except federal units. 
CEQA requires all public agencies to consider the 
environmental consequences of all of their activities. 
Under CEQA, Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) 
are to be prepared, generally, for projects which may 
have a significant effect on the environment. They do 
not have to be prepared for projects which fall within 
exempted categories, which are specifically excepted 
by law, or which will not have a significant effect on 
the environment. "Significant effect" is defined in the 
State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA as a 
"substantial adverse impact on the environment". 
Under CEQA, then, the requirement for preparation 
of EIRs is applicable to a project which may have a 
significant effect on the environment. The activities of 
nongovernmental entities come under the provisions 
of CEQA whenever those activities require approval 
or funding by a public agency in California. 

It is probable that the full impact of the passage of 
NEPA and CEQA in 1970 will not be known for 
many years, but it is reasonable to assume that these 
laws will continue to have a profound influence on 
water management. It is difficult to accommodate the 
requirements of these laws in projects now underway 
that were planned and authorized prior to enactment 
of the laws. The longer term effect of the laws should 
be to improve planning, and it is probable that fifteen 
years from now, planners will recognize them as a 
valuable part of the water management process. 

Lifigation 

The courts have pia\cd an increased role in water 
resources development during the last several years. 



Most litigation that has been instituted against agencies 
planning or constructing \\ater projects has been 
brought by individuals or groups who believed that 
the projects would have important adverse effects on 
the environment or that insufficient attention had been 
given to environmental considerations in planning the 
projects. Many of the suits were brought under the 
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or the 
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 

In California, lawsuits have delayed some projects 
but to date no water projects have been totally aban- 
doned due to litigation alone. Many of the lawsuits, 
however, are still in various stages of trial or pretrial 
or have been appealed to higher courts. Some of these 
will not be decided for several years. 

Many of the uncertainties of the federal and state 
environmental protection acts have now been resolved 
and the degree of compliance w ith these acts by proj- 
ect constructors is increasing. There will still be dis- 
agreements, however, between those seeking to avoid 
changing the environment through the prevention of 
further development and those planning and construct- 
ing water projects who may have a different assessment 
of the balance between environmental benefits and 
detriments. Significant cases interpreting the National 
Environmental Policy Act, the California Environ- 
mental Quality Act or otherwise involving water proj- 
ects are summarized briefly below. 

The right of a court to review an agency's environ- 
mental impact report (EIR) after that agency has 
found its own work satisfactory was established in the 
case of Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Coastside 
County Water District, 27 Cal.App.3d 695 [104 Cal. 
Rptr. 197] (1972). 

The premiere CEQA case is Friends of Maumioth v. 
Board of Supervisors of Mono County, 8 Cal. 3d 247 
[104 Cal.Rptr. 761] (1972) which held that private 
activities subject to the discretionary approval or co- 
operation of a public agency must include an environ- 
mental analysis by the public agency. That analysis 
must be written in an environmental impact report if 
the activity may have a significant adverse impact on 
the environment. 

The court in County of Inyo v. Yorty, 32 Cal.App. 
3d 795 [108 Cal.Rptr." 377] (1973) held that an EIR 
was required for projects begun before the enactment 
of CEQA if that on-going project had not progressed 
to the point of no return or if substantial changes were 
proposed after the Act became law. 

The Environmental Defense Fund \. Annstrong case 
involved a challenge to the adequacy of the Corps of 
Engineers environmental impact statement (EIS) on 
the New Melones Dam prepared pursuant to the re- 
quirements of NEPA. The Corps revised its EIS, v\hich 
was then found legally sufficient by the Ninth Circuit 
Court of Appeals and the Corps is proceeding with 
construction. 



18 



Another group of cases are at trial or on appeal. In 
the Sierra Club v. Morton case in the federal district 
court in San Francisco, the Sierra Club has sued the 
Department of Water Resources to stop or limit the 
export of water from the Delta through the California 
Aqueduct of the State Water Project. The Sierra Club 
also seeks to stop or delay the proposed Peripheral 
Canal. 

In Boii'ker v. Morton, also in the federal district 
court in San Francisco, the plaintiffs are attempting to 
force the Department to limit the deliver)' of project 
water to land holdings of 160 acres or less. That acre- 
age limitation exists under federal reclamation laws 
and the plaintiffs believe that because the State Water 
Project has benefited from the operation of the San 
Luis joint use facilities, the federal limitations should 
be applied to the entire State Water Project. 

T\\o cases. Friends of the Earth x. Brinegar in fed- 
eral court in San Francisco and Friends of the Earth v. 
Walton, in state superior court in San Francisco, have 
challenged the use of the Peripheral Canal alignment 
as a borrow site for land fill in the Interstate 5 highway 
project. The suits charge that the digging involved 
would constitute the beginning of the canal before an 
EIR on the canal had been approved. 

There have been several cases involving numerous 
parties which seek to set aside the State Water Re- 
sources Control Board's Decision 1379, concerning 
Delta Water Quality, and Decision 1400, concerning 
American River flows. A closely related case. United 
States V. State of California in federal district court 
in Sacramento, was brought by the U. S. Bureau 
of Reclamation seeking a declaration that its water 
rights are not subject to State Water Resources Con- 
trol Board regulations. 

A suit to halt the U.S. Corps of Engineers' Warm 
Springs Dam has been brought in federal court in San 
Francisco. The Warm Springs Task Force v. Corps of 
Engineers case challenges the adequacy of the Corps' 
environmental impact statement prepared pursuant to 
the reqiurements of NEPA. Also, Auburn Dam, and 
the Auburn-Folsom South Canal, \\ hich are U. S. 
Bureau of Reclamation projects, have been challenged 
in federal court in Sacramento in National Resources 
Defense Counsel, Inc. v. Stannn case on the grounds 
that the Bureau's EIS was not adequate. 

Another case involving the Auburn-Folsom South 
Canal is the Environniental Defense Fnnd x. East Bay 
Municipal Utility District in federal court in San Fran- 
cisco. That suit seeks to compel the East Bay Munici- 
pal Utility District to abandon its agreement w ith the 
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation for Auburn-Folsom South 
Water and to reclaim waste \\ ater instead. 

Comprehensive Water Quality Control Planning 

In 1970, the Porter-Cologne Water Qualit\- Act re- 
placed the former Division 7 of the Water Code. This 



Act required the implementation of a statewide pro- 
gram for the control of the quality of all water of 
the State. To implement the Act, the people of Cali- 
fornia in 1970 approved the Clean Water Bond Law, 
which made the proceeds from the sale of |250 million 
of state general obligation bonds available for assisting 
local governmental agencies to correct and avoid pol- 
lution of water of the State. Over |6 million from 
these funds were allocated for the development of 
plans for water quality control within 16 planning 
basins covering the State. These basins depicted on 
Figure 4, are essentially the same areas or further di- 
visions of the planning areas used by the Department 
of Water Resources for this report and shown in 
Figure 2. 

Section 303(e) of the Federal Water Pollution Con- 
trol Act Amendments of 1972 ordered each state to 
have a continuing planning process for water quality 
control of interstate water. Over |2 million in federal 
funds were allocated to the State Water Resources 
Control Board (SWRCB) Study. 

The Board contracted with seven basin contractors 
in 1971. The contractors prepared a basin plan for 
each of the 16 planning areas, working in coordination 
with the State and Regional Boards and other inter- 
ested parties through public workshops. The corn- 




Figure 4. Water Quality Control Planning Basins 



19 



prehensive basinwide plans give consideration to inter- 
relationships of quantity and quality of water. Under 
provisions of the Porter-Cologne Act, water quality 
control plans adopted by a regional water quality con- 
trol board and approved by the SWRCB become a 
part of California Water Plan, effective when such 
plans are reported to the Legislature. 

The Department of Water Resources participated 
in this planning effort by furnishing water resources 
data and information for each of the 16 planning 
basins and acting as the basin contractor in developing 
the comprehensive A\ater quality control plans for each 
of 4 planning basins which are shown on Figure 4. 
Each plan consists of identified beneficial water uses, 
water quality objectives, plan implementation program 
for meeting these objectives, an environmental assess- 
ment of the recommended plan, and a surveillance pro- 
gram to monitor the effectiveness of the plan. Each 
plan is intended to provide a definite program of 
actions \\ithin the planning area designed to preserve 
and enhance quality and protect beneficial uses in a 
manner which will result in maximum benefit to the 
people of the State for the next 25 to 30 years. 

Although the intent of this comprehensive planning 
effort is to provide positive and firm direction for 
water quality' control for many years, it is also rec- 
ognized that adequate provisions must be made for 
changing conditions and technology. Thus, a major 
premise in the development of the basin plans is that 
they will be updated periodically to maintain pace 
with technology, policies and physical changes in the 
basin. This planning effort is discussed in some detail 
in Chapter V. 



State-Federal and Interstate Activities 

The satisfaction of future water needs in consonance 
with environmental goals depends to an important 
degree upon relations with Federal agencies. In a num- 
ber of respects, coordination of objectives and actions 
with neighboring states and with other states in the 
West is also an important factor. Activities in the 
areas of state-federal relations and interstate matters, 
particularly in regard to events that have occurred 
since the publication of Bulletin No. 160-70, are dis- 
cussed in the following paragraphs. 



Cooperaf/'on With U.S. Water Resources Council 

The Water Resources Council was established by 
the Water Resources Planning Act of 1965. It consists 
of the cabinet secretaries of federal departments and 
other top federal officials who have some responsibili- 
ties for water and related land resources. 

The most significant aspect of the Council's activities 
to California was its sponsorship of the comprehensive 



framework studies, including one for the California 
Region, which encompassed California and a small part 
of Southern Oregon. These were ver\- broad studies 
covering estimates of needs for water and related land 
resources, ways of meeting such needs and, in some 
cases, the consequences of doing so or not doing so. 
The study for the California Region commenced in 
1967 under the direction of the California State-Federal 
Interagency Group, representing the States of Nevada 
and Oregon, 9 California agencies and 22 federal agen- 
cies. Field drafts of a Main Report and 18 appendixes 
were completed in mid-1971 and forwarded to the 
Water Resources Council for their use in preparing a 
final report. State and federal comments on these 
field drafts were received and published in January 
1972, and a revised Alain Report was forwarded to the 
Council in May 1972. To date, the Council's final re- 
port has not been completed for transmittal to the 
President and Congress. 

Concurrent with this study of the California Region, 
similar investigations were progressing in three other 
portions of the Southwest, including the Upper and 
Lower Colorado Regions and the Great Basin Region. 
Finally, the report "Pacific Southwest Analytical Sum- 
mary Report on Water and Land Resources", based on 
the framework studies of the four regions, was pub- 
lished in November 1971. 

The major limitation of the framework studies, as 
far as California is concerned, is its emphasis on the 
needs for water and related land resources with Series 
C projections of population and resulting food and 
fiber requirements, which the California investigators 
considered too high in view of the lower growth rates 
measured in 1970. 

The Water Resources Planning Act of 1965 also 
provides that the Water Resources Council shall estab- 
lish "principles, standards, and procedures for Federal 
participants in the preparation of comprehensive re- 
gional or river basin plans and for the formulation and 
evaluation of Federal water and related land resources 
projects". After producing several drafts, the Council 
published in the Federal Register on December 21, 
1971, "Proposed Principles and Standards for Planning 
Water and Related Land Resources". When approved, 
these were to supersede the "Policies, Standards, and 
Procedures in the Formulation, Evaluation, and Re- 
view of Plans for L'se and Development of Water and 
Related Land Resources" approved b>- President 
Kennedy on May 15, 1962, and printed as Senate 
Document 97. They would apply not only to federal 
projects but also to many regulatory activities and all 
federal water resources grants to the states except 
those by the Environmental Protection Agency. 

The proposed criteria provided for addition of the 
planning objectives "environmental quality" and "re- 
gional development" to the former single objective of 
"national economic development" in Senate Document 
97. They provided further for the display of beneficial 



20 



and adverse effects of projects or measures being con- 
sidered according to four accounts, including three 
corresponding to the planning objectives just men- 
tioned and one designated "social well-being". One of 
the more controversial aspects was a discount rate for 
evaluation of federal projects to be set at 7 percent 
for 5 years. Thereafter the rate would be the "op- 
portunity cost", estimated to be approximately 10 per- 
cent. 

Hearings on the proposed Principles and Standards 
were held early in 1972. The Department of Water 
Resources and many others presented testimony. Fol- 
lowing the evaluation of these comments and consider- 
ation of other factors, the Principles and Standards 
were again revised and were approved by the Presi- 
dent on September 5, 1973. As adopted, the criteria 
retained only the planning objectives of "national eco- 
nomic development" and "environmental quality" but 
included all four of the evaluation accounts noted 
above. The planning discount rate was changed to the 
average interest cost to the United States of both 
short-term and long-term securities. It was established 
initially at 6% percent. 

The latest development relating to the Principles 
and Standards is contained in the Omnibus Appropria- 
tion Act for fiscal year 1974 entitled "Water Re- 
sources Development Act of 1974". In Section 80 of 
this Act the Congress amended the planning interest 
rate to the rate on federal long-term securities only, 
a criterion which had been adopted by the Water 
Resources Council in 1968 and which was in effect 
prior to the latest presidential approval. This section 
of the Act also requested the President to study fur- 
ther the matters of the discount rate and the objectives 
and evaluation criteria to be used in planning water 
resources projects. 

Under the Water Resources Planning Act, the 
Water Resources Council is required periodically to 
assess the adequacy of the nation's water resources. 
The first National Assessment was prepared in 1968, 
and preparations are being made for the second. The 
originally announced plan for this new effort was to 
conduct both regional assessments and a national as- 
sessment using similar approaches. The regional as- 
sessments would have been compiled independently 
by regional teams to present different viewpoints from 
the National Assessment which would have been based 
on a nationally consistent analysis. Because of a re- 
duction in alloted funds, only the national assessment 
is now scheduled for preparation. 

Western U.S. Water Plan Study 

The Colorado River Basin Project Act (P.L. 90- 
537) which authorized the Central Arizona Project 
and several projects in the Upper Basin, also author- 
ized investigations which became known as the West- 
ern U.S. Water Plan Study. Title 1 of the Act con- 



templated a regional water plan "to serve as the 
framework under which projects in the Colorado 
River Basin may be coordinated and constructed with 
proper timing to the end that an adequate supply of 
water may be made available for such projects . . . ." 
Title II provided that "the Secretary of the Interior 
shall conduct full and complete reconnaissance investi- 
gations for the purpose of developing a general plan 
to meet the future water needs of the Western United 
States. Such investigations shall include the long-range 
water supply available and the long-range water re- 
quirements in each water resource region of the 
Western United States." A final report was to be 
completed not later than June 30, 1977. A proviso 
stated that for a period of ten years or until Septem- 
ber 30, 1978, "the Secretary shall not undertake re- 
connaissance studies of any plan for the importation 
of water into the Colorado River Basin from any 
other natural river drainage basin lying outside the 
states of Arizona, California, Colorado, New Mexico, 
and those portions of Nevada, Utah, and Wyoming, 
which are in the natural drainage basin of the Colorado 
River". This moratorium was intended to exclude the 
study of importations from the Pacific Northwest. 

The Bureau of Reclamation on behalf of the Secre- 
tary of the Interior started these studies in 1970. Early 
in 1973 the Office of Management and Budget directed 
the Department of the Interior to reduce the scope of 
the investigation from that originally laid out in the 
plan of study and to shorten the study period so as 
to complete the final report by June 30, 1974. The 
Bureau of Reclamation prepared an abbreviated plan 
of study, which consisted mainly of identifying major 
problems in the West relating to water resources and 
recommending further investigations to find solutions 
therefor. Since the scope of studies was largely limited 
to review and summarization of other work, there 
will not be any major new findings regarding water 
supplies for California. 

Salinity of Colorado Rive^r 

The Colorado River is now and will continue to be 
an important source of water for the coastal and 
desert areas of Southern California. The primary agri- 
cultural service areas are in the BIythe and Yuma 
areas along the River and in Imperial and Coachella 
Valleys. The principal municipal and industrial service 
in the coastal drainage area from Ventura County to 
San Diego County is by the Metropolitan Water Dis- 
trict of Southern California. By the time the full 
capacity of the State Water Project is being used to 
import water to Southern California, the Colorado 
River supply will still amount to more than half of 
the total for that area. Thus, it is to California's eco- 
nomic interest that the quality of the Colorado River 
be maintained as high as possible. 

The Colorado River has always had a substantial 
load of dissolved salts as well as its burden of sedi- 



21 



merit. The natural salinity comes from salt springs 
and from the widely diffuse leaching of salt from 
marine sediments by precipitation, surface runoff and 
ground water flow. Additional quantities of salt have 
been introduced by agricultural, domestic, industrial 
and other uses of water. Further, the export of good 
quality water originating in the high mountains of 
Colorado and New Mexico for use outside the Colo- 
rado River Basin and the evaporation or transpira- 
tion of water from reservoirs and irrigated areas has 
caused the concentration of salt to increase. 

The combination of the above factors has, for ex- 
ample, caused salinity to increase substantially in the 
vicinity of Imperial Dam, the diversion point for the 
Ail-American Canal near the Mexican Border. Since 
the beginning of salinity records in 1941, salinity has 
increased from an average of about 700 milligrams of 
salt per liter of water to 870 milligrams per liter 
(mg/1) in 1972. Recent projections by the Colorado 
River Board of California forecast about 1,300 mg/1 
at Imperial Dam in the year 2000 if control measures 
as planned are not undertaken. For the same year at 
Lake Havasu, the point of Metropolitan Water Dis- 
trict's diversions, the Board has predicted about 1,100 
mg/i compared with about 750 mg/1 at the present 
time. 

Several steps have been taken in the last decade 
toward the planning and implementation of measures 
to control the increase of salinity in the Lower Colo- 
rado River and to improve the quality of water reach- 
ing Mexico. The first \\as publication of the report 
entitled, "Need for Controlling Salinity of the Colo- 
rado River" by the Colorado River Board of California 
in August 1970. This report combined information 
on the probable rate of development and use of water 
in the basin and its effect on the salinity of the lower 
river if mitigation measures are not taken. 

In 1971, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 
published the result of studies begun in 1963 in a re- 
port titled, "The Mineral Quality Problem in the 
Colorado River Basin — Summary Report". This report 
projected future salinity levels without control 
projects, suggested specific projects to control salinity, 
and compared the costs of these projects with the 
detriments that \\ould be caused by using the water of 
higher salinity without control measures. The Sum- 
mary Report recommended a policy of maintaining 
salinity concentrations at or below levels then found 
in the lower main stem of the River; the adoption of 
water quality standards at key points; and the imple- 
mentation of a basinwidc salinity control program as 
future water development in the Basin occurs. 

The Environmental Protection Agency report was 
used as a basis for meetings among the seven states 
and the Environmental Protection Agency in Febru- 
ary and April 1972. These meetings together com- 
prised the "Seventh Session of Conference in the Mat- 
ter of Pollution of the Interstate Waters of the 



Colorado River and Its Tributaries — Colorado, New 
Mexico, Arizona, California, Nevada, Wyoming, 
Utah". The conferees agreed to defer the establishment 
of numerical criteria but to adopt and accelerate the 
salinity control program outlined in the 1971 Environ- 
mental Protection Agency report as modified by 
further studies of the Bureau of Reclamation. In this 
connection, the Bureau prepared a report in February 
1972 entitled, "Colorado River Water Quality Im- 
provement Program". 

Also during the 1960s and early 1970s, the De- 
partment of State was negotiating with Mexico 
toward solution of the problem of salinity in the water 
delivered to that country under the 1944 water treaty. 
On August 30, 1973, after agreement had been reached 
by U. S. Ambassador Herbert Brownell and Mexico's 
Foreign Secretary Rebassa, the Presidents of the two 
countries signed the agreement, which was recorded as 
Minute 242 of the International Boundary and Water 
Commission. The minute specified that annual average 
salinity concentrations at Morelos Dam, the .Mexican 
diversion point, would be no more than 115 mg/1 
(plus or minus 30 mg/1) greater than at Imperial 
Dam, the lowest diversion point in the LTnited States. 
This provision was conditioned on the authorization 
by Congress of certain facilities and measures re- 
quired to effectuate the agreement. While not speci- 
fied in the agreement, these would include a desalter 
on the Wellton-Mohawk Drain in the vicinity of 
Yuma, Arizona; lining or reconstruction of the Coa- 
chella Canal to control seepage losses and thereby 
provide an interim water supply for dilution; and 
other related facilities. 

The congressional delegation of the Colorado River 
Basin states introduced legislation into both houses of 
the Congress in February 1974, to combine authoriza- 
tion of facilities of the upstream salinity control pro- 
gram under study by the U. S. Bureau of Reclamation 
and of the downstream works to effectuate Minute 
242. This legislation was passed and signed by the 
President on June 24, 1974. 

In a parallel action of September 10, 1973, the En- 
vironmental Protection Agcnc\' notified the states of 
the Lower Colorado River Basin that, pursuant to the 
Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 
(PL 92-500), the states would be required to establish 
numerical criteria for salinit\- control and a plan of 
implementation to achieve the criteria. Representatives 
of the seven states established the Colorado River 
Basin Salinity Control Forum through which they 
plan to compl>- with the proposed Environmental 
Protection .'\gency regulation. 

A probable major component of tiie Forum's plan 
will be implcmcntatiiin of fcasil)le components of the 
Bureau of Reclamation's salinit\- control program. In 
addition, the plan will undout)tedl\' include actions 
to be taken by the states, local goscrnmental agencies. 



22 



and private industry. The latter, in particular, will 
likely include measures to limit the increase of salinity 
from mining and processing of oil shale and coal for 
petroleum or synthetic gas or for combustion in ther- 
mal power plants in the Basin. The plan will also 
cover estimates of the degree to which salinity can be 
controlled in the lower main stem of the Colorado 
by measures such as those that have been identified, 
and economic evaluations relating costs and benefits 
of the measures. The plan may allow for salinity to 
increase temporarily while the Upper Basin continues 
to develop and before full control measures are in- 
stituted. However, the objective will be to reduce the 
salinity to 1972 levels within a specific period of time. 

Wesfern Stafes Water Council 

In 1965, the Western Governors' Conference, com- 
posed of 1 1 states lying wholly or partially west of 
the continental divide, created the Western States 
Water Council. The purpose of the Council is to 



provide effective cooperation among the western states 
in planning for programs leading to the integrated 
development of water resources by state, federal, and 
other agencies. Its "Principles, Standards, and Guide- 
lines" contemplate a high degree of cooperation in 
planning to meet water needs. 

While the Council itself has not entered into a 
planning program as such, it has fostered communica- 
tion and mutual understanding among water leaders 
throughout the West. There have been a number of 
positions taken by the Council on legislative and policy 
matters that have affected the western states. Even 
though unanimous consent was not obtained on all 
issues considered, as is required by its Rules of Organi- 
zation for adoption of any external position, the thor- 
ough exploration of issues has been beneficial in clari- 
fying the interests and desires of the states. 

California Sfate-Federal Interagency Group 

In an effort to coordinate water planning, develop- 
ment and management activities in California by the 




Pine Flat Reservoir, constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers pholo 



23 



major water development and management agencies, 
the California State-Federal Interagency Group was 
established in 1958 as a forum for information ex- 
change and resolution of mutual interest issues. It 
consists of the director of the State Department of 
Water Resources and the equivalent officers in Cali- 
fornia for the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, the 
U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, and the U. S. Soil Con- 
servation Service. 

The Group includes a Task Force for Planning 
Coordination, which is composed of the planning 
chiefs of the parent organizations and also of the U. S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, the California Department 
of Fish and Game, and the State Water Resources 
Control Board. This is the major coordinating group 
at the subpolicy level. In addition, staff representing 
these organizations and others as circumstances war- 
rant make up work groups and supporting subgroups 
that report to the Task Force. Representatives of the 
State of California are the Chairmen of both the Inter- 
agency Group and the Task Force for Planning Co- 
ordination. 

The Interagency Group meets quarterly and has 
been a useful organization to consider and find solu- 
tions to problems of coordination, needs for new 
studies and similar matters. The emphasis has been on 
water resource planning. 

Intersfafe Wafer Compacfs 

Under terms of the Klamath River Basin Compact, 
California cooperates with Oregon in the administra- 
tion and use of water common to the two states \\ithin 
the Upper Klamath River Basin. The compact allo- 
cates sufficient water to each of the two states to 
provide for all foreseeable uses within the area. At 
present, both states are operating well within their 
water allocations and are expected to continue to do 
so for some time into the future because of the rela- 
tively slow rate of growth of agriculture and other 
developments within the compact area. 

A California-Nevada Interstate Compact relates to 
the distribution and use of interstate water resources. 
The compact allocates the water supplies of the Lake 
Tahoe Basin and the Truckee, Carson, and A\'alker 
River Basins. This agreement has been approved by 
both California and Nevada, but has not \et receiA"ed 
the necessary consent of the United States. Pending 
this consent, each state is administering the use of 
w-ater covered by the compact as if it were in effect. 

The compact makes an equitable apportionment be- 
tween the states of the available water of the respec- 
tive stream systems, but the limited supplies does not 
provide sufficient water to either state to provide for 
the full development of the available land. 

The need for a compact to distribute the water is 
emphasized by two law.suits which the United States 
has instituted. In one case, the United States is attempt- 



ing to define water rights for the Newlands Reclama- 
tion Project in Nevada by bringing suit against all 
water users on the Carson River upstream from the 
project, both in California and Nevada. In the other 
case, the United States is seeking to define its rights 
and those of the P\ramid Lake Tribe of Paiute In- 
dians to water from the Truckee River by suing all 
diverters of water from the Truckee River in Nevada 
upstream from P\ramid Lake. 

In May 1974 the Nevada State Supreme Court is- 
sued a writ of mandamus requiring the Nevada State 
Engineer and the Director of the Bureau of Environ- 
mental Health to approve a subdivision map for a 
development along the crest of the Lake Tahoe Basin. 
The two state officials had refused approval on the 
ground that the water supply for the subdivision came 
from the Lake Tahoe Basin and some of the lands 
in the subdivision were outside the Basin. Thev cited 
the California-Nevada Interstate Compact, which pro- 
hibits additional out-of-basin diversion of water from 
the Lake Tahoe Basin, as expressing the intent of the 
State of Nevada in this matter even though the Com- 
pact has not yet been approved by the Congress. 

Significant recent events on the Colorado River 
from which water supplies are allocated under a com- 
pact written in 1922, are described in an earlier section 
on Salinity of the Colorado River. 

Land Use Planning and Controls 

In recent years increasing emphasis has been given 
at both state and federal levels to fashioning legisla- 
tion aimed at controlling land use. Although many 
different concerns are reflected in this movement, the 
catalyst that is bring numerous interests together has 
been concern for the environment. .Many people be- 
lieve there is a need for a rational, carefully thought- 
out plan for land use to provide organization to the 
current situation which sometimes seems near chaotic 
due to the multiplicit\- of agencies independently ap- 
plying environment-related controls. 

Land use policies, planning, and controls would 
have direct impact on all resource management, in- 
cluding water resources. They could provide better 
insight as to the location and nature of future water 
management problems. Similar!)', they miglit assist in 
identification of possible solutions to these problems. 

The Department of \\'ater Resources' interest goes 
beyond questions of possible impact, however. In the 
arid \\est, land use and water use management are 
intimately tied together. 

In this section, some of the proposed land use leg- 
islation will be reviewed as well as some of the history 
of land use control. 

Land Use Policy and Confrol Legislaiion 

Congress gave extensive consideration to r\vo land 
use bills in 1974. Botli bills ^\•ere defeated, but pos- 



24 



Change in Contra Costa County 
land use--1946, 1954 and 1974 




sibly will be introduced again in the next Congress. 
Various provisions of the bills would have had state 
government responsible for (1) establishing a state- 
wide land use planning process within 3 years of 
passage, (2) developing an adequate state land use 
program within 5 years of passage, and (3) estab- 
lishing an intergovernmental advisory council com- 
posed of officials of local governments. The state 
process would have been required to have the power 
to regulate development around key major facilities 
(airports, major freeway interchanges, etc.) and to 
regulate real estate development of 50 lots or more 
10 miles beyond the boundaries of a Standard Metro- 
politan Statistical Area (as defined by the U.S. Bureau 
of Census). The legislation included the concept of 
"areas of critical concern" which has been adopted in 
California as a basis for policy statements by the State 
Administration and for pending state legislation. Gen- 
erally, these are lands of more than local importance 
in regard to agricultural use, unique flora or fauna, 
natural or historic character, etc., and those lands hav- 
ing a hazardous nature for certain kinds of develop- 
ment. 

The American Law Institute has said that 90 
percent of decisions regarding land use are of only 
local significance. If this is correct, then the "areas 
of critical state concern" should be expected to be 
impacted by only 10 percent of the cases of proposed 
actions. However, precisely defining "areas of state 
critical concern" will require considerable delibera- 
tion to limit the scope so that a much larger portion of 
decision making does not become unduly relegated to 
other than the local level. At the same time these 
definitions must be broad enough to meet the social, 
economic, and environmental land-related objectives 
being sought. 

At the state government level, the major legislative 
considerations, to the time of this writing, have been 
directed toward establishing a responsible agency in 
state government to designate areas of critical state 
concern and establish rules and regulations for land 
development within these areas. 

The proposed federal and state legislation briefly 
described above is addressed directly to areavvide land 
use planning and control. Many administrative and 
legislative actions in the past have dealt with the 
subject in a more indirect or more limited manner. 
Their total effect has been increasingly apparent, and 
they have contributed to the steadily broadening and 
deepening of public control of land use. 

The "Quiet Revolution" 

Land use control is by no means a new concept in 
California. Federal, state, and local government as well 
as public initiative action have all contributed a variety 
of control mechanisms. In recent years, principally in 
response to environmental concerns, there has been a 



rapid increase in land use controls, many indirect, but 
some quite specifically directed toward limiting or 
shaping the nature of land utilization. The National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), among 
other things, established the Council of Environmental 
Quality. Its report on land use and associated en- 
vironmental issues spoke of this proliferation of con- 
trols as the "quiet revolution". 

The following presents some of these legislative, ad- 
ministrative, and public land use control actions that 
have taken place through the years. 

Federal. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act 
Amendments of 1972 include the goal that the dis- 
charge of pollutants into navigable waters be elimi- 
nated by 1985. The Clean Air Act of 1970 grants 
land use controls to agencies regulating air pollution 
under the 1965 Housing Act. The Housing and 
Urban Development Agency requires that there is a 
"certified" regional planning activity in every metro- 
politan area in order to qualify communities for re- 
ceipt of grants for a variety of urban-related 
purposes. The 1966 Demonstration Cities and Metro- 
politan Development Act empowered the regional 
planning agencies to review application for federal 
grants from both public and private bodies. The 
Federal Flood Insurance Program requires local gov- 
ernment to zone and otherwise control land use in 
flood prone areas. 

Probably most significant at the federal level was 
the establishment of the Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA) in 1970. This consolidated some of 
the above programs and others dealing with air pollu- 
tion, water pollution, solid waste disposal, pesticide 
regulation and atomic radiation in the environment. 
EPA has some authority to use land use controls to 
accomplish the objectives of these programs. The 
limited use it has made of this power reflects the some- 
what disaggregated character of its statutory au- 
thority. 

In addition to the above. Federal Government in- 
fluences on land use are often quite significant as a 
result of congressional and federal administrative de- 
cisions regarding location of key federal facilities, the 
awarding of contracts, and other major federal fi- 
nancial investments. 

State. The 1949 water quality control legislation 
and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act as well as 
the establishment of tlic Solid Waste Management 
Board and the Air Resources Board created state gov- 
ernment agencies designed to formulate and enforce 
provisions for control of pollution. 

The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act enables 
regional water quality control boards to place a freeze 
on new sewer connections until waste treatment prob- 



26 



lenis are solved. The Air Resources Board has the 
power of land use control through provisions of the 
federal Clean Air Act of 1970. 

The Cobey-Alquist Flood Plain Management Act 
prescribes the manner of cooperation between the De- 
partment of Water Resources or the State Reclama- 
tion Board and local government in developing regu- 
lations to control land use within flood-prone areas. 

The Agricultural Land Conservation Act (William- 
son Act) passed in 1965 was a major step toward 
preserving agricultural lands from urbanization. Al- 
though there is current debate over how successfully 
it accomplishes this purpose, without question, it has 
had some positive effects on the agricultural industry. 
The act allows agreements to be entered into by 
private land owners and county government whereby 
the land is retained for agricultural uses in exchange 
for tax assessment based on value of agricultural pro- 
duction, rather than on the traditional "comparative" 
sales basis. The act was amended in 1967 to allow 
these agreements to be draw n in land use cases other 
than agricultural, i.e., scenic highway corridors, wild- 
life habitat, wet lands, submerged lands, salt ponds, 
recreation lands, and open space. 

The Legislature created the San Francisco Bay Con- 
servation and Development Commission in 1965, and 
in 1967, the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency was 
formed. In 1972, through initiative action and by 
direct public election, the California Coastal Zone 
Commission was established. All three entities are 
looked upon as representing the most direct and 
significant involvement by state government in areas 
of land use control formerly under the exclusive juris- 
diction of local government. The nature of tiic prob- 
lems and the degree of success experienced by these 
agencies undoubtedly \\ ill ha\c impact on future state- 
wide land use planning and control legislation. 

Pending state land use polic\' and control legislation 
might be considered to be potentially the most signifi- 
cant state action impacting land use decision-making 
to date. From the sense of direct consideration and 
control of land use this may be true. However, legis- 
lation already enacted probably has had equally as 
broad an influence, albeit more indirect, on land use 
decision-making. The California Environmental Qual- 
ity Act, passed in 1970, required government agencies 
to prepare environmental impact documents covering 
activities thc\' intend to carry out. The Friends of 
Mammoth decision by the California Supreme court 
expanded this responsibility to include environmental 
impact analysis l)\- public agencies having discretion- 
ary or financial responsibilities over proposed private 
activities. 

The Environmental Impact Reports constitute an 
important tool for the decision makers (and their 
constituents). The requirement to include all pertinent 
basic data and the descriptions of possible direct and 
peripheral impacts makes much more of the available 



knowledge readily accessible to the decision makers 
than has traditionally been the case. 

In 1970 the Legislature declared that future growth 
of the State should be guided by an effective planning 
process, which includes a framework of "officially 
approved statew ide goals and policies directed to land 
use, population grow th and distribution, urban expan- 
sion and other relevant ph\'sical, social, and economic 
development factors".* To carry out this process, the 
Legislature created the Office of Planning and Re- 
search and placed it within the Governor's Office. 

The Office of Planning and Research produced a 
state Environmental Goals and Policy Report t which 
was approved by the Governor in June 1973. It con- 
tains general goals and policies on such subjects as 
water, noise, air quality, transportation, population, 
pesticides, land use, environmental resources and 
hazardous areas. The report lists potential areas of 
statewide critical concern, plus eleven basic principles 
which provide a framework for assessing the intent 
of the goals and policies and the government's role. 

The report looks to the State to exert leadership in 
areas classified as of statewide critical concern and, 
through its departments and political subdivisions, to 
undertake measures to minimize those activities which 
will have a detrimental effect on such resources. The 
report also states that programs are encouraged which 
will enhance the quality of the areas of concern or 
at least optimize their use without destroying their 
inherent value. Activities, such as providing water 
and other governmental services, which support de- 
velopment of areas identified as of hazardous concern 
(fault zones, fire hazard, flood-prone areas, etc.) 
should be avoided. 

Local. Traditionallx', control of land use has resided 
in the hands of local government. Zoning ordinances 
have been based on many considerations, such as 
separation of industry from residential development, 
ability of soils to adequately handle septic tank 
Icachate, stability of hillsides relative to erosion and 
sedimentation potential if disturbed, building height 
limitation, and others. This traditional approach to 
land use control has received much criticism for its 
apparent lack of strength in the face of development 
pressures. More importance is being placed on the 
preparation of sound County General Plans to provide 
the framework for decision making. 

The State Planning Act in 1929 required counties 
to adopt master plans. In 1947, this Act was replaced 
by the Planning and Conservation Act that require 
cities also to prepare such plans. During the period 
1967 through 1971, state legislation was enacted that 
added separate and specific elements to the require- 

» Chapter 1534, Statutes of 1970. 

t "Environmental Goals and Policy", State of California, June 1973. 



27 




High altitude photograph taken over the lower Sacramento Valley from a U-2 plane during the summer of 1974. Water-using areas (green 
fields) stand out as red in the picture. The Sacramento River winds through the right side of the picture. The cities of Woodland (upper left), 
Davis (lower left), and part of Sacramento (mid-to-lower right) con be seen. Note the light colored areas which ore plots of unirrigated land in an 
intensely developed agricultural area. NASA photo 



28 



ments for the general plan (i.e., master plan). These 
were the housing element, the conservation element, 
the open space plan, and the seismic safety, noise, 
scenic highway, fire protection, and geological hazards 
elements. Although much work remains to be done in 
most counties even to assemble the necessary data for 
satisfactory analysis of these subjects, the requirements 
have forced consideration of many aspects of land 
development not covered to any obvious degree in 
earlier cases. 

Recent dramatic land use controls at the local level 
precipitated by citizen action have occurred in the 
communities of Palo Alto, San Diego, and San Jose, 
and in Marin County. These have ranged from initia- 
tive action to freeze or slow growth pending specific 
studies or other action, to the disapproval of bond 
proposal for financing utility development. The extent 
of future impact of this type of action is uncertain, 
as some have been overturned in the courts. 

Questions of personal property rights, of alternatives 
to property taxes as the principal local funding instru- 
ment, of how to achieve a balance between social, 
economic, and environmental objectives, and other 
difficult questions remain to be adequately answered. 



Land Use Planning 
and the Department of Water Resources 

The Department of Water Resources does not en- 
gage in land use planning, but it does make land use 
studies. In planning of water projects and coordinating 
the plans of other agencies, the Department's pro- 
cedures are reactive rather than proactive. It projects 
what it believes will be the most likely land use under 
existing public policies. Since the major consumptive 
use of water in California is by irrigated agriculture, 
it goes into considerable detail, projecting areas and 
types of cropping. It works with population projec- 
tion and distribution. The planning takes into account 
current trends and considers probable future trends. 

The Department has made major contributions to 
recent deliberations in the State administration on 
land use planning. Its data files on present and past 
land use are extensive and widely used. Plans for water 
management will be an essential and integral part of 
comprehensive land use plans. The Department will 
be able to contribute in numerous additional ways to 
any land use management program that may be 
adopted by the State. 



29 



CHAPTER II 



KEY WATER POLICY ISSUES 



A significant aspect of the greatly expanded public 
concern for natural environmental conditions is the 
need for greater consideration of interrelationships of 
actions, "trade-offs", and secondary effects. The need 
to evaluate the interrelationships, and frequently even 
their existence, is not always recognized. The complex 
interrelationships need to be understood to avoid sim- 
plistic or partial solutions to water problems. 

The following discussions outline some of the cur- 
rent water policy issues that need thorough considera- 
tion. In some cases adequate data are not available 
to make complete assessments of the interrelationships 
currently considered important. Awareness of these 
and the likely direction of the effects is, however, very 
important to sound decisions. Every effort should be 
made to avoid actions that produce unexpected and 
adverse results. All of the issues relate to changing 
public attitudes that affect or are affected by water 
development and management. The principal cause 
for the changes relates to revised vie\\'s on protection 
and enhancement of the natural environment. 

Over the past quarter century, the technology of 
economic analysis as applied in the planning, formula- 
tion, and design of government-sponsored water re- 
sources development has reached a high level of 
sophistication, particularly as compared with the anal- 
ysis of other government-sponsored programs. This 
technology, based largely on economic criteria, has its 
critics and its difficulties. When properly and consci- 
entiously applied it provided a tangible basis for deci- 
sion making in connection with implementation of 
major water resources development and the allocation 
of the costs among beneficiaries. 

Within recent years, however, this approach to the 
decision making process has been seriously challenged 
by those who contend that preservation and enhance- 
ment of the natural environment, and social considera- 
tions, are of primar\' concern in connection with any 
development-oriented undertaking. These considera- 
tions are highly qualitative, judgment oriented, and 
not readily adaptable to quantitative expression or 
economic dimensioning. When included in water 
project development they result in benefits and costs 
whicii may significantly affect the cost of other prod- 
ucts and services. 

In an expanding economy under conditions of in- 
creasing population, maintenance of the status quo, 
or the "no project alternative", usually represents a 
cost in itself, since the products and services which 
society demands must be supplied from a more costly 
alternative. Indeed, the "environmental movement" 
and the increasing awareness and concern on the part 
of the general public for the natural environment and 
esthetics appear to be side effects or results of in- 



creasing economic affluence in a large sector of so- 
ciety. 

Although environmental and esthetic goals involve 
economic aspects, it is not necessary that these con- 
siderations be forced into a rigorous economic frame- 
work. Care must be taken, however, to adopt a reason- 
able balance between economic factors and subjective 
factors to provide opportunity for the economically 
handicapped portion of society to increase its level 
of economic affluence to a point where it can partici- 
pate in the natural environmental and esthetic ameni- 
ties of California. Sucii an approach would recognize 
the impact of water management actions on the en- 
vironment as well as recognize the economic and so- 
cial impact of development. There is need for a 
straightforward, workable basis for formulating and 
evaluating water resources development, and for allo- 
cating the costs of such development among all bene- 
ficiaries, including those for whom the natural en- 
vironmental and esthetic considerations are enhanced. 

The issues presented in this chapter have significant 
potential impact on the public and most have received 
public attention. Most have been extensivel\- reviewed 
and discussed in various forums including the work- 
shops held by the Department of Water Resources in 
the preparation of this bulletin. While the subjects 
have received wide attention, the ramifications of the 
courses of action have not always received the atten- 
tion necessary to develop public policy and decisions. 

Cooling Water for Electric Energy Production 

The cooling water policy issue arises because limi- 
tations on locating power plants on the coast are 
creating a substantial previously unplanned-for de- 
mand on inland water resources. Significant resource 
trade-offs and costs result from the coastal limitations. 

In recent decades most of the increased demand for 
electric energy in California has been met by con- 
structing thermal electric plants. Although the re- 
maining hydroelectric potential is significant, pollu- 
tion-free, and nonconsumptive of fuels (as pointed out 
in Department of Water Resources' Bulletin No. 194, 
"Hydroelectric Energy Potential in California") the 
majority of future energy requirements must still be 
met by thermal generating plants. Thenual plants re- 
quire some high quality water for steam generation, 
which is frequently obtained by distillation, and much 
larger quantities of cooling water to recondense the 
steam and to remove approximately 50 to 60 percent 
of the heat which cannot be converted to electricity 
due to natural heat exchange limitations. This cooling 
water is either passed through the plant and discharged 
back into its source or recycled through cooling 
towers where heat is removed by evaporation. 



31 



Thermal electric plants located along the Pacific 
Ocean or its bays and estuaries take advantage of the 
large volume of cold water available and use once- 
through cooling systems. Concerns about the marine 
environment, the esthetics of coastal plants, and the 
safety of structures against earthquakes, however, 
have greatly restricted further construction of new 
plants along the coast during the past few years. The 
present trend is toward location of new thermal plants 
at inland sites. Plants in these areas will require re- 
circulation of the cooling water, most of which must 
come from fresh water resources. The number of new 
plants which will be constructed at inland sites will 
depend on many factors but it is possible that the 
cooling water demands may range between 300,000 
and 400,000 acre-feet annually by the year 1990. Even 
more water might be required in later years, although 
technological advances may improve cooling methods 
and energy conservation programs may slow the rate 
of growth in demand. The U.S. Environmental Pro- 
tection Agency is currently proposing that all existing 
plants stop using ocean water for cooling and switch 
to other sources. To do so would require by 1977 
about 200,000 acre-feet of fresh water annually. The 
Department of Water Resources, State Water Re- 
sources Control Board, and the electric utilities have 
expressed concern to the Environmental Protection 
Agency that such a requirement is impractical and un- 
necessary. 

Many of the natural environmental concerns about 
coastal sites apply equally well to inland sites. While 
there are impacts on marine resources from use of 



ocean water for cooling, the development of addi- 
tional surface water supplies for inland plants will 
also have environmental impacts on fresh water fish 
and wildlife resources. Similarly, concern with the 
esthetics and scenery on the coast will be translated to 
analogous concerns at inland locations. Plants at 
coastal locations using once-through cooling are not as 
large and imposing as ones located inland with their 
large cooling towers, which typically are several hun- 
dred feet tall if natural draft is used. An alternative to 
cooling towers would be construction of large ponds, 
which could be esthetically pleasing but require large 
areas of land. Consideration is currently being given 
to using air cooling, in which the cooling water is 
recirculated through a radiator system similar to that 
used in an automobile. These costly systems, how- 
ever, would require very large installations covering 
large areas in order to provide enough cooling sur- 
face, and they also require energy for pumping. 

Water for cooling at inland locations, however, can 
in part be obtained from waste water discharges which 
may be too brackish to use for other purposes. Waste 
water that would otherwise be discharged to the ocean 
that could be used for power plant cooling could re- 
sult in an overall economic benefit. The cost of electric 
generation may be somewhat greater than if fresh 
water is used due to the cost of pretreatment of the 
water. The cost of disposing of the waste water, 
however, could be much lower because the volume 
may be only about one-tenth the initial volume due to 
the concentrating effect of the evaporative process. 




Ocean water cooling at Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant 



32 



In the Central Valley there will be signficant quanti- 
ties of waste water which must otherwise be dis- 
charged to the ocean. This water must be collected, 
treated, and stored for cooling. Some discharges into 
the Salton Sea may also offer potential for power 
plant cooHng. The level of the Salton Sea would, how- 
ever, be lowered and the salinity increased. This 
would have an impact on the fishery resources and 
the recreation use of the Salton Sea. 

A major untapped source of waste water would be 
the urban discharges to the ocean and its estuaries. 
Due to safety and environmental considerations, it has 
been difficult to locate power plants near the metro- 
politan areas, and the use of urban waste water for 
cooling would involve extensive collection and trans- 
mission facilities. 

An additional factor involved in the source of cool- 
ing water is the physical advantage of the cold Pa- 
cific Ocean over inland water supplies. The ocean 
water in Northern California is generally 20-25 de- 
grees colder than inland supplies and therefore is a 
more efficient coolant. The difference in Southern Cal- 
ifornia ma\' be around 10-15 degrees. The increased 
efficiency of power plants using colder sea water when 
compared to plants operated inland with warmer wa- 
ters and evaporative coolers would be equivalent to 
between 15 and 20 million barrels of oil annually for 
the additional plants needed b\' 1990. 

Boards and agencies responsible for developing 
coastal zone and control plans, the Legislature, and 
the public should be aware of the trade-offs which 
are involved. The esthetic impact on the coastline 
should be compared to the trade-off of a highly vis- 
ible inland site with its massive cooling towers. Waste 
water in the San Joaquin Valley used for cooling at 
inland sites might be some of the water now used 
for Delta salinit)' control and \\ould have to be off- 
set by fresh water outflow. Until waste water can be 
collected and adequateh' treated, it may be necessary 
in some areas of the state to use fresh water for cool- 
ing thus imposing additional stress on the state's water 
supplies. The coastal site limitations on power plants 
will create very similar inland problems. 

Water Deficiencies 

The size and scheduling of future water conserva- 
tion facihties, particularly for the State Water Proj- 
ect and the Central Valley Project, depend to some 
degree on the certainty of meeting contractual deliv- 
ery schedules. If it is not necessary to fully meet the 
contractual commitments during dry years, the water 
supply available during "normal" or wet years can be 
spread out to more users, or the date by which addi- 
tional conservation facilities are needed for a given 
service area can be deferred. This latter concept is the 
basis for suggestions for increasing the \ield of the 
State Water Project and the Central Valley Project by 



simply e.xpanding the degree of risk in meeting water 
delivery commitments. The policy issue is whether an 
increased degree of risk should be borne by water 
users in order to defer or avoid additional water de- 
velopment. Equitable consideration of any increased 
risk would involve all water uses, including municipal 
and industrial users, agriculture, fish and wildlife, rec- 
reation, and hydroelectric generation. 

The dependable or firm yield of each water project 
traditionally has been based on the capabilities of that 
project to furnish water service on some prescribed 
pattern or schedule during the most severe drought 
of record. Built into this approach are tempering al- 
lowances for reduction of water deliveries in critically 
dry years. For example. State Water Project contracts 
with agricultural customers provide for ma.ximum de- 
ficiency of up to 50 percent of contractual amounts 
in any one year and up to 100 percent cumulative de- 
ficiency over a seven-year period after which munic- 
ipal and agricultural users jointly share any further 
shortages. The practical effect of these deficiency al- 
lowances in project planning and design is to build in 
some degree of risk, but the amount of risk is usually 
not statistically determined. 

For \\ ater projects using Northern California water 
supplies such as the Central Valley Project and the 
State Water Project, the historic drought which oc- 
curred during the six water seasons 1929 through 1934 
is the critical period for project water yield studies. 
This period was the worst sustained drought in the 
Sacramento River Basin in the 120 years of record in 
terms of length and severity. The driest single runoff 
year in the past 100 years was 1924 (1864 was prob- 
ably slightly drier, based on very limited rainfall rec- 
ords). 

The recurrence interval of a six-year drought com- 
parable in severity to the 1929-1934 critical dry pe- 
riod is not known. Estimates range from between 100 
and 400 years, and the best estimate at this time is that 
a similar drought could be expected about once every 
200 years on the average. It could occur twice in suc- 
cessive decades, however. 

Critics of the traditional "historic critical period" 
method have suggested that probability methods be 
used for determining the design size and water yield 
accomplishment of water resource projects. With the 
advent of the electronic computer, this approach is 
possible, but the matter of risk remains. Three aspects 
need to be evaluated somewhere in this process: (I) 
assessment of the level of risk built into the traditional 
approach, an extremely important point to those 
holding existing contracts for firm yield; (2) the eco- 
nomic effect of water shortages on various types of 
use; and (3) the degree of risk of water and hydro- 
electric power shortage which the public is able or 
willing to accept and the equitable distribution of such 
risks. 



33 



The same water development system might be able 
to provide more water on the average than the calcu- 
lated dry period safe yield, if sufficient conveyance 
capacity existed. Operating in this manner would tend 
to use all or much of the reservoir carryover reserves 
during the current year rather than a longer and more 
conservative carryover as assumed in conventional 
studies; therefore, the shortages which occur would 
generally be greater. The average water supply would 
be increased, but the lack of dependability would also 
be increased, causing dry >ear hardships for some 
water users whose investments may require a firm or 
dependable supply. Hydroelectric power production 
would also be reduced in dry years due to lower water 
levels in reservoirs. This would require additional in- 
stalled capacity in new thermal electric plants. 

The sharing of water deficiencies between agencies 
under drought conditions would be constrained by 
institutional and legal considerations. Water rights arc 
property rights and there is no legal basis for sharing 
between users of different basins. 

Cost Sharing of Environmental Enhancement 

As a general principle of equit\-, the cost of mitiga- 
tion, due to the loss of a public resource, such as fish, 
have been borne by water project beneficiaries. Con- 
siderable efforts have been made to compensate for 
certain unavoidable losses. For example fish hatcheries 
have been constructed to replace the loss of fish 
spawning areas due to dam construction. These have 
been accepted as project costs. There has not, how- 
ever, been a corresponding degree of concern with 



cost sharing for the benefits received when enhance- 
ment occurs. 

In large federal water projects, such as those on the 
American River, there are generally many years be- 
tween the time of authorization of a plan of accom- 
plishments with its corresponding cost-sharing formula 
and the time the project is completed and in opera- 
tion. Public pressures for changes in plan or operation 
to enhance the natural environment are common but 
generally do not include any proposals for changing 
the cost-sharing formulas. In some cases large seg- 
ments of the public can be benefited b>' project 
changes, while in other cases only limited numbers of 
people enjoy the benefits. Frequently, significant bene- 
fits incidental to the main purpose of project opera- 
tion, such as a live summer stream with enough flow 
to produce "white \\ater" rapids favored for recrea- 
tion or an esthetically pleasing stream flow, are taken 
for granted. Intensive public pressures are applied to 
retain the windfall benefits but little or no indication 
is made as to what project costs should be assigned to 
those benefits or how they should be paid for. The 
result is often long delays in carrying out the water 
program. 

In the Water Rights Decision 1379 of the State 
Water Resources Control Board provision was made 
for fishery enhancement. This decision, which calls 
for mitigation as well as enhancement, establishes cer- 
tain water quality conditions in the Sacramento-San 
Joaquin Delta which would in part be dependent on 
release of stored water. It would require about 500,000 
acre-feet annually of stored water from the State 
Water Project and the federal Central Valley Project 
to achieve the prescribed conditions for enhancement. 




AcA^^-^M^ 





R.l,.an' of slored water to the lower American River enhonces re.reolion 



34 



To make up the loss of w ater resulting from the deci- 
sion would require the construction of a new water 
storage project in the Upper Sacramento Valley or 
the North Coast. 

Among public works projects, water development 
undertakings are in the forefront on economic justifi- 
cation, that is, benefits versus costs, and on cost al- 
locations. Over the years legislative acts have identi- 
fied certain types of project accomplishments which 
are sufficiently widespread to warrant repayment from 
general taxes. This was the purpose of the Davis- 
Dolwig Act which applies only to the State Water 
Project. For federal water projects provision for en- 
hancement may be included at time of authorization, 
but great difficulty has arisen when these benefits have 
been added ex post facto. As the type and scope of 
environmental amenities expand, public policy on cost 
sharing has not kept pace, and financing and repay- 
ment obligations have been assigned by default. There 
is a pressing need for further conscious consideration 
of the degree of general public benefit which could 
be paid by general taxes, and the extent of direct user 
repayment by the specific beneficiaries. The process 
of evaluating public interest in paying for various 
environmental benefits would identify the relation be- 
tween benefits and costs and may indicate the need to 
revise some goals. 

Water Quality Improvement 

Concern for the quality of the rivers and lakes of 
the nation has become a major public issue in the last 
decade. The state and national programs for water 
quality improvement involve large sums of money and 
material and human resources, as well as releases of 
stored fresh water in some cases. The United States 
is now planning to spend billions of dollars over the 
next few years for clean water. Grants of up to 75 
percent of the cost of waste treatment facilities are 
available to local communities. In California an addi- 
tional 12.5 percent can be obtained from the State. 
These programs are designed to treat wastes from 
municipalities. They call for secondary treatment of 
all wastes by 1977, the best practicable treatment by 
1983, and elimination of all pollutant discharges to 
navigable waterways by 1985. There are also require- 
ments for major improvements in industrial waste dis- 
charges. Increasing attention is being directed to agri- 
cultural return flows. Concern is also being expressed 
with the loads of pollution which run off from streets 
and urban areas during storm periods, and means of 
controlling these wastes are being considered. 

Benefits from the quality improvements have gen- 
erally not been assessed in quantitative terms and com- 
pared to the costs, particularly the incremental bene- 
fits and costs resulting from varying levels of 
treatment. The issue of cost effectiveness was raised by 
the National Water Commission in its report of 1973. 



The Federal Water Pollution Control Act calls for 
a high degree of uniformity in requirements through- 
out the country. The water supplies, seasonal precipi- 
tation patterns, present quality of rivers and lakes, 
and historic pollution control vary widely, however, 
and many of the requirements for humid and indus- 
trialized eastern states do not fit the California case. 
Strong water quality control has been in effect in Cali- 
fornia since the late 1940s, and in 1969 this control was 
further strengthened with enactment of the Porter- 
Cologne Water Quality Control Act. This Act estab- 
lishes as state policy that the quality of the water re- 
sources of the State shall be protected for the use and 
enjoyment of people and that activities which affect 
quality shall be regulated to attain the highest water 
quality which is reasonable considering all uses of the 
water and all values involved. These qualified policies 
call for a balance between various water uses. The 
general public in its support for better water quality 
or waste treatment may not take into account the 
tradeoffs that such a program imposes. This could be 
in the form of higher taxes or prices for goods and 
services. 

Practically all of the attention has been directed 
toward the reduction of discharged pollutants. Less 
attention has been directel toward desirable degrees 
of water quality in the rivers, lakes, and ground water 
bodies for beneficial uses. Since these are the sources 
of water supply for other users, there is a relationship 
between the quality of the supply and the benefits 
derived by the subsequent user. In most cases there is 
a wide range of qualities which are fully satisfactory 
to meet consumptive urban, industrial, and agricultural 
needs as well as fish, wildlife, and recreation needs. 
The incremental savings which may result from pro- 
viding better quality water within that range may be 
far less than the costs of providing the incremental 
improvement. As the quality of the water supply 
deteriorates, the incremental costs to the user become 
increasingly greater, and in this range there may be 
justification for larger expenditures on water treat- 
ment. 

In addition to the overall question on the appropri- 
ate level of water quality achievement, there is the 
consideration of the payment of costs. Where there is 
widespread public benefit, it is generally satisfactory 
to use public taxes. Where identifiable commercial 
interests are involved, the costs are generally assigned 
to those interests but these increased costs of produc- 
tion are, in turn, passed on to the product consum- 
ers. 

Some proposals and requirements for water quality 
improvement involve releases of stored water from 
existing or future water projects. Dedication of the 
yield of projects to this end may mean construction 
of additional and more costly facilities if other water 
requirements arc to be met. The additional costs would 
be passed on to a different group of beneficiaries un- 



35 



less special provisions are made for repayment. There 
may also be environmental costs with additional water 
development which would be an offset to the environ- 
mental enhancement achieved by use of stored water. 
It is reasonable that additional consideration be 
given to all types of benefits of water quality im- 
provement to be certain that benefits equal or exceed 
costs or offsets. Congress has recognized the need for 
methods of evaluation and the federal program is be- 
ing evaluated by the National Commission on Water 
Quality. The Commission report is due in October 
1976 and guidelines from this effort are anticipated. 

Water Supplies as a Growth Regulator 

There has been increasing activity in recent years 
to limit population growth by rcstriciting water sup- 
plies. Most of these efforts have been at the local 
community level, but there are those who suggest that 
the denial of additional water \\ ould stop population 
growth in Southern California and thereby alleviate 
air qualit_\- problems, further congestion, and so on. 
Water is necessary to support growth as well as the 
status quo, but it is equalK- true that the factors in- 
fluencing growth are many. 

In California, a State of over 20 million people, 
much of the pressures of growth are related directly 
to natural population increase. Decisions regarding 
numbers of children are matters of individual family 
planning and are based on considerations other than 
the availability of water. There is no evidence that 
decisions to migrate to or from California or to other 
areas within the State are made on the basis of an 
assured water suppl\'. Such movement has been in- 
duced principally b>- climatic, social, or economic 
reasons. Environmental quality is also becoming a 
motivating factor and is affecting some growth pat- 
terns. 

When considering the growth issue recognition 
should be given that curtailing ser\-ices such as water 
supplies may not, in fact, limit growth but induce 
health hazards, environmental degradation, and other 
complications. Further, in most California urban areas 
growth would still be possible where water is in short 
supply b)- taking water conservation, reclamation, and 
reuse measures. Finally, localized moves to control 
population expansion, if successful, might simply trans- 
fer the growth and associated problems to another 
area. 

Government at all levels has mechanisms at its dis- 
posal to influence population growth patterns. A broad 
policy to do so, however, does not exist. When and 
if such should occur, the State's water resources can 
be adjusted to accommodate growth patterns. The 
more significant hurdles may be legal and institutional. 
Aside from recent court decisions confirming the 
right to move, significant changes in water law would 
be necessary. Government can largely control further 
development of surface water simply by withholding 



funds for building projects. The surface water supplies 
remaining to be developed require large projects to 
be economically feasible and are generally beyond the 
means of private individuals or the smaller public 
agencies. Ground water in California is another matter, 
ho\\ever. In all but the adjudicated ground water 
basins of the State, any local public agency or an 
individual can construct a well and obtain water for 
a variety of purposes. Under existing law, the state or 
federal government has little influence on use of 
ground water except in those few areas where the basin 
has been so severely overdrawn that the courts 
through the adjudicatory process have placed limits 
on the further withdrawal of ground water. A whole 
new body of ground water law would be required 
for the State to be able to designate areas that could 
not use available ground water to support further 
development. 

Another factor to be considered in limiting growth 
would be the payment of costs incurred and obligated 
in existing water projects that have been sized and 
constructed to support future growth. 

Role of Water Exchanges in Water Management 
As California's water supplies become more fully 
used or reserved for natural environmental uses, such 
as \\ild and scenic rivers, it becomes increasingly 
important to review water rights and management 
policies. Many changes would involve revised laws, 
but frequently much can be done within existing laws 
or with minor modifications. Significant policies, such 
as water rights, water pricing, water quality, and 
flexibility of operations, are almost always involved. 

There are opportunities for water exchanges which 
could be considered to reduce the expenditure of re- 
sources to meet future needs and to make more effec- 
tive use of available resources. Each case will have its 
own particular problems. It will almost always be 
necessary to make some financial arrangements, and 
in many cases there would be water quality considera- 
tions. Two key ingredients to agreements appear to 
be earnest desire by \\ater users to improve the sen-- 
ice of their agencies, and mutual economic advantage 
for each agency. Public interest in the concept would 
stimulate dormant opportunities. Some past exchanges 
and potential opportunities that have had some atten- 
tion are described in the following paragraphs. 

Each additional increment of \\ater supply is gen- 
erally more expensive than previous increments, and 
frequently long distances between source and area of 
use are involved. Water supplies are sometimes con- 
veyed through areas which already have adequate sup- 
plies or which only received a small additional supply 
from the system passing through the area. In other 
cases, areas which have been slow to develop are faced 
with high costs because supplies originating in or near- 
by the developing areas have already been appropri- 
ated by a downstream or distant area. In some places. 



36 




Growth in Southern California— 1954 to 1974. fSpence Photo— UCtA and DWR) 



37 



water of excellent quality is used once and discharged 
to a marine water body and lost. If an alternative and 
available supply of adequate but lower quality water 
\\ ould suffice, the water of excellent quality might be 
made available for more than one use. 

Possibilities for water exchanges are enhanced \\ lien 
they can be combined with major regional transfer 
works such as the California Aqueduct of the State 
Water Project and the Central \"aliey Project. For ex- 
ample, the Desert Water Agency and the Coachella 
Valley County Water District have arranged with 
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern Cali- 
fornia to take Colorado River water for a few years 
from the Colorado Aqueduct which goes through their 
area and, in turn, assign to the Metropolitan Water 
District their w ater supply from the State Water Proj- 
ect. This exchange permits the two desert districts to 
defer a major outlay of funds for a conveyance s\s- 
teni to connect with the California Aqueduct until 
later when demands are greater and the financial base 
of the districts is larger. 

In terms of the quantit\' of water, tlie largest ex- 
change in the State involves the Central \^illc\' Proj- 
ect. Water from the Sacramento \'alie\' is conveyed 
through the Deita-Mendota Canal to Alendota Pool on 
the San Joaquin River to replace supplies in the river 
which are diverted at Friant Dam and conveyed south- 
ward through the Friant-Kern Canal as far as the Bak- 
ersfield area. 

Study is being given by the state and federal agen- 
cies and the Pacific Cas and Electric Compan\- to in- 
creasing dry season in-stream flows in the Eel River 
below Van Arsdale Dam by using some of the water 
stored in Lake Pillsbury and diverted by Pacific Cas 
and Electric to a power plant on the East Fork Rus- 
sian River. This trade would result in a reduction in 
power output and some reduction in water suppl\' to 
the Russian River Basin. Primary benefits would be 
enhancement of Eel River fisheries and recreation in 
northern Mendocino and southern Humboldt Coun- 
ties, plus a possible supplemental irrigation suppl\- in 
the Eel River Delta. 

Where a ground water basin has been adjudicated, 
as, for example the West Coast Basin in Los Angeles 
County, exchange of water may occur when surface 
water is also available. Operation of the basin to re- 
duce sea water intrusion is possible by the reduction 
in pumping of some overlying owners in exchange for 
surface water importation. Such exchange also factors 
in any cost and (]ualit\' differences between the two 
sources. 

Proposals have also l)een made to use Eos Angeles' 
Owens Valley Aqueduct Water in communities adja- 
cent to the aqueduct, such as China Lake-In\ okern, in 
exchange for Northern California water delivered to 
the City of Eos Angeles via the State Water Project 
and Metropolitan Water District's facilities. 



Although the opportunities for exchanges exist, such 
factors as cost, qualit\- differences, and legal and in- 
stitutional constraints will often present formidable 
problems. In the final analysis such exchanges may 
save conveyance costs but do not obviate the need to 
develop dependable water supplies. 

Public Interest in Agricultural Drainage 

Agricultural drainage in the San Joaquin Valley is 
a problem which could have a major impact on the 
State's agricultural economy and consequently, upon 
the economic well-being of a significant portion of the 
State's population. Some 150,000 acres of presently 
productive land will become seriously degraded with- 
in the next decade unless some corrective measure to 
remove salt and reduce w ater tables is developed. An 
additional 800,000 acres are in jeopard)' of a similar 
fate unless corrected within the next two to five dec- 
ades. With increasing demands for food, losses of ag- 
ricultural production in this magnitude would have 
significant impacts on the economy of the State. 

The fundamental problem involves "salt balance" 
in the San Joaquin \'a]le\' w here onl\' a part of the salt 
residue resulting from the consumptive use of local 
and imported water supplies is discharged from the 
X'alley. The greater portion is simply accumulating 
in the ground, water and soil. If the productivity of 
the San Joaquin \'alley is to be maintained, this salina- 
tion process must be stopped and reversed. 

The general approach to maintenance of salt balance 
is to remove the salts from the area in the form of 
concentrated saline waste water collected as natural 
drainage or from subsurface drainage systems installed 
by the irrigators. The San Joaquin River now serves 
as a conduit for the removal of such waste water in 
the northern or San Joaquin Basin portion of the 
V^alley. The river also is a source of irrigation water 
and, at times, the quality is only marginally adequate 
and further degradation cannot be tolerated. The 
larger Tulare Lake Basin portion of the San Joaquin 
X'allcy is essentiall\' a closed basin with no outlet, and 
the problem of salt balance in this area is particularly 
threatening since none of the salts are leaving the 
basin. 

A master drain s\stcm for the San Joaquin \'alley 
is an authorized part of the State Water Project, and 
the Department of Water Resources has made exten- 
sive saidies of the drainage problem in the \'alle\- and 
has developed a plan for a master drain system. Diffi- 
culties in obtaining repayment contracts with benefi- 
ciaries have so far prevented implementation of the 
plan. The major problem has been that, though a 
large portion of the San Joaquin Valle\- contributes to 
the problem, only those areas which actually suffer 
damage have thus far been called upon to repay the 
costs of implementing the drainage plan. Some means 



38 



is needed to finance and assign responsibility for re- 
payment of the costs of such a system on an expanded 
repayment base. Benefits to the State in maintaining 
its number one industry — agriculture, are threatened 
unless some repayment means are found. The costs 
would be partially borne by electric power users if 
thermal electric plants located in the San Joaquin Val- 
ley use agricultural drainage w ater for cooling. 

A closely related and significant environmental 
problem is the manner of disposing of the saline 
drainage water. Drainage conveyed to the Sacramento- 
San Joaquin Delta may require removal of the nutri- 
ents to avoid undesirable algae conditions in the Delta 
channels. The water would, however, provide a por- 
tion of the outflow needed to control intrusion of 
salinit\' from the bay system which would otherwise 
have to be provided from fresh water sources. If the 
drainage water is ponded in the valley and removed by 
evaporation, large land areas would be required. Con- 
centrated brine blowdow n from power plant cooling 
would require much less land area. Any inland storage 
areas would need to be sealed to prevent percolation 
to ground water and an\' such plan may only defer an 
ultimate solution of salt removal. If the water or the 
salt cannot finally be disposed of at inland facilities 
or to the ocean through the Delta, it will have to be 
conveyed by conduit and discharged directly into the 
ocean at an offshore location. Environmental concerns 
will be involved in any disposal alternative, and some 
impact is unavoidable for continuation of the agricul- 
tural economy of the State. 

Flood Damage Prevention 

There are basicall\- t\\ o means to prevent flood dam- 
ages. They are (1) sta>- out of the way of floods, or 
(2) keep the flood flows in defined channels either 
with or without upstream regulatory storage. Both 
methods have been used throughout the history of 
California with the greatest emphasis being placed on 
controlling floods. Although a great deal of money 
has been spent on structural control measures, such 
as reservoirs and leveed channels, annual flood dam- 
ages continue in many unprotected areas. More atten- 
tion to staying out of the way of floods — flood plain 
management is being urged. 

Significant amounts of public funds and natural 
resources, as \\ ell as control of land use decisions, are 
involved, and it is increasingh- important to give 
thoughtful consideration to the various aspects of 
flood damage prevention alternatives. 

The nature of California's topography is a major 
factor in considering this issue. Most of the mountains 
are geologically \oung and quite steep. The valleys 
and plains are composed of the sediments washed 
down from the mountains. Most of the easily habita- 
ble land is a flood plain. Stream channels are naturally 
inclined to extensive changes in course as sediments 



build up. Levees and channel works are necessary to 
keep the floods within reasonable limits, if the flood 
plain is inhabited. 

Sta\ing full\- out of the w a\- of floods in California 
is probably not practical as a complete solution. In 
some of the mountainous northern California coun- 
ties, practically all of the "flat" land is in a flood plain 
and further economic development would be severely 
limited if it could not take place in the flood plain, 
but structural control measures would be required. 
The desire to maintain streams in their natural state 
for wildlife or scenic values, particularly in urban 
areas, will necessitate strong land use controls. 

Major flood control reservoirs can adequately re- 
duce most flood peaks, but in all cases they are de- 
signed to operate with high release rates to accommo- 
date large inflows from a major storm when the 
reservoir is nearly full. These high release rates, even 
though far smaller than the natural flood flows, gener- 
ally are so infrequent that the public does not recog- 
nize that they may occur. Consequently, the flood 
channel becomes encroached upon by downstream de- 
velopment in the absence of adequate zoning protec- 
tion. The Sacramento River below Shasta Dam, par- 
ticularly in the Redding area, and the Santa Ana River 
in Orange County below Prado Dam are two ex- 
amples. 

Land use control — and flood plain management is a 
major form of land use control — is, under existing 
state law, the responsibility of local agencies. Failure 
to adequateh" zone, and regulate in accordance there- 
with, at the local level tends to create laws and pro- 
grams administered b\- state and federal governments. 
To prevent development in floodways in which the 
State financially assists local agencies to provide rights 
of way for federal flood control agencies to construct 
flood control projects, the State has since 196.'> under 
the Cobey-Alquist Act required that the local agency 
zone and regulate the channel area. For areas identi- 
fied by the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban 
Development as having special flood hazards, flood 
insurance is a requirement to obtain a new or addi- 
tional loan from a federally insured financial institu- 
tion, if such insurance is available. After July 1, 1975, 
loans cannot be made unless the community is partici- 
pating in the national flood insurance program and 
insurance is purchased. 

In addition to changing public attitudes regarding 
flood control structures in favor of greater emphasis 
on flood plain management, the record of unusual 
flood events continues to lengthen. It indicates that 
extreme events like the 1964 flood on the Eel River, 
the new 1974 peak inflow to Shasta Reservoir, or even 
the l-in-500-year flood as occurred in Rapid City, 
South Dakota, in 1972, are possible and it is necessary 
to plan for increasingly intense storms. 

As the State's growth continues, the potential for 
loss of life and economic investment also grows. The 



39 



trade-offs between large investment of public funds, 
flood risk, and the environmental desires to maintain 
natural channels and wild rivers should be considered 
in future public policy decisions. 

Water Pricing Policy and Its Effect on Demand 

To reduce the future quantity of water used by 
urban areas and irrigated agriculture, suggestions have 
been made that water prices be raised. Urban users 
generally pay for water at a flat rate or a decreasing 
block rate under which the unit costs of successive 
blocks of water are priced at lower rates, similar to 
most electric power rates. Irrigation water in federal 
reclamation projects is priced at less than full costs. 
Price increases may reduce demand for future irriga- 
tion water. Some industries may also be encouraged to 
use less water or to reuse waste water. There would 
be related effects which must also be considered in 
any discussion of the price/demand relationship. 

In the development of the State Water Project, an 
initial determination was made of the overall market 
for urban and agricultural water, and direct negotia- 
tions were undertaken with water agencies acting on 
behalf of individual customers. Contracts were signed 
that obligated the water agencies to pay full cost of 
providing the water, including interest. The aqueduct 
system was sized and built to convey the contracted 
for quantities of water. Repayment for the system is 
the obligation of the agencies. The additional costs 
of conserving and pumping the water is fixed by 
contract to the actual costs to the State. 

To effect a significant change in agricultural water 
demands \\ ould require a governmental pricing policy 
for all irrigated area which would result in sufficiently 
high costs as to eliminate some farming enterprises. 
Such a governmental policy could not be extended 
across the agricultural sector under existing laws. 
Water is diverted or pumped by individuals and many 
public districts and, therefore, pricing is not subject 




The California Aqueduct conveys contracted for quantities of water 

40 



to state or federal intervention. Since existing federal 
reclamation contracts have fixed the price of water, 
any increase could be effected only when those con- 
tracts come up for renewal or for future projects. 

In the case of urban water demands, the evidence 
is mixed but there are examples where a switch from 
flat rates to metered rates has resulted in decisive and 
permanent reductions in water use. This follows the 
usual expectation that an increase in price results in 
a decrease in demand, and the greater the price in- 
crease the greater change in demand. Behavioral pat- 
terns are oftentimes affected, which results in con- 
servation practices including reductions in wastage 
from over-irrigation, lawn watering, and leaky plumb- 
ing fixtures. The duration of these practices will de- 
pend, in part, upon the costs of water relative to 
personal income and other expenditures. This applies 
to industry as well, but as long as the price of water 
is sufficiently high to be a concern, a reduction in 
water demand could be expected. 

A significant question involved in increasing munic- 
ipal water rates is who is affected and what may 
be the results. Most probably the low income group 
would be most seriously affected, as the more afflu- 
ent families would be able to more easily absorb a 
cost increase. Environmental amenities such as lawns, 
trees, fountains, and parks would likely be reduced. 
The U. S. Forest Service has found that well-watered 
trees can reduce air temperatures on a hot, dry day 
as much as five degrees. They also found that a single 
city tree provides a cooling effect equivalent to five 
average-sized room air conditioners running about 20 
hours per day. 

In summary there is a relationship between water 
price and demand. From a practical standpoint the 
ability of federal and state pricing policies \\ouId have 
limited effect. The tradeoffs of local environmental 
amenities, economic and social well-being vis-a-vis 
the environmental benefits of leaving more natural 
stream flow or some streams undeveloped require 
thoughtful consideration. 

Water Use EflRciency and Its EfFect on Demand 

A great deal of attention is currently being directed 
to\\ard improvements in the efficiency of use of re- 
sources as a means of decreasing expanding demands 
and stretching available supplies. Possibilities for more 
efficient use of \\ ater. range from flush toilets that use 
less water to desert t\pe landscaping or applying irri- 
gation by controlled dripping at each tree. These and 
various other methods can reduce the amount of ^\■ater 
used in homes and industry, and to irrigate crops. The 
degree to which the\' would reduce the overall re- 
quirement for water supplies, however, depends on 
several factors. 

In evaluating the effects of improving the methods 
of using water, consideration must also be given to 




Small sprinklers provide for efficient use of water 



the disposal of waste water. Where the waste water is 
discharged to saline water, any reduction in the 
amount of water originally applied will provide an 
equivalent reduction in demand for developed water 
supplies. It will also reduce the size of the waste treat- 
ment facilities. This case generally applies to coastal 
urban areas but only to a very limited degree to agri- 
culture. The principal areas where agricultural returns 
mix with brackish water are in the Coachella and 
Imperial Valleys which drain to the Salton Sea. 

Throughout practically all other irrigated areas and 
at inland urban locations, almost all excess irrigation 
water or urban waste water becomes part of the sup- 
ply for downstream users. Any reduction in the 
amount of applied water will result in approximately 
the same reduction in return flow and therefore re- 
quire a comparable amount of Mater from an alterna- 
tive sources for downstream users. With the exception 
of some savings in unavoidable losses, there will not 
be any overall savings in total water demand by im- 
proving the efficiency of application or use of water 
in such cases. There will, however, be other advan- 
tages and some disadvantages. 



If less water is used, the costs of handling it, in 
particular energy for pumping, will be less. With less 
applied water there will generally be less leaching from 
irrigation, and the quantity of dissolved salts which 
need to be removed from the area will be less. The 
concentration of salts in the return flows, however, 
will be greater due to the reduced volume of water. 
Reduction in the waste water from urban areas will 
involve higher concentrations of salts unless there are 
also changes in the home and industrial practices 
which reduce the quantity of waste minerals. 

Reduction in the amount of irrigation runoff from 
fields will be adverse to trees, brush, and native grasses, 
and the wildlife which depends on this vegetation. In 
most cases, and particularly the flat Central Valley, 
there would be scenic detriments from the loss of veg- 
etation. 

While the overall water savings from more effi- 
cient use probably will be relatively small in compari- 
son to total usage, the advantages warrant thorough 
study. As water supplies become increasingly scarce 
improved use methods become more important. 



41 



Economic Efficiency as a Basis 
for Water Management 

As California's supplies of undeveloped water have 
decreased, suggestions have been made that certain 
presently developed supplies could be diverted from 
uses having \o\v economic returns to uses with higher 
economic returns. Generally this would involve a shift 
from agricultural production to industrial use, as well 
as a change in geographic location. It also suggests 
the shifting of water from one crop to another that 
might use less water and produce more economic re- 
turn. Advocates of this view point out that there 
would be greater employment and wealth for a given 
quantity of water and there would not be need for 
as much, if any, additional water development. This 
concept also includes the purchase or shifting of water 
during periods of drought from one use such as irri- 
gation of an annual crop to a use of greater signifi- 
cance to the State's economy. Such a concept has 
great ramifications and raises major policy issues. State 
law does not provide for administrative reassignment 
of water supplies being beneficiall\' used. 

A change in use would involve water rights as well 
as financial considerations. A major factor in buying 
out the water supply of an agricultural area is the re- 
location and social impact and change of life style on 
the people of the area. Pa\ment for water and land 
values will not necessarily provide for relocation and/ 
or gainful employment elsewhere, although some agri- 
cultural workers ma\' retrain for industrial work if it 
is in the same general area. There may be increased 
costs in social welfare programs. It would be necessary 
to reimburse owners more than market values to ob- 
tain comparable relocated conditions and to assist in 
relocation. 

Three generations have passed since the City of 
Los Angeles purchased the lands and acquired the 
water rights in the Owens Valley. The transfer of 
water from irrigation use to urban use was made and 
one of the world's major cities developed. This ex- 
perience has shown, however, that long lasting social 
problems remain even though there was an increase 
in economic effciency. 

Supplemental Water 
Through Waste Water Reclamation 

Waste water reclamation is generally acclaimed as 
the primary alternative to further surface water de- 
velopment for meeting California's future water 
needs. This alternative, while probably the major po- 
tential supplement to surface water development, must 
also be viewed from the perspective of some limita- 
tions. The following discussion outlines some ke\' 
considerations, such as dissolved mineral levels, health 
concerns, costs, and institutional conflicts, whicii 



strongly affect policy decisions by local agencies in 
pursuing waste water reclamation. 

Waste water reclamation, as considered in this bul- 
letin, is the planned renovation of waste water with 
the intent of producing usable water for a specific 
beneficial purpose. Biological treatment and/or de- 
mineralization may be involved. 

It is important to distinguish between reclamation 
\\ hich results in improvement of the existing supply 
and reclamation which actualh' results in creation of 
a "new" supply. Both facets are important, but the 
creation of a "new" supply as supplemental water is 
the thrust of this policy issue. 

Only when waste water would otherwise be dis- 
charged to saline water — or when water has been so 
degraded that it cannot be discharged to fresh water — 
does reclamation create a water suppl\- which can be 
considered "new". Much of the water used in Cali- 
fornia is returned to the freshwater c\cle, either di- 
rectly after its use or following treatment. This in- 
cludes 90 percent of the irrigation return water from 
nearly 9 million acres of irrigated land and the treated 
wastes from inland cities, particular!)- in the Central 
V^alley. Although reclamation of this water would 
tend to enhance water quality, it would not create a 
new supply. 

There are two main sources of water which can 
be reclaimed for new supplies. These are (1) the 
brackish agricultural drainage water which must be 
removed from the Central \'alley and in particular 
the San Joaquin \'alle\-, and (2) the urban wastes 
from coastal areas which are discharged to the ocean 
and its estuaries. It is anticipated that much of the 
agricultural drainage could be reclaimed for power 
plant cooling. The role for reclaimed coastal urban 
wastes is not, how'ever, as apparent. 

To undertake waste water reclamation there needs 
to be a supply of fresh water of good qualit)' to begin 
with. Not all of this fresh water supply can be re- 
claimed, however. Up to 50 percent of an urban sup- 
ply is used consumptively or incidentally lost. Another 
20-30 percent of the initial supply is needed to carry 
off concentrated wastes and prevent accumulation of 
salts in gardens, parks, etc. Accordingly, only 20-30 
percent of the original supply may be available for 
possible reclamation. 

The mineral quality of the initial suppl\- is impor- 
tant in evaluating reclamation. A single cycle of water 
use in an urban area normally adds about 300 milli- 
grams of salts per liter of water. The recommended 
limit for salts in municipal supplies is 500 milligrams 
per liter (mg/1) but up to 1,000 mg/I is acceptable. 
A large share of the urban water suppl\- in the coastal 
area of Southern California is from the Colorado 
River and has a salt content of around 750 mg 1. A 
single use would cause the salt to exceed the accept- 
able limit, and reclaimed water would require blend- 
ing with less saline water. With an increasingly 



42 



greater share of water from the State Water Project 
used in Southern California, the widespread mineral 
limitation on waste water reclamation would be re- 
duced. At the other end of the scale, the Sierra 
Nevada water supplies delivered to the San Francisco 
Bay area through the Hetch Hetchy and Alokelumnc 
Aqueducts are of excellent mineral quality with gen- 
erally less than 100 mg/1. Water delivered by the 
State Water Project would average less than 220 
mg/1. 

At this time there are significant liealth concerns 
which greatly limit urban use of reclaimed ^\•ater. De- 
velopment and use of a wide range of organic com- 
pounds for industrial, agricultural, and household 
uses, which find their way into public water supplies, 
are causing concern regarding effects on public 
health. Many of the complex compounds are stable, 
that is, they do not break down into simpler forms, 
and persist for a long time. The long-term effect of 
ingesting even minute amounts of some stable organic 
compounds is unknown and, therefore, efforts are 
made to avoid use of water containing the com- 
pounds. Similar concerns exist regarding viruses 
which may not be fully eliminated in waste water 
treatment and reclamation processes. 

Concern about viruses has caused health officials to 
reject direct distribution and use of reclaimed water 
for human consumption. Concern regarding effects of 
stable organic compounds has caused health officials 
to greatly restrict the use of reclaimed A\ater for 
ground water recharge where the ground water basin 
is a source of water for human consumption. Since 
ground water moves ver)' slowly and does not mix 
very well, reclaimed water would generalh' move as a 
unit away from the point of recharge and could re- 
main in the basin for many years. 

Until the uncertainties regarding health are resolved, 
plans for using reclaimed water are being directed 



toward nonpotable uses such as irrigation and indus- 
trial, especially power plant cooling. Efforts are being 
launched by local and state agencies to develop re- 
search programs on these health concerns. The De- 
partment of Water Resources, in cooperation with 
the State Water Resources Control Board with help 
from the University of California, is initiating work- 
leading to specific and coordinated studies of the 
stable organic and virus problems. 

General industrial use of reclaimed water would 
require separate distribution systems and in-plant 
modifications. The costs are generally not competitive 
with fresh water, although as the requirements for 
treatment of waste water increase, industry will find 
it more advantageous to recirculate its water. Ther- 
mal electric power plant cooling could be a major use 
of reclaimed water, but the plants cannot usually be 
located near urban centers for environmental and 
safety reasons. Consequently, the reclaimed water 
from urban areas would need to be conveyed long 
distances with considerable expense and use of energy. 

In addition to the costs directly associated wjth 
reclamation, consideration must be given to costs al- 
ready invested in facility capacity for future needs. 
These sunk costs are frequently quite great since 
many water projects and distribution systems are con- 
structed with capacity for the future to take advan- 
tage of economies of scale. Economic evaluation of 
waste water reclamation must take into account the 
sunk costs in existing facilities. 

Generally separate local agencies have been or- 
ganized to handle water supply and waste. Full con- 
sideration of the reclamation of waste water may be 
inhibited due to institutional constraints. The appro- 
priate agencies to pursue this potential is one of the 
polic\' issues needing attention. 



43 



CHAPTER III 

ALTERNATIVE FUTURES FOR CALIFORNIA 



This chapter presents the first phase of a two part 
approach to determining water requirements. It does 
so by focusing attention on the needs of people — 
needs that have an impact on the State's water re- 
sources — needs for goods and services, security, social 
well-being and the quality of life. Historical trends 
and forces that influence change are given special at- 
tention since an understanding of trends and in- 
fluences is prerequisite to forecasting possible future 
growth. In addition emphasis is given to the possible 
variabilit>' of projected needs and their relationship 
with the factors that cause variation. The second part 
is accomplished in Chapter IV where the needs dis- 
cussed in this chapter are converted to water require- 
ments. 

In previous reports the Department has made a 
single projection of growth which was representative 
of a "most probable" future based upon an e.xtension 
of past trends and the public attitudes of the time. 
This report contains projections of "alternative fu- 
tures" any one of which might occur under various 
assumptions regarding factors that influence change. 
While trend analysis remains a valid description of 
one possible occurrence and serves to indicate what 
may happen if no significant change occurs, it should 
not be presumed that the resulting projection is neces- 
sarily the most probable description of the future. An 
important justification for presenting alternative fu- 
tures is recognition of the fact that there are a variety 
of possible events and outcomes which can bring 
about changes that do not mirror the past. 

The importance of studying and evaluating a range 
of water management and demand alternatives and 
maintaining as much flexibility as possible becomes 
more evident when considering the uncertainties in- 
volved in projections of the nature, location, and 
timing of future events. Sonic of the factors which 
are particularly difficult to assess are the recent down- 
ward trend in the birth rate, the opening of China and 
Russia agricultural market, air and water quality 
standards, and future land use policies. Recognition 
also must be given to the need to identify environ- 
mental preservation or enhancement goals, assess their 
impact on demands for water, and establish their rela- 
tionship with economic and social objectives. 

Because of the rapid changes occurring in society, 
including its outlook and values, planning on the basis 
of alternative futures is extremely relevant. If prop- 
erly presented, alternative futures do not presume 
what the choices should be but rather define the is- 
sues, the assumptions, possibilities, and consequences 
of certain actions and events taking place. The process 
recognizes that several futures are possible and that 



technological developments, unforeseeable events, 
changing public attitudes, and future policy decisions 
can afi^ect the outcome. 

Projected Needs 

Alternative future levels for three of the major 
water using fuctions were developed for the outlook 
presented in this bulletin — urban, agriculture, and 
electric power plant cooling. Insufficient information 
regarding alternative outlooks for fish, wildlife and 
recreation, made it impracticable to present more than 
a single projection for these needs. 

Future population will have a direct effect on urban 
water use in California. The U. S. population will 
have a direct impact on California agriculture since 
much of the State's production of food and fiber is 
used by the rest of the nation. 

Production of food and fiber in California is by far 
the most significant single enterprise affecting use of 
the State's land and \\ater resources. Future amounts 
of irrigated agriculture in the State will have a major 
impact on water resources management and planning. 

Fresh water use for cooling thermal electric power 
plants has historically not been significant. Most of the 
major thermal electrical generation plants in California 
are located near the ocean or saline estuaries and use 
salt water for cooling. Current trends and environ- 
mental policies indicate that much of the future power 
generation facilities may be located in inland areas 
where fresh water resources would be the major cool- 
ing water source available. 

Since water plays such an important part in human 
life and activity, a large number of factors influence 
the future uses and needs for this resource. Water 
management plans must necessarily therefore include 
functions such as flood control, environmental en- 
hancement, and water quality maintenance. These 
needs are also discussed in this chapter but in qualita- 
tive rather than quantitative terms. 

Population 

California's population has increased each year for 
the past 150 years. During that span the growth rate 
has varied, but has exceeded comparable rates for the 
U. S. as a whole. Table 1 summarizes growth in Cali- 
fornia and the United States by decades since 1920. 

Trends and Influences 

In California, population growth is a product of 
natural increase and net migration. Until a few years 
ago, the latter was the principal contributor to the 
State's growth, but now with a population of nearly 
21 million, natural increase is the predominant factor. 



45 



Table 1. California and U. S. Population and Percent 
Increase by Decades, 1920-1974 





Decade 


California Population- 


United State 


Population*" 


Year 


(Millions) 


(Percent 
increase) 


(.Millions) 


(Percent 


1920 


1920-1930 


3.4 


68 


107 


16 


1930 


1930-1940 


5.7 


21 


123 


8 


1940 


1940-1950 


6.9 


54 


132 


15 


1950 


1950-1960 


10.6 


50 


152 


19 


1960 


1960-1970 


15.9 


26 


180 


14 


1970 

1972.. 

1974 




20.0 
20.5 
20.9 


205 
209 
212 



•^ Includes armed forces stationed in area. 

1> Total resident population. Prior to 1940 excludes Alaska and Hawaii. 
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census. "Current Population Reports", Series P-25, 
Xos. 139. 250, 469, 481 and 502. 

Both influences have shown significant decreases since 
the mid 1960s, reducing the annual growth rate from 
about four percent in the 19.'»0s to the present one 
percent. Haci the earUer rate continued to the present 
and into the future, California could e.xpect a popula- 
tion of about .56,000,000 in 50 years, or 20 million 
more than expected if present trends continue. This 
difference becomes especially meaningful when one 
considers that meeting the needs of 20 million people 
amounts to planning and providing for another Cali- 
fornia of the present size. 

Attempting to anticipate future levels of migration 
and birth rates is fraught with uncertainties. Although 
voices have been raised for population policies of 
some sort, direct intervention by government to con- 
trol population is not expected. Having or not having 
children will continue to be an individual decision, 
but the increasing availability, effectiveness, and ac- 
ceptance of birth control measures make the realiza- 
tion of these decisions more a certainty. Since there 
is a larger number of women of childbearing age than 
ever before, the implication of this "personal" con- 
trol could be drastic as suggested by the diff'erence in 
population projections mentioned above. Similarly, 
governmental action to prohibit migration is not an- 
ticipated but the factors that stimulated an average 
annual 200,000 to 300,000 immigration for nearly 20 
years after World War II are not expected to recur 
during the present planning period. Population esti- 
mates appearing in this bulletin are based upon immi- 
gration ranging from to 150,000 annually. 

Alternative Population Projections 

Four alternative future population projections arc 
presented in this report as shown in Table 2. It will 



be noted from the table that each of the four projec- 
tions is characterized by a diff'erent combination of 
fertility rates and assumed net migration levels. The 
U. S. Bureau of the Census uses the letters A through 
G to identify population series ranging from high to 
low. This bulletin considers only the series designated 
C, D, and E, which are derived from fertilirv' rates 
of 2.8, 2.5, and 2,1, The 2,1 rate or Series E is com- 
monly termed zero population growth. Fertility rates 
indicate the average number of children a \\ oman will 
have during her childbearing years. 

Table 2. Population Factors 



Alternative projections 


Popu 


lation scries 


Fertility rates 


Net migration 


I 


c 

D 
D 

E 


2.8 
2.5 
2.5 
2.1 


150,000 


li 


150.000 


Ill 


100,000 


IV 










Each projection results in a different population 
total for the State (Table }) and a different distribu- 
tion among hydrologic areas (Table 4). The latter is 
essentially an aggregation of county projections ap- 
pearing in a Department of Finance report,* which 
is the basis for the alternative projections presented 
here. The report contains a discussion of those con- 
siderations involved in making the estimates. The al- 
ternatives are plausible possibilities. They reflect trends 
in births, deaths, and migration that, for the most part, 
have occurred in California at one time or another. 
As noted in the Department of Finance report, the 
projections "are designed to provide the planner and 
decision-maker with the dimensions of his problem as 
the\- arc affected by population". 

Table 3. California and United States Populations 
(in millions) 



.Alternative 


Year 


Future 
Projections 


1972 


1980 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 


I (C-150) 


20.5 
20.5 
20.5 
20.5 


23.0 
22.8 
22.7 
21.9 


27.4 
26.7 
26.1 
23.6 


31.9 
30.5 
29.3 
24.7 


37.2 
34.6 
32.8 
25. 7 


43.3 


II (D-150) 


39.1 


III (D-lOO) .- 


36.6 


IV (E-O) 


26.5 






U.S. 

Population 

Series* 














c 

D 

E 


209 
209 
209 


231 
229 
224 


266 
259 
247 


300 
286 
264 


344 
318 

282 


392 
351 
298 



' U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1972. 

Figure 5 shows the historic growtii of California's 
population from 1920 to 197.^ and the four alternative 
projections. Figure 6 shows the United States popula- 
tion from 1920 to 1973 and three of the alternative 
grow th projections used nationall>'. 



"Population Projecti 
P 2, June 1974. 



for California Counties 1975-2020," Report 74, 



46 



Table 4. Population in California — 1972, 1990 ond 2020 
(In Thousands) 





1972 


Alternative future projection 




(Series 


I 

C-150) 


II 
(Series D-150) 


III 

(Series D-lOO) 


IV 

(Series E.0) 


Hydrologic study area 


1990 


2020 


1990 


2020 


1990 


2020 


1990 


2020 




180 

4,630 

840 

11,240 

1,210 

470 

440 

980 

40 

240 

230 


250 

5,940 

1,370 

14,620 

1,700 

760 

650 

1,280 

70 

410 

350 


390 
8,670 
2,430 
22,510 
2,600 
1,730 
1,140 
2.030 

110 
1,040 

650 


240 

5,800 

1,340 

14,260 

1,670 

730 

640 

1,250 

70 

370 

330 


350 

7,920 

2,200 

20,300 

2,400 

1,550 

1,010 

1,820 

100 

870 

580 


230 

5,680 

1,290 

13,930 

1,630 

710 

620 

1,240 

70 

370 

330 


310 
7,350 
2,030 
19,140 
2,230 
1,420 

940 

1,730 

90 

820 

540 


210 

5.270 

1,130 

12,510 

1,470 

640 

560 

1.160 

60 

290 

300 


230 

5,700 

1,370 

13,790 

1,620 

930 

660 

1,360 

60 

380 

400 


San Francisco Bay 








Delta Central Sierra.. 




Tulare Basin 






Colorado Desert 


Totals 


20,500 


27,400 


43,300 


26,700 


39.100 


26,100 


36.600 


23,600 


26,500 















/ 


1 












^ 












^ 




€i 


1 1 lll ^1 " 






1 ^ 


/ 


X 


1 










^^^ 



















1920 1930 



1990 2000 



m&- 



Figure 5. California Historical and Projected Population Growth 



47 







■ST^r 



Population change in California 



- b 

\: 0. 





1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 

YEARS 






Figure 6. United States Historical and Projected Population Growth 



48 



Agricultural Production 

California is blessed with the climate, land, and 
water resources which give it the capability of pro- 
ducing large amounts of a great number of crops, cur- 
rently over 200 on a commercial scale. The State is 
the nation's leading producer of about 50 crops and 
is among the top five in the production of another 20. 
In addition, it ranks second in milk and cream produc- 
tion and fifth in cattle production. California contin- 
ues to be the nation's number one farm state in terms 
of cash receipts from farming. According to the Cali- 
fornia Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, the total 
receipts from farm marketing in 1972 was |5.5 billion. 
The sharp increase in prices contributed to a rise to 
$7.5 billion in 1973. 

Trends and Influences 

The industry in this State is vexed by many of the 
same problems facing agriculture throughout the 
country, but does not have anywhere near the problem 
that many of the other major producing areas have 
with annual fluctuations in weather. Certainly there 
are occasions when late frost or unseasonable rain 
cause a drop in yields for some crops. But the impact 
on the total agricultural production in the State is 
rarely significant compared to the impact weather 
often has on crop production in many other states. 
The relatively predictable weather in California, the 
State's reliance on irrigation rather than growing sea- 
son precipitation, and the wide variety of crops are the 
principal reasons for the industry's freedom from 
weather-borne catastrophes. 

The importance of California in regard to satisfying 
the food and fiber needs of the nation is highly signifi- 
cant. The importance of agriculture to the California 
economy is apparent upon considering that California 
farms and other agriculture-related industries and ac- 
tivities such as food processing, financing of farm pro- 
duction, and sales of equipment and supplies to farms, 
generate income estimated to be at least 20 billion dol- 
lars annually. 



'jite 





Exporting California's agricultural production 
Port of Sacramento photo 



Irrigated corn field in California 

Because it enjoys so many climatic and soil advan- 
tages, California has a major role to play in producing 
food and fiber for both national and foreign markets. 
The future size of these markets is the key question. 
Population growth and consumptive patterns are im- 
portant variables, but the market is also influenced by 
policy decisions involving acreage allotments and for- 
eign trade. The latter is especially difficult to antici- 
pate in view of balance of payment considerations, 
world food production, and changes in international 
relationships which may open new markets (China) 
or shut others ofi^. Because of this uncertainty, care 
should be taken to see that agriculture retains a capa- 
bility that is flexible and responsive. This means that 
decisions and polic\' relative to land and water use 
must be concerned with the availability of productive 
agricultural land and necessary water supplies to irri- 
gate those lands. 

Although many factors w ill influence the future de- 
mands for California produced food and fiber, most are 
directly or indirectly accounted for when attention is 
focused on national population growth, possible 
changes in per capita consumption, changes in crop 
yields, foreign trade, and California's probable share 
of national production considering the relative ability 
of other areas to meet the needs. In order to provide 
a basis for examining the capability of available water 
supplies to meet the needs of a wide range of possible 
levels of agricultural activities and to give examples of 
the impact on calculated water demand of different 
assumptions regarding each of these five factors, the 
Department conducted the study of future crop pro- 
duction described in this section. 

\'arious specialists from the University of California 
were sought out as data sources and for comments on 
what appears likely for agriculture's future. The Cali- 
fornia Department of Food and .Agriculture was 



49 




LIVESTOCK 
& POULTRY 



DAIRY PRODUCTS 



FIELD CROPS 



VEGETABLES 



FRUITS & NUTS 



FATS & OILS 



200 400 600 800 1000 



TOTAL ALL FARM PRODUCTS 



2020 



400 800 1200 1600 2000 
POUNDS PER PERSON PER YEAR 



Figure 7. Per Capita Consumption of Form Products in the 
United States 





1930 




1 











brought into the studies at an carl\ stage, and, in ad- 
dition to the valuable data provided b\- that agenc>-, 
its review and comments on the various phases of the 
work as it progressed w ere very helpful. 

Each subject — national population, per capita con- 
sumption, foreign trade, state share of national produc- 
tion, and crop yields — \\as studied to determine if 
there were more than one projected level (i.e., value) 
for the years 1990 and 2020 appropriate to consider at 
this time, considering current trends and events. Alter- 
native assumptions were identified and four projec- 
tions of future crop acreage w ere calculated based on 
selected combinations of some of these assumptions. 

The results of this stud\- are presented in the follow- 
ing pages. 

National Population. In the last 50 years, United 
States population has doubled. The 1920 and 1970 
Census of Population showed 107 million and 205 
million people, respectively. According to the U. S. 
Bureau of Census, basing calculations on the E fertility 
series results in a 2020 population projection of 298 
million; the D Series gives 351 million. As discussed 
later, Series C was not used in estimating future crop 
production. Series D and E were used. 

Per Capita Consumption. The principal basis for 
per capita consumption estimates is contained in the 
1972 OBERS Projections.* This work was primarily 
based on data available through 1970. 

Figure 7 shows the past, present, and projected 
average per capita consumption of major groups of 
farm products in the United States as determined by 
the OBERS studies. The national average for total 
quantit}' of food and fiber used per person has de- 
clined over the years, principally as a result of less 
consumption of cereals, potatoes, and dairy products. 
The types of food eaten have changed over time 
and changes are expected in the future. The OBERS 
stud\- projected a decline in per capita consumption 
of dairy products and field crops. Dry beans, wheat, 
rice, and other food grains are included in the field 
crop category. They expect the consumption of vege- 
tables to remain about level. Projections of livestock 
and poultry consumption indicate the quantity of 
animal feed and forage required. OBERS projection 
of a substantial increase in livestock and poultry con- 
sumption includes a large (40%) increase in per capita 
consumption of beef. Although the total for fruits 
and nuts is projected to increase slightly, per capita 
consumption of nuts and noncitrus fruit is projected 
to decrease 15°o while consumption of citrus fruits 
will increase 100°o. These estimates prepared by 
OBERS were used in calculating future crop acreages 
for this bulletin. 

The projections of future crop acreages contained 
in Bulletin Nos. 160-66 and 160-70 were based on as- 



•1972 OBtRS Projections, ReRioi 
OBERS. 1972. OBERS stands 
.Analysis (formerly Office of Bi 
Research Ser\-ice. 



al Economic .Activity in the U.S.", 
or the Federal Bureau of Eco 
siness Economics) and the Econ 



50 



sumptions of a lesser increase in beef consumption 
and increased consumption of nuts, noncitrus fruits, 
and vegetables. These were the conclusions of earlier 
studies conducted by the Department of Water Re- 
sources and, separately, by the Economic Research 
Service of the U. S. Department of Agriculture. 

The impact on California's agricultural production 
of a change toward greater use of nuts, fruits, and 
vegetables would likely be quite significant considering 
the State's large share of current national production 
of these crops. 

Foreign Trade. In looking at recent developments 
in international agricultural trade, a number of pro- 
found changes can be seen. These include an apparent 
revolution in \\orld dietary patterns, and major 
changes in agricultural trade flows and trade policies. 

Per capita incomes around the world are growing 
and promise to continue to grow at a pace never ex- 
perienced before in human history. As incomes rise, 
more people will be able to afford an improved quality 
of life. Among the first areas where improvement is 
usually seen is in upgraded diets. This coupled with 
increasing population, not only increases total food 
consumption, but also creates a demand for a wider 
variety of foods. 

As the nations of the world increase their use of 
more agricultural commodities, they are buying more 
in the world market, and more of what they buy is 
coming from the United States. American agriculture 



has conducted an extensive sales and advertising cam- 
paign over the past decade which has enabled the 
United States to secure a greater share of the inter- 
national market. To the extent that this country's long 
term production can be managed to reduce the impact 
of periodic droughts in the nonirrigated, rain-fed 
regions of central and southern United States, the 
growth in foreign exports should continue in the 
future. 

A review of U. S. agricultural exports to foreign 
countries since 1960 gives some idea of the magnitude 
of food demand increase over time. In 1960 all agri- 
cultural commodities exported were slightly in excess 
of 14.5 billion; by 1970 exports had increased to $6.7 
billion, and in 1973, the level of U. S. exports was 
112.9 billion. California's share of U. S. agriculture 
exports includes 54% of the U. S. foreign sale of 
fruit, 27% of the vegetables, 22% of the rice, 11 %o 
of the cotton, and 94% of the nuts. 

Two levels of foreign trade \\ere given considera- 
tion in the Department of Water Resources' studies 
of future crop production in California. The 1972 
OBERS projections of foreign trade were used as one 
level. These were prepared prior to the substantial 
increases in foreign trade that occurred in 1972, 1973, 
and 1974. Certainly there \\ere aspects of these recent 
increases, such as the availability of dollars for pay- 
ment that raise questions as to whether foreign export 
will continue to increase at this rate, or for that 




'iixv?' 



---K^-'t' 



"'Igl'Mdc^''^ _'\'- ". 







ia^^rj^^i^"---::^^ 



Ripping hardpan soils to a depth of 5 to 7 feet 
Collin Company photo 



51 



matter, remain this large. However, studies conducted 
by the Department of Water Resources in 1974, based 
on United States Department of Agriculture publica- 
tions, indicated that the future export demand for 
California farm products could be greater than the 
projections contained in the 1972 OBERS report, 
\\hich were based on data available through 1970, if 
some of the more substantial world market opportu- 
nities unfolding in recent years continue to materialize. 
Based on assumptions resulting from the Department's 
study, an alternative set of values for foreign trade of 
specific commodities was developed. 

California's Share of U. S. Production. The 1972 
OBERS report figures were used for the crops that 
had been studied on an individual basis. In those cases 
where values were prepared for groups of crops, the 
State share of production for each individual crop was 
projected from historical trends with modifications 
which reflect recent national and international market 
opportunities and changes. In general, OBERS pro- 
jections showed a small overall increase in California's 



share of the market for all crops. The agricultural in- 
dustr\- in California has demonstrated considerable suc- 
cess in competing for greater shares of U. S. produc- 
tion 

Crop Yields. Two sets of crop >ields were de- 
rived. One set was the values used in preparing Bul- 
letin 160-70 estimates of crop acreages. These were 
based principally on the advice of agricultural special- 
ists of the University of California, and were devel- 
oped in 1968, prior to the energy crisis and prior to 
development of some of the possible limitations on 
agricultural chemical use as a result of concern for 
environmental protection. 

For this study, a modified set of crop yields has been 
developed which reflect a more conservative outlook 
regarding increased yields. The advice of various agri- 
cultural experts was considered in developing these 
estimates, including crop specialists from the Univer- 
sity of California and County Farm Advisor Offices. 
Figure 8 illustrates the magnitude of revisions which 
were made to the previous crop yield estimates for 




Dry farmed wheat with irrigated almonds in the background 



52 



1968 YIELD PROJECTIONS 
MODIFIED YIELD PROJECTIONS 




I I 

1950 1970 1990 2020 

YEARS 




Figure 8. Average Yields of Selected Farm Crops in California 



53 



eight of the forty-five crops studied. These eight crops 
were selected as being fairly representative of the 
trend of all crops. They account for 30 percent of the 
total state irrigated acreage and 25 percent of the dol- 
lar value of total state crop production. 

Alternative Projections of Irrigated Crop 
and Land Acreage 

The study of the five principal factors which gov- 
ern agricultural growth resulted in the identification 
and quantification of three possible levels of national 



population, two levels of foreign trade and two sets 
of future crop yields. Only one set of values for per 
capita consumption and the State's share of U. S. pro- 
duction was prepared. 

The crop acreage for any combination of assump- 
tions for the five growth regulating factors is calcu- 
lated as follows: 



Crop acreage 



/National Per capita Net 
I popula- X consump- + foreigi 
\tion tion trade 



\ State share 
n ) X of U.S. 
/ production 



Crop yield 




YEARS 

Figure 9. Historical and Projected Irrigated Land Area 



54 



There are numerous possible combinations of the 
alternative values derived for the five factors. In order 
to provide a basis for examining water use for a wide 
range of possible levels of agricultural activities and to 
give examples of the result of different combinations 
of assumptions, four alternative crop acreage projec- 
tions were prepared based on essentially an arbitrary 
selection of groups of assumptions. For simplification, 
only two alternative population levels, two foreign 
trade levels, and tx\o sets of crops yields were used in 
combination with the single projection of state share 
of U. S. production and the projection of per capita 
consumption. 

The combinations of assumptions for national pop- 
ulation, net foreign trade and crop yields used in cal- 
culating alternative crop acreages were as follows: 





U.S. Population 


Net Foreign Trade 


Crops 


Yields 










Higher 


Lower 


1968 


.Modified 


Alternative 


Series D 


Ser 


es E 


estimate 


estimate 


estimate 


estimate 


I.. - 


X 






,. 






X 


11 


X 








X 




X 


III 


X 








X 


X 




IV 




X 




^ 




'^ 



These combinations of assumptions resulted in the 
projected irrigated land acreages shown in Figure 9. 
All other combinations but two would fall within the 
extremes shown. Combining Series C national popula- 
tion with the higher foreign trade estimate and the 
modified crop yields \\ ould give a higher acreage pro- 
jection, \v hile combining the Series E population with 
the lower foreign trade estimate and the 1968 estimate 



of yields would give a lower projection. In the judg- 
ment of the Department, both of these combinations 
resulted in projections of crop acreages which ap- 
peared to be unreasonable in light of current knowl- 
edge and trends. 

The projections of total irrigated land shown in 
Figure 9 were obtained by adjusting the calculated 
harvested crop acreage value for each set of assump- 
tions to account for land planted but not harvested, 
the acreage of dry-farmed crops and double cropping 
(i.e., more than one crop during the year on the same 
parcel of land). 

The State total irrigated land acreage and total crop 
acreage were distributed to hydrologic study areas. 
Table 5, considering the availability of suitable land 
and historic agricultural land use in each area. 

The location of irrigated, irrigable, and urban lands 
throughout the State is show n in Plate II. The small 
scale of this map does not allow completely accurate 
depiction of land use. The three enlarged township 
areas are typical examples of the actual pattern of 
land use which exist within areas shown to be solidly 
developed on the map. 

A discussion of available land and recent trends in 
irrigated agriculture is presented in the following sec- 
tions. 

Land Avnilability. The Department has mapped 
the location, nature and extent of lands physically 
suited to production of irrigated crops throughout the 
State. The classifications provide a basis for determin- 
ing both the physical suitability of the land for specific 
crop production under various farm management pro- 
grams and the influence of soil factors on the rate of 
water use by each crop. 



Toble 5. 1972 



nd Projected Irrigated Land Area and Ir 
(1,000 acres) 



igated Double Crop Acreage 





North 
Coastal 


San 

Francisco 

Bay 


Central 
Coastal 


South 
Coastal 


Sacra- 
Basin 


Delta 
Central 
Sierra 


San 
Joaquin 
Basin 


Tulare 
Basin 


North 
Lahontan 


South 
Lahontan 


Colorado 
Desert 


Totals 


1972 Irrigated land 

Double crop - 

Alur,>M,t, I 

1990 Irrigated land 

Double crop 

2020 Irrigated land 

Double crop 

Alurnativ, II 

1990 Irrigated land 

Double crop. 

2020 Irrigated land 

Double crop 

Mlurniukc III 
1990 Irrigated land 


240 



240 


260 


240 


260 


240 


250 


24U 


250 



110 

130 


150 


120 


140 


120 


140 


120 


120 



420 

50 

500 
50 

530 
80 

480 
50 

520 
70 

480 
SO 

520 
60 

480 
50 

510 
60 


390 
40 

290 
SO 

220 
60 

290 
40 

220 
50 

290 
40 

220 
SO 

300 
40 

220 
SO 


1.520 
10 

1,950 
10 

2,250 
20 

1,850 
10 

2,060 
10 

1,740 
10 

1.890 
10 

1,680 
10 

1,760 
10 


800 
20 

990 

20 

1,130 

30 

930 

20 

1,060 

20 

880 
20 

980 
20 

850 
20 

920 
20 


1,350 
10 

1,690 

20 

1,920 

50 

1,610 
20 

1,690 
40 

1,530 
10 

1,580 
30 

1,480 
10 

1,490 
20 


3,100 
70 

3,560 
200 

4,040 
420 

3.370 
180 

3,730 
340 

3.250 
120 

3,430 
220 

3,190 
110 

3,260 
190 


140 


140 



140 



140 


140 


140 



140 



130 


130 



80 


80 


70 


80 


70 


80 


70 


80 


70 



630 
90 

630 
90 
650 
110 

630 
90 
630 
100 

630 
90 

630 
90 

630 
90 

630 
90 


8,780 
290 

10,200 
440 

11,360 
770 

9,740 

410 

10.520 

630 

9,380 




340 


2020 Irrigated land 


9,850 




480 


AlUrnativi IT 
1990 Irrigated land 


9,180 




330 


2020 Irrigated land 


9,360 
440 







55 



The total statewide acreage determined to be suited 
to some kind of irrigated crop production is 22,000,- 
000 acres, including 8,780,000 acres of currently irri- 
gated lands. With the advice of local agricultural 
experts, including County Farm Advisors, and con- 
sidering present day practices, it has been determined 
that one million acres occur where climate is suitable 
for the production of citrus and other subtropicals. 
Three million acres have deep, well-drained soils, are 
relatively flat and where the climate is right, are 
suited to deciduous orchards. Grapes and many truck 
crops are suited to much of the above land as well as 
to an additional six million acres. Field crops and 
pasture are adaptable to practically all irrigable land 
and slightly over 12 million acres are best suited to 
their production under current practices. 

Recent Trends in Irrigated Land Use. Agriculture 
in California is characteristically an ever-changing 
enterprise. New lands continue to be put into produc- 
tion and changes in the proportion of each crop occur 
constantly throughout the State. 



The nonirrigated crops account for less than 15 
percent of the State's total crop acreage. Most of this 
is comprised of small grains and grain hay. A large 
portion is raised as a rotation crop on land which 
otherwise is irrigated. The total acreage of cropped 
land without developed irrigation systems is constantly 
decreasing as a result of urbanization and new irriga- 
tion development. 

Figure 10 illustrates the changes in irrigated and 
urban land in the State from 1920 to 1950 and to 1972. 
In the latter part of this period, the acreage of irrigated- 
land increased from the 1960 level of 8,085,000 to 
8,480,000 in 1967 and to 8,780,000 in 1972. The actual 
amount of new land developed to irrigation during 
this period is greater than the differences in these totals 
due to replacement of land lost to urban encroach- 
ment. The rate of urbanization of irrigated land in 
recent times has been between 20,000 and 25,000 acres 
per year. 

Some of the recent changes in irrigated land and 
cropping practices around the State are shown on 
Figure 11. 




Figure 10. Irrigated and Urban Areas 



56 



SACRAMENTO 
VALLEY FLOOR 

• TOTAL IRRIGATED ACREAGE UP 

5% 

• RICE ACREAGE FLUCTUATED 

BETWEEN 300.000 AND 400,000 
ACRES 

• IRRIGATED PASTURE ACREAGE 

DOWN IN SOME AREAS 

• DECIDUOUS ORCHARD (PRINCI- 

PALLY ALMOND AND WALNUTS), 
TRUCK CROPS. SUGAR BEETS, 
AND OTHER FIELD CROP ACRE- 
AGE UP. 
> A FEW EXPLORATORY PLANTINGS 
OF GRAPES IN NEW AREAS 



SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA 

• SOUTH BAY URBAN CONTINUED 

INCREASE AT EXPENSE OF IRRI 
GATED LAND; 3S,000 ACRES 
CURRENTLY IRRIGATED ABOUT 
ONE-HALF IN ORCHARD AND 
MOST OF REMAINDER IN TRUCK 
CROPS. 

• NORTH BAY IRRIGATED ACREAGE 

ABOUT THE SAME IN SPITE OF 
URBAN GROWTH AS FORMERLY 
DRY FARM LANDS (ORCHARD 
AND VINEYARD) PUT UNDEt 
IRRIGATION 



MONTEREY BAY AREA 

r. WINE GRAPE ACREAGE IN- 
CREASED FROM LESS THAN 
2.000 TO OVER 30.000 ACRES. 
NEARLY ONE-HALF ON LAND 
NOT PREVIOUSLY IRRIGATED 

• EXAMPLES OF SHIFTS DUE TO 

URBANIZATION OF FORMER 
PRODUCING AREAS ARE THE IN- 
CREASE IN CHILE PEPPERS 
(RELOCATION FROM SOUTHERN 
CALIFORNIA) AND INCREASES IN 
GREENHOUSE PRODUCTION OF 
CUT FLOWERS AND POTTED 
PLANTS (RELOCATION FROM SAN 
FRANCISCO BAY AREA) 

• IN SOME AREAS.OLDER ORCHARDS 

REPLACED BY TRUCK CROPS 



ACREAGE 



SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN 
DELTA 

• IRRIGATED ACREAGE ABOUT THE 

SAME 

• LONG-TERM DECLINE IN ASPARA- 

GUS AND POTATOES ACREAGE 
CONTINUED (ABOUT 90% DROP 
OVER LAST 20 YEARS) 

• FIELD CROP. PARTICULARLY 

FIELD CORN AND SAFFLOWER. 
INCREASED 




SOUTH CENTRAL COAST 

I NEW LANDS PLANTED TO LEMONS. 
AVOCADOS AND WINE GRAPES- 
THE LATTER, NOW OVER 10,000 
ACRES. NOT COMMERCIALLY 
SIGNIFICANT BEFORE 



SOUTH COAST 

< IRRIGATED LANDS CONTINUED 
DECREASE DUE TO URBANIZA- 
TION, ALTHOUGH SIGNIFICANT 
EFFORTS MADE IN SOME AREAS 
TO LIMIT ENCROACHMENT 

1 CONTINUED NEW PLANTINGS OF 
CITRUS AND AVOCADOS IN A FEW 
AREAS. CHOPPING INTENSIFICA- 
TION OF TRUCK CROPLANDS 
AND INCREASE IN NURSERY- 
TYPE FARMS 



SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY 

I TOTAL IRRIGATED ACREAGE IN- 
CREASED OVER 300.000 ACRES 

> ORCHARD AND VINEYARD ACHE- 

AGE INCREASED OVER 30% 

> PISTACHIO NUTS. A NEW CROP, 

NOW TOTAL ABOUT 15.000 ACRES 
I COTTON ACREAGE INCREASED 50% 

> INCREASED DAIRY ACTIVITIES 

DUE IN LARGE PART TO SHIFTS 
INTO THE AREA FROWSOUTHERN 
CALIFORNIA STIMULATED IN- 
CREASED PRODUCTION OF CORN 
SILAGE 

> BARLEY. SUGAR BEETS AND SAF- 

FLOWER ACREAGE DECREASED 
IN SOME AREAS AS COTTON AND 
OTHER COMPETING CROPS RE- 
PLACED THEM 
■ LANDS FORMERLY IN DRY FARM 
GRAIN IN VARIOUS AREAS ALONG 
THE EAST SIDE OF THE VALLEY 
PUT UNDER IRRIGATION (MAINLY 
TREES AND VINES) THROUGH 
NEW GROUND WATER DEVELOP- 
MENT 

• LANDS IN THE CENTER, OR 

TROUGH, OF THE VALLEY CON- 
TINUED TO BE BROUGHT INTO 
PRODUCTION THROUGH ALKALI- 
LAND RECLAMATION AND 
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT 

• NEW WATER SUPPLIES BROUGHT 

INTO THE FEDERAL WATER 
SERVICE AREA OF WESTERN 
MERCED, FRESNO, AND KINGS 
COUNTIES SUPPLEMENTED THE 
LIMITED GROUND WATER SUP- 
PLY,ALLOWING INTENSIFICATION 
OF THE CROPPING PATTERN 
WHICH FORMERLY WAS DEVOTED 
IN LARGE PART TO LOW-WATEH- 
USING BARLEY 

• ABOUT 100,000 ACRES OF NEW 

LAND PUT INTO PRODUCTION 
AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THE 
STATE WATER PROJECT WHICH 
ALSO PROVIDED SUPPLEMENTAL 
WATER TO PREVIOUSLY DEVEL- 
OPED IRRIGATED LANDS 



DESERT AREAS 

> ANTELOPE VALLEY AND COA- 

CHELLA VALLEY AGRICULTURE 
EXPERIENCING PRESSURE FROM 
URBANIZATION 

> CITRUS ACREAGE INCREASED IN 

PALO VERDE VALLEY 
I BETWEEN 1969 AND 1972 HAR- 
VESTED COTTON ACREAGE 
DROPPED 30%, PRINCIPALLY 
THE RESULT OF PINK BOLL- 
WORM INFESTATION - FARMERS 
SHIFTED TO OTHER CROPS AND 
TOTAL IRRIGATED ACREAGE 
REMAINED ABOUT LEVEL 



Figure 11. Highlights of Changes in Irrigated Land Use, 1967-1972 



57 



Electrical Energy 

"Energy" has had an emotional impact on the 
United States second only to "war" or "riot". The 
effect of a shortage of energy on water projects 
would be as severe as the impacts on travel, heating, 
or industry. Many water projects and related services 
depend on large blocks of electrical energy for pump- 
ing, and the cost of the energy is a major, and some- 
times the largest, operating cost for water supply 
projects. 

The direct concern for this report is the water re- 
quirement for cooling thermal generating plants. At 
present, most of the plants in California are cooled 
with ocean or brackish water. Several factors are now 
leading to use of fresh water at inland thermal power 
plant sites. This is a large potential new fresh water 
requirement. 

Trends and Influences 

There is more known about the trend of increased 
use of electrical energy than the reasons for the trend. 
Studies by the Rand Corporation * of increases in 
energy consumptions have been prepared for resi- 
dential, commercial, and manufacturing sectors in 
California. Residential use of energy has increased in 
recent years and is projected to continue to increase 
primarily for environmental control and personal com- 
fort. Air conditioning and heating continue to use in- 
creasing amounts of electrical energy on a per capita 
basis. In addition, numerous small personal electrical 
consuming items arc being added to homes. While the 
electric stove has maintained the same level of elec- 
trical consumption in the home for many years, the 
average size of refrigerators has increased and most of 
the newer models are frost-free and include freezers. 

Commercial use of electrical encrg>' is the fastest 
growing of the three sectors. Most of the increases 
relate to air conditioning and iieating, but in addition 
there has been a trend for more floor space per em- 
ployee. It is more difficult to identif\- a general pat- 
tern for manufacturing and industrial increases except 
that man\- industries are decreasing the amount of 
labor per unit of product and, for the most part, sub- 
stituting electrical devices and increased electrical 
energy for the labor. 

Electrical energy usage increased at a high rate for 
about 20 >cars after World War II. The average an- 
nual compound rate of increase was 9.2°o from 1950 
to 1966 and 6.7% from 1966 to 1972. During this 
period the price of electricity did not increase in the 
same magnitude as other prices. New power plants 
have been more efficient, and the unit cost of adding 
generating capacity decreased. The annual rate of in- 
crease in electrical energy use tlius had begun to taper 

♦"California's Electricity Quandary: 1. Lstinialing I'uturc Demaml," 
Rand Corporation, September 1972. 



off in the late 1960s before such limiting factors as 
power plant siting and price increases added their 
effect. Now that energy prices have begun to increase 
and are e.xpected to increase even more, demand 
should respond in an clastic manner. It should also be 
pointed out that concurrent with the reduction in 
growth rate of energy sales there was a similar reduc- 
tion in the rate of increase in population. 

Until recently, energy has been taken for granted 
in California. In the evaluation of water projects, 
energy considerations have been limited to pumping 
costs and the value of hydroelectric generation. The 
cost of energy for pumping has been and will be of 
primary concern to the Department of Water Re- 
sources because payment for power required by 
pumping plants is the major cost in the operation of 
the State Water Project. It is also an important factor 
in other water projects and in ground water manage- 
ment. 

In the last two \ears the energ\- situation and public 
awareness have brought a period of change and uncer- 
tainty Assumptions about future power requirements 
need to be reexamined. Some of the factors w hich af- 
fect future demand of electricity in a qualitative way 
are listed in the following two groups. 

Factors which cause continued increase in electricity 
consumption: 

Population growth 

Extension of existing uses of electricity 

Resistance heating 

Refrigeration cooling 

Transportation — trains, mass transit 
New uses for electricity 

Transportation — autos 

Conversion of alternative forms of energy 

Desalting 
Factors \\ hich contribute to a low er rate of increase 
in e!ectricit\' consumption: 

Decline in birthrate and net in-migration 

Rising energy costs 

■More efficient use of energ\" 

Conservation measures to reduce waste 

Better appliances 

Beneficial uses of w aste heat 
Substitution of alternative forms of energy 

Some of the factors in the first group have exerted 
a dominant influence during most of the period since 
1945. In the future, factors in the second group are 
expected to become dominant. Population growth is 
slowing down. Although per capita cnergv use grew 
very rapidlx' for about 20 years, its growth is now- 
slow ing down. Energ\' costs have increased signifi- 
cantly and arc expected to continue to increase. Pro- 
jection of some of the other factors, how ever, is more 
uncertain. How soon technology ma\' advance new 
and alternative forms of energy is ver\- speculative. 



58 




2010 2020 



Figure 12. Historic and Projected Electric Energy Requirements 



Alternaiive Future Projections 

Consideration of projections of future electrical en- 
ergy requirements was the subject of the September 
1972 report by the Rand Corporation, and it included 
a detailed study of five different projections or cases. 
The base case projection, Case 1, is a generally ac- 
cepted view of the future which tends to be a sta- 
tistical extension of the past. The other cases were 
combinations of high or low growth of population 
and the economy with or without relative increases 
of price of energy. Case 3, the low growth case, gave 
a rate of growth of 3.4% per year for the period 
1970-2000. 

The Energy Dilemma Report * contains a compari- 
son of the 1972 California Public Utilities Commission 
(CPUC) projection of annual peak demand in the year 

* "Energy Dilemma" California's 20-Year Power Plant Siting Plan, 
State of California, The Resources Agency, June 1973. 



1991 with the Rand Case 1 electrical energy projec- 
tions, converted by the CPUC staff to peak demand, 
and found the difference to be less than one year's 
growth. 

A current assessment of the foregoing factors re- 
sulted in the selection of a high and a low projection, 
neither of which is considered an extreme or limiting 
condition. The high alternative was obtained by using 
the projection from the Energy Dilemma Report to 
1991, the Rand base case projection up to the year 
2000 and assuming a 4.4 percent annual growth rate 
from 2001 to 2020. The low alternative was obtained 
by using the Rand low grow th case projection up to 
the year 2000 and assuming a 3.0 percent annual 
growth rate from 2001 to 2020. 

A graph of the historical electrical energy sales from 
1950 to 1972 and the high and low estimates of future 
cncrgv use is shown on Figure 12. Quantities of pro- 



59 



jected electrical energy sales and generation are given 
in Table 6. Estimates of the generation of energy by 
plants that require cooling are given in Table 7. 

Table 6. Projected Requirements for Electrical Energy 
(billion kilowatt hours per year) 





Electrical energy sales 


Electric energy generation*^ 


Year 


High estimate 


Low estimate 


High estimate 


Low estimate 


1972 


140 
420 
1600* 


140 
247 
600'' 


155 
466 
1780 


155 


1990 


274 


2020 


670 







» Estimated by projecling 4.4 percent rate of growth from 2000. 
^ Estimated by projecting 3.0 percent rate of growth from 2000. 
• Electric energy generation differs from sales by 10 percent losses. 

Table 7. Projected Additional Generation Requiring Cooling Water 





(in billion kilowatt hours) 










1972 


1990 


2020 


Type 


High 


Low 


High 


Low 


Nuclear 


3 
90 


220 
26 


83 
13 


1,184 
26 




387 




13 






Total thermal 


93 


246 


96 


1.210 


400 



Thermal Power Plar)t Sif'mg 

Most of the electrical energy generated in Califor- 
nia to satisfy energ\- needs will probably be produced 
using oil and nuclear fuel. While there may be a slight 
increase in electric energy production using oil, most 
of the increase is expected to be developed from nu- 
clear energy. However, projections for 2020 are 
fraught with uncertainties especially where fairly rap- 
idly changing technolog\-, such as in the production 
of electricit\% is involved. It is not known if fusion 
will be the leading form of energy generation by 2020, 
but it is considered likely. With the application of 
magnetohydrodynamics (iMHD) one can envision 
efficiencies of 60 percent or better. Gas turbines dis- 
charging w aste heat directl\- to the atmosphere cou- 
pled with nuclear reactors are expected for commer- 
cial application in the 1990s. Higher efficiencies and 
direct discharge of waste heat to the atmosphere will 
reduce the need for cooling \\ater for power plants 
by 2020. 

Solar energy or other novel energy sources by to- 
day's standards could be utilized in central stations for 
generation of electrical energy. On the other hand, 
individual use of solar energy couJd substantially re- 
duce central station demand. Individual units would 
no doubt discharge waste heat directly to air, thereby 
not requiring water for cooling. 

Nevertheless, a very substantial portion of our ther- 
mal generating plants will require cooling water for 
operation. Therefore, projections of thermal power 



plants needing w ater for cooling and the siting of the 
plants is a major concern in considering California's 
future water needs. The location of future thermal 
power plants (taking into consideration load center, 
safety, aesthetics, technological changes, and econom- 
ics and the amount of energy generated) are the major 
ingredients of alternative futures for electrical energy. 

Location of power plants along California's 1,072- 
mile coastline w ith its access to an unlimited supply of 
sea water, usable for once-through cooling, has pro- 
vided an economic solution to the current cooling 
water requirements related with thermal energy pro- 
duction. About 90 percent of the thermal power plants 
in California are presently located along the coast to 
take advantage of cooling with saline or brackish 
water. 

Since the coastal zone is in such great demand for so 
nian\' uses, i.e., commercial, industrial, residential, rec- 
reation, aquatic and wildlife habitat, and preservation 
as natural areas, it is not surprising that there is a 
conflict for above ground power plant siting. 

Active and potentially active seismic areas in the 
coastal area are a serious restraint for siting nuclear 
plants. 

Several estimates have been made of the length of 
coastline that might be suitable for pow er plant siting 
based largely on population centers and seismic haz- 
ards. In the Holmes and Narver report, "California 
Power Plant Siting Study", 17 siting variations were 
studied. The amount of suitable coastline varied from 
2 to 855 miles depending upon the type of installation 
considered. The criteria in that report were generally 




Most California thermal power plants ore along the i 



60 



more lenient than those used in the report by the Cali- 
fornia Institute of Technology in 1973, entitled 
"Siting Nuclear Pow er Plants in California, the Near- 
Term Alternatives", ^\■hich found only 52 miles of 
the 1,072-mile coastline suitable for power plant siting 
consideration. 

The difficulty in finding suitable coastal sites for 
power plants has caused power companies to look 
inland for sites. Studies of power plant siting criteria 
reveal that the most favorable inland locations are the 
Central Valley and the eastern portion of the Colo- 
rado Desert area. These locations are discussed in the 
Resources Agency's report, "Energy Dilemma, Cali- 
fornia 20- Year Power Plant Siting Plan". The studies 
of inland siting which have been made thus far have 
not been detailed enough to determine whether other 
parts of the State might yet be found suitable for 
power plant siting. 

In view of the uncertainties about power plant sit- 
ing, two alternatives for thermal power plant location 
were considered. The assumption was made for plan- 
ning purposes in this report that either one-third or 
two-thirds of the future additional thermal power 
plants would use closed cycle evaporative cooling 
which would have to be supplied from inland sources 
of fresh water. The remaining plants would be lo- 
cated on the coast for cooling with ocean water. This 
assumption on plant location could not be followed 
completely for the low alternatives because more than 
Yi of the plants needed are already under construction 
or planned to be located at inland sites. 

Compounding these two assumptions of future ther- 
mal power plant location with the aforementioned 
two levels of electric energy requirements results in 
four alternative futures for thermal power plants in 
California. The energy to be generated by plants re- 
quiring inland sources of cooling water is given in 
Table 8. 

Table 8. Additional Inland Thermal Power Generation 
(in billion kilowatt hours) 





Energy 
demand 


Fresh water 
cooling" 


Generation requiring cooling 


Alternative 
future 


1990 


2020 


I 


High 
High 
Low 
Low 


H 
'A 


158 
88 
52 
44 


790 


II 

in.... -. 

IV 


420 
250 
150 



■ Fraction shown indicates that portion of additional thermal generation using 
fresh water for cooling purposes. The remaining portion of cooling need would 
be met by ocean water. 



Trends and Influences on 
Other Water-related Needs 

There are several other water-related needs that 
must be included in the formulation of water resource 
management plans. The earlier portion of this chapter 



covered population, agriculture and energy which in 
Chapter IV^ will be translated into alternative levels of 
water needs for municipal and industrial purposes, irri- 
gation of crops, and power plant cooling. While these 
include the primary consumptive needs for which 
water supplies are developed they do not provide in- 
formation on the other purposes of water resource 
management plans. 

Items such as recreation, fish, and wildlife, flood 
control, water quality, and environmental quality are 
important values. Past trends and present attitudes of 
society indicate that there are presently unmet needs 
and that additional needs can be projected into the 
future. However, since most of such needs do not 
directly affect the water supply-use balance of a spe- 
cific area it has not been necessary in water manage- 
ment planning to directly quantify projected future 
levels of need. The usual procedure has been to rec- 
ognize the importance of damage prevention and qual- 
ity enhancement, incorporate protection of existing 
values to the maximum extent possible, and enhance 
those benefits where there is an opportunity in the 
formulation of water resources management plans. 

The following discussions of recreation, fish and 
wildlife, flood control, water quality, and environ- 
mental qualit\" cover the trends and influences that 
affect these water-related benefits. 

Recreaf/on, F/s/i and Wildlife 

The long-range trend of public participation in out- 
door recreation activities is upward. Throughout the 
Nation, and especially' in the West, recreation area use 
data reveal a greater per capita participation for most 
types of recreation as compared with past years. As 
an indication of this. Figure 13 shows the growth in 
California State Park System attendance since 1950 
which is increasing much more rapidly than popula- 
tion. Other outdoor recreation activities reveal a simi- 
lar trend. 

Most observers of recreation use patterns and trends 
attribute a large part of the increase to more leisure 
time, more income, and greater mobility. Another 
factor — less often mentioned — that has doubtless had 
a major influence on recreation activity- has been an 
innovative recreation industry. Improved services, fa- 
cilities, and equipment have proved attractive to a 
larger segment of the population. 

In addition to these factors, it has been true in 
California and elsewhere in the A\'est that resources 
have general!)- been available for expanding recreation 
activities. Land, water, fisheries, etc. have generally 
been adequate to support the increased activity. Un- 
fortunately, these resources frequently are not near the 
large concentration of people in the urban centers. 

As a result of the growth factors, a large recreation 
industry has developed in California and has grown 
without significant interruption in the almost 30 years 
since World War II. 



61 




VISITOR ATTFN DANCE 

(IN RECREATION-DAYSl 



CALIFORNIA POPULATION 



1950 1952 



1954 1956 1958 1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 



Source of Data CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PARKS 8. RECREATION 



Figure 13. California Population and State Park System Attendance 



Like most other human activities, outdoor recreation 
participation is dynamic and changing. When looking 
to the future and attempting' to develop a basis for 
forecasting future recreation activity, the usual proce- 
dure is to look at past trends and present influences. 
On this basis it would be logical to project a continua- 
tion of the upward trends. The energy crisis, how- 
ever, demonstrated the vulnerability of recreation ac- 
tivities to external influences including public 
confidence in the economy and their own economic 
securitv'. 

There is no doubt that gasoline shortages and price 
increases starting in the last half of 1973 reduced 
recreation travel. There is also no doubt that there 
was a decrease in the purchase of recreation vehicles, 
trailers, motor homes, boats, and other energy using 
items at the same time. However, it is impossible to 
find uniformity in forecasts of the duration and 
severity of the energy shortage, and therefore difficult 
to predict \\ ith any certainty the effect of that short- 
age on outdoor recreation. 

Two major types of outdoor recreation that are 
dependent upon fish and wildlife resources are fresh 
water fishing and water fowl hunting. The present 
level and the projected levels of these two recreation 
activities (as shown in Table 9) demonstrate their 
popularit\- and also indicate the importance of fish 
and wildlife resources. 

Fish and wildlife resources must be protected and 
enhanced where possible to preserve and expand rec- 
reational opportunity. These resources include a num- 
ber of limited and endangered species of fish and w ild- 



life. Water resource management plans must also 
include measures for their protection and sur\-ival. 



Table 9. Existing and Projected Fishing and Hunting Uses of 

California's Fresh Water Fish and Water Fowl Resources 

(in 1,000 of user days) 





Fresh Water Fishing 


Water Fowl Hunting 


Hydrologic Study Area 


1970 


2000 


1970 


2000 




983 
8)2 
988 
2.195 
4.617 
3.100 
1,819 
1.7M 
1.180 
1,759 
1,286 


1.435 
1,262 
1,403 

2,837 
6,940 
4,916 
3,038 
2,486 
2,392 
3.421 
2,351 


213 
60 
8 
34 
625 
110 
234 
168 
41 
46 
126 


277 


San Francisco Bay 


84 
11 




63 


Sacramento Basin 

Delta-Central Sierra 

San Joaquin Basin 

Tulare Basin 


928 
193 
403 
218 




53 




160 




260 






Totals 


20.443 


32,481 


1,665 


2,650 







: "Present and Future Human Demands for Fish and Wildlife", Californi: 
Department of Fish and Game, August 1972. 



Some species of \vildlife need habitat protection to 
sur\ive while others need additional protected habitat 
to maintain populations that will be beneficial to 
society. Riparian habitat adjacent to rivers, lakes and 
other water\\ays is particularly itnportant to many 
species. Mountain valle>' habitats are limited for many 
deer and the few remaining elk herds and competitive 
uses of these valleys for cattle grazing, intensive rec- 
reation use, and reservoir sites places additional strain 
on the animal populations. 



62 



The Pacific Flyway for water fowl passes through 
the entire length of California from the Mexican to 
the Oregon borders. Marsh areas which provide rest- 
ing, nesting, and feeding areas are essential to maintain 
the present populations of these birds. To maintain 
these important habitats requires water and protection 
from encroachment of competing uses. Several state 
and federal water fowl management areas are now 
in op)eration and additional areas are needed. Opportu- 
nities for providing such areas should be evaluated in 
the preparation of water resource management plans. 

The fresh water and anadromous fisheries are 
important to the recreational and economic welfare 
of the State. Good spawning areas for anadromous fish 
are limited and in many natural streams dry season 
flow are not sufficient to maintain optimum fish 
populations. Water resource planning must include 
evaluation of the fishery resources and explore op- 
portunities to enhance the fisheries through riverflow 
augmentation and protection or replacement of spawn- 
ing areas. 





1 


m 


. P. 


^5 


^y^l 


^M 


Ik 




..-•■'« ^pr '^^^S 


5Wp 




r 







California Wildlife fiabitat 



^ v» 



A 

.>-^ 



1 









•^ 3- 



^V 



,v 





Wetland habitat for waterfowl 
Deportment of Fish ond Gome photo 






63 



Flood Confrol 

Every few years some of California's winter storms 
occur in such rapid succession that there are severe 
floodflows over extensive areas. Prior to settlement by 
migration from the eastern states, these floodflows 
covered the terraces along streams and the Sacramento 
and San Joaquin Valleys became lakes over much of 
their areas. Alluvial cones in Southern California were 
covered by water and debris. 

Flood control works in California now prevent in- 
undation of many of these areas and have made a 
significant contribution to the State's productive ca- 
pacity and social well-being. Without these facilities, 
California would be unable to sustain its high level of 
agricultural production and industrial output; its 
municipal and industrial communities would be so 
scattered as to render them ineffective. 

In the early days of California there was little choice 
but to settle in areas prone to flood damage. Provision 
of flood control structures has been a gradual process. 



but with numerous projects completed since World 
War II, major portions of the State are now relatively 
secure from flood damage. As flood protection works 
have been expanded, often initially to protect large 
areas of agricultural land, the pressures of urban ex- 
pansion caused further invasion of the floodplain and 
greater levels of flood protection became necessary. 
The clearest discernable trend has been a decline in 
new starts for structural works in the past few years. 
Factors contributing to this trend include a decrease 
in federal spending, a 4-year period to work out a 
new basis for sharing of nonfederal costs of federal 
projects between the State and local agencies and con- 
cern for possible detrimental environmental effects of 
projects. 

Both social concerns and legislative actions are con- 
tributing to increased use of floodplain zoning. En- 
vironmental concerns of people in some flood control 
districts has resulted in strong objections to concrete 
or rock-lined flood control channels and searches for 
alternative solutions. 




Flood damoge in the Delta 



64 



The Federal Flood Insurance Program was not well 
received for its first four years, but additional legisla- 
tion following severe floods at several locations in the 
United States has stimulated widespread interest in 
extension of the program in flood-prone areas. A re- 
quirement of the program is local agency implementa- 
tion of suitable zoning of floodplains. 

Until recently, the State reimbursed local flood 
control agencies for nearly all the local share of the 
capital costs of federal flood control projects. State 
legislation adopted in 1973 reduced reimbursement by 
the State thus requiring local agencies to assume a 
significant part of the nonfederal share of first costs 
of projects. This is in addition to the operation and 
maintenance costs local agencies have borne in the 
past and will continue to pay. This too can be ex- 
pected to shift flood management toward greater use 
of floodplain zoning. 

The State in 1974 adopted legislation providing that 
it will pay part of the maintenance cost of eligible 
levees. In the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, for non- 
federal project levees, the State will pay annually up 
to 50 percent of the maintenance costs after the local 
agencies have assumed the first $500 per mile of levee. 
For all project levees in the State, authorized under 
the State Water Resources law of 1945, the State will 
also pay 50 percent of additional costs attributed to 
planting or retention of controlled vegetative cover 
for wildlife, recreational, scenic and aesthetic purposes. 

Land use planning and zoning can be used to keep 
incompatible urban development out of flood-prone 
areas and at the same time allow for suitable uses of 
the land resources. 

To insure that man's needs for protection and se- 
curity are satisfied, protection from floods is essential. 
Furthermore, to maintain adequate production of agri- 
cultural produce, goods, and other services, adequate 
land resources must be made available. Flood damage 
prevention is an economic cost which must be con- 
sidered in the development of California's land and 
water resources to satisfy the needs of people. 

Environmental Quality 

Water, either running or standing, is often the 
central environmental attraction of an area regardless 
of whether the area is used for recreation, residential 
or other purposes. Whatever the recreational activity, 
the setting with a stream or lake seems to be preferred 
to a setting without water. It also is apparent that land 
with a lakeview or a stream nearby is higher in value 
for residential use than other land. The development 
of stream parkways such as along Los Gatos Creek in 
Santa Clara County and the American River in Sacra- 
mento is further evidence of the high regard placed 
on streams. 

Other examples of concern for environmental qual- 
it\ are the California Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 
M-hich followed by a few years federal legislation in 



this field, and the current Resources Agency program 
for the development of waterway management plans. 
Californians for years have developed lakes and reser- 
voirs for recreation and their scenic attributes. Streams 
now seem to ofi'er the kinds of environmental quality 
and recreation potentials that excite communities to 
action. 

Up through the 1950s concern about comprehensive 
long-range environmental goals for an area such as 
California was minimal. During the 1960s there was 
increasing concern about what was happening and 
\\hat might happen to the environment in California 
and elsewhere. By the end of the 1960s there appeared 
to be an informal concensus on the part of the people 
of California and the United States that we should 
achieve and maintain a high quality of liveability for 
ourselves, our children, and grandchildren. 

This informal consensus was translated into law by 
the Congress of the United States in 1969 and the Cali- 
fornia State Legislature in 1970. Those laws established 
a formal statutory base which will "create and main- 
tain conditions under which man and nature can exist 
in productive harmony".* 

There is little understanding of the long-term effects 
that different rates and kinds of growth would have 
on the quality of life. There does not appear to be 
agreement on what the mix of material goods for 
social well-being should be with the intangibles needed 
for the highest attainable quality of life. Each person, 
each corporation, each governmental unit, each citizen 
organization historically has pursued his or its own 
ends. The result, through the 1960s, generally has 
been unplanned, uncoordinated, and uncontrolled 
growth. This kind of growth, historically, has pro- 
duced in the United States and in California a high 
material standard of living. It also increasingly is 
yielding some undesirable natural environmental re- 
sults and conflict. 

These problems are considered in the report entitled 
"Summary Report: Environmental Goals and Policy", 
issued by the Governor in 1973. The report is dis- 
cussed in Chapter I of this bulletin. 

During the next few years, it is anticipated that a 
more specific body of information will be developed 
to better define some of the relationships between 
man and nature. At the present time, the interrelation- 
ships of water management and environmental con- 
cerns require institutional, economic and operational 
studies to develop alternative courses of action that 
may result in solution. In the interim, water manage- 
ment programs must be aware of and respond to issues 
that relate environmental quality and water resources. 

Water Quality 

The quality of water provides a measure of the 
utility of water for its many beneficial uses. In gen- 

al Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), Public Law 



65 



eral, the better the quality of the water the wider the 
variety of uses that can be met. In recognition of 
this the public at large and the legislature's attitudes 
are to protect the quality of the State's water re- 
sources and to enhance water quality in those instances 
where a better quality would facilitate more beneficial 
uses or esthetic enjoyment. 

California since 1950 has had an aggressive program 
to prevent water pollution resulting from municipal 
and industrial waste discharges. This program was ex- 
panded in 1970 by the Porter-Cologne Water Quality 
Control Act which added many provisions to provide 
stricter water quality control management, particularly 
through new enforcement provisions. Additional em- 
phasis was placed on control of water quality by the 
passage of the 1972 amendments to the Federal Water 
Pollution Control Act (PL 92-500). PL 92-500 pro- 
vided funds to assist the local agencies of every state 
in construction of treatment facilities to improve the 
quality of waste water discharges. The goal of PL 
92-500 is to have by 1983 a national water resource 



of sufficient quality to provide for the protection and 
propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and for 
recreation in and on the water. The State Water Re- 
sources Control Board has further emphasized pro- 
tection of water quality by the adoption of a policy 
to prevent degradation of the existing quality of all 
water of the State by any of man's activities to the 
maximum feasible extent. 

The State Water Quality Control Board is currently 
completing a massive water quality management 
planning program which is mentioned in Chapter 1 
and is discussed in detail in Chapter V of this bulletin. 

The basic water quality assumption for water re- 
sources management planning is that overall improve- 
ments in water quality can be expected in spite of in- 
creased population levels and economic activities. 
Achieving the established water quality standards may 
affect the need for future water supply development, 
reclamation of waste water, and agricultural waste 
water drainage systems. 




Iffter 



■^^z^.. 




Environmental quality is Improved by summer releases from storage to the American River 



66 



CHAPTER IV 

DEMANDS FOR WATER 



This chapter discusses demands for water — water 
supplies to meet out-of-stream consumptive uses, 
water for instream flow maintenance and enhance- 
ment, water quality for protection of beneficial pur- 
poses, and control of water to reduce damage from 
floods. "Water demands" as used in this report means 
"quantity of water use". 

The quantity of water for irrigated agriculture, 
urban uses, and for power plant cooling has been cal- 
culated for several alternative levels of future develop- 
ment. Only one estimate of future water demand for 
recreation, fish and wildlife was made. Water man- 
agement requirements for other purposes such as flood 
control, energy generation, quality protection, en- 
vironmental enhancement, and navigation are discussed 
only qualitatively — in terms of their relation to the 
future. 

Urban Water Use 

California currently requires more than five million 
acre-feet of \\ater each year for municipal and indus- 
trial purposes. The uses are many and varied but fall 
broadi\' into four general groups: domestic (residen- 
tial), industrial, commercial, and governmental. 
Domestic uses require about 68 percent of the total, 
industrial about 18 percent, commercial 10 percent, 
and governmental and institutional uses the remaining 
4 percent. 

These four components are treated in this bulletin 
as a single combined entity, "urban water use". The 
projected quantities presented in this chapter are de- 
rived as the product of per capita water use and the 
population projections presented in Chapter III. By 
w ny of review, the four levels of future population are 
show n in the following tabulation: 



The variability in per capita water use between com- 
munities is demonstrated by the examples in Table 10. 

Table 10. Per Capita Water Use in Selected Communities 





Alter 


native Fu 


ure Popu 


at 


on 








(millions) 












I 


II 


III 


IV 


1972... 




20.5 


20.5 




20.5 


20.5 


1990 






27.4 


26.7 




26.1 


23.6 


2020 






43.3 


39.1 




36.6 


26.5 



Urban rates of water use were determined on a per 
capita basis. The total quantity of water used by a 
community each day was divided by its population. 
The quantity of water used is the net result of a num- 
ber of variables, some of which tend to increase unit 
use while others cause decreases. Each area has a unique 
combination of these variables which result in a per 
capita value specific to that area. 



Agency 


Service area 
population 


Per capita 

water use 

(gallons per 

capita 

per day) 


San Francisco Bay Area 


59,300 
160.000 
712,000 

91.460 

34.200 

116.749 
72,427 

1.877,736 
657.036 


255 




164 


San Francisco Water Department -. 


144 
134 


North County Water District (Pacifica) 

South Coastal Jrra 


98 
223 




171 


Los Angeles Department of Water & Power (City 
and hator area) 


163 




154 







Industrial use of fresh water constitutes about one- 
fifth of the total urban water demand. The State's 
1972 industrial use amounted to about 920,000 acre- 
feet. Considerable effort has been devoted to canvass- 
ing industry to obtain data on water use and related 
production information. The results are summarized in 
Department of Water Resources Bulletin No. 124, 
"Water Use by Manufacturing Industries in Califor- 
nia". For purposes of this Bulletin 160-74, the detailed 
information was adapted to permit industrial water use 
and all other urban uses to be expressed as a direct 
function of population, that is, as per capita water use. 

Temperature has significant influence on residential 
use, especially where lawns and gardens are extensive. 
In these areas, summer use often will vary from winter 
use by several hundred percent. Precipitation most 




67 



markedl\- reduces water requirements when it occurs 
during late spring and early fail while vegetation is 
actively growing. 

Other factors which influence per capita water use 
include personal income, cost of water, degree of in- 
dustrialization, family size, type of community, meter- 
ing water delivered to individual users, and system 
losses. In addition, many cities are undergoing a change 
in unit water use trends as their residential develop- 
ment patterns change. An example is the replacement 
of older single family dwellings with high-rise apart- 
ment complexes; this usually results in lower per 
capita water use. 

Historic rates of urban water use are determined 
by sampling as many individual water service agen- 
cies as can be found with reliable water production 
data. The per capita value derived for each agency is 
weighted according to population served to determine 
the proper value for each geographic area under in- 
vestigation. 

Trends in per capita water use rates provide a use- 
ful guide in predicting future unit water values, 
although the reliability of this technique diminishes 
the further ahead one looks. The 1990 unit values de- 
rived for calculating the total urban water demand 
presented in this report are principally the result of 
e.xtrapolation of historic trends. Consideration is given 
to possible future industrial activity and the charac- 
ter or type of future residential development to mod- 
ify the extrapolated trends for estimating year 2020 
unit values. 

The populous San Francisco Bay and South Coastal 
areas have established rates of use which are not apt 
to change greatly in the foreseeable future due to the 
relatively small impact changes in new residential de- 
velopment and new industry will have on total use. 
Unit use in the San Francisco Bay area is still increas- 
ing somewhat but data from the South Coastal area 
reveal a leveling off. 

Sacramento Basin, Delta-Central Sierra, San Joaquin 
Basin, and Tulare Basin have a high per capita water 



use due to high summertime residential requirements, 
high water-using industries, and mostly flat-rate resi- 
dential services. Considering the current high use and 
the likelihood of more extensive recycling of indus- 
trial waste water, the average unit use should remain 
relatively constant. Average unit use in Delta-Central 
Sierra will probably show a decline beyond the pres- 
ent because increase of large water consuming indus- 
tries is not keeping pace with population growth. 

Average North Coastal per capital use will probably 
decline as the high water use in pulp and paper manu- 
facturing remains level and population continues to 
grow. 

A substantial increase in average unit use is predicted 
for North Lahontan area as a reflection of recreational 
growth. Per capita water use is calculated based on 
resident population but includes the water used by 
tourists. Tourism is treated similarly to industry in 
computing unit use. 

As would be expected, the desert areas have a high 
unit rate of use because of hot and dry climatic condi- 
tions throughout the year. 

A detailed discussion and analysis of historic unit 
municipal and industrial water use is presented in the 
Department of Water Resources Bulletin No. 166 
series. Bulletin No. 166-1, "Municipal and Industrial 
Water Use", was published in 1968, but an updated 
edition is being prepared and will be published soon. 
That bulletin should be referred to for data on water 
deliveries by specific agencies, unit rates of use for 
specific communities and other geographic areas, and 
other urban-related water use information. 

Urban applied \\ater demands projected for 1990 
and 2020 under the four levels of alternative popula- 
tion are presented by major hydrologic areas in Table 
11, along with 1972 demands. The term "applied 
water" refers to the total quantity produced by a 
water service agenc}- and delivered to its customers, 
plus all losses inherent in the system such as convey- 
ance leakage, back-flushing of the filter system, fire 
protection, etc. 



1972 and Projected Urban Applied Water Demand 
(1,000 acre-feet) 





North 
Coastal 


San 

Francisco 

Bay 


Central 
Coastal 


South 
Coastal 


Sacra- 
Basin 


Delta- 
Central 
Sierra 


San 

Joaquin 

Basin 


Tulare 
Basin 


North 
Lahontan 


South 
Lahontan 


Colorado 
Desert 


Total 


1972 


93 

104 
126 

102 

120 

101 
IH 

97 
100 


990 

1.480 
2.240 

1.460 
2.070 

1.430 
1.940 

1.340 
1,570 


181 

308 
569 

300 
516 

289 
473 

252 
318 


2.370 

3.130 
4.830 

3,050 
4.360 

2,980 
4.120 

2,670 
2,980 


470 

700 
1.040 

687 
968 

674 
908 

621 

702 


173 

251 

537 

247 
490 

239 
451 

219 

323 


192 

295 
548 

287 
485 

279 
451 

249 
307 


363 

493 

798 

479 
718 

471 
679 

441 

530 


23 

40 
68 

40 
59 

39 
54 

32 
35 


89 

154 
387 

139 
326 

136 

306 

108 
143 


99 

148 

275 

142 

24<i 

139 
230 

126 
173 


5,040 

'7,100 
11,400 

6,930 
10.400 

6 770 


Alurnalive I 
1990... 


2020 


Alurnative II 
1990 


2020 


AtUrnativt III 

1990 


2020 ... 


9,7.111 

6.160 
7,170 


Munatm If 

1990 


2020... 





68 




Lake Merced Golf Course In San Francisco 



Agricultural Water Demands 

At the present time, nearly 9 million of the 10.5 
million acres of cultivated lands in California are irri- 
gated. The remaining 1.5 million acres are dry-farmed, 
planted primarily to small grains and hay which derive 
their water solely from rainfall. The 1972 total applied 
\\ ater for irrigation is some 31.7 million acre-feet. The 
estimates of future agricultural applied water demands 
presented in this bulletin are the product of the pro- 
jected acreage of each irrigated crop and the appro- 
priate unit values of applied water. 

By way of review, the four alternative levels of 
future agriculture development presented in Chapter 
III were premised on two different rates of national 
population growth, two projections of foreign trade, 
two sets of projected crop yields, a single projection 
of per capita consumption of food and fiber, and a 
single projection of the state's share of national pro- 
duction. 





Alternotl 


ve Future Irr 
(1,000 


igated Crop 


Acreages 






I 


II 


III 


IV 


1972 - 


9,070 
10,640 
12,130 


9,070 
10.150 
11.150 


9,070 
9,720 
10,330 


9,070 


1990__ .- 


9,510 


2020 


9,800 







While the actual use of water (evapotranspiration) 
is primarily a physiological function of the crop, the 
rate of water application (irrigation) is a function of 



many variables, some unrelated to the specific crop 
in question. In order to determine the amount of 
applied water required per acre of each crop within 
an investigation area, it is necessary to know not only 
the methods of irrigation but also those factors which 
affect irrigation practices. This is important because 
crop culture, soils, climate, water availability, and 
other factors vary substantially from place to place 
within California, often over short distances. Some 
examples of the wide range of water application rates 
are given below: 





Crop 


Weighted Average .Annual Unit Applied Water 
(AF/A) 




Tehama County 


Kern County 


Alfalfa 




3.6 
3.1 

2.7 


5.4 




4.2 


Deciduous o 




3.7 









Within each of these areas the rates vary considera- 
bly. 

Results of in-depth studies of water use rates and 
much of the collected data are presented in the De- 
partment's Bulletin No. 1 1 3 series, the most recent 
edition being Bulletin No. 113-3, "Vegetative Water 
Use in California, 1974". The crop unit water use 
values used in calculating agricultural water demands 
were based on data presented in Bulletin No. 113-3. 
That report should be referred to for more detailed 
information on the quantity of water transpired by 



69 




Several irrigation methods used in California 



70 



plants or evaporated from soil and plant surfaces as 
a result of irrigation and current rates of water applica- 
tion for specific crops in the various geographic areas 
of the State. 

In California, irrigation systems range from wild 
flooding to the most advanced found any\\herc in 
the world. The wild-flooding technique, i.e., letting 
water flow randomly downslope from a network of 
distribution ditches, is still used today in some of the 
mountainous areas where pasture and the associated 
livestock production remain the principal agricultural 
enterprise. The other extreme can be found in such 
places as San Diego County, where high income pro- 
ducing truck, nursery, and semitropical fruit crops 
are irrigated with expensive water by highly sophisti- 
cated and expensive systems, including drip irrigation. 
At the present time, about 2 percent of the State's 
total irrigated lands are irrigated by wild flooding, 
about 17 percent by sprinklers, and most of the re- 
mainder by border, basin, or furrow systems. 

Howev^er, as is true for nearly all phases of farm 
management in California, there are significant changes 
taking place in irrigation practices throughout the 
State, even in some of the long-established agricultural 
areas such as the pasture-livestock producing moun- 
tainous areas mentioned in the previous paragraph. The 
need to increase production to offset ever-increasing 
costs has encouraged eff'orts to spread limited water 
supplies to the maximum extent possible. Even where 
water availability and price are not constraints, irri- 
gation techniques are changing, principally as a result 
of increased labor costs. The change is mainly to 
sprinkler systems and this trend seems likely to con- 
tinue. 

The water application efficiency of sprinkler systems 
is generally greater than with other systems. Sprinklers 
are also used for frost control, principally on grapes 
and deciduous orchard, but also on certain truck 
crops. The heat provided by the relatively warm 
water and the heat energy released as it changes from 
the liquid state to ice often can provide just enough 
protection. The same system can provide a few degrees 
of cooling during periods of extreme heat which can 
be important in preserving the quality of some varie- 
ties of wine grapes. 

A new "drip" method of irrigation has recently 
been initiated w ith encouraging results. Drip irrigation 
has potential for significant reduction in total \\ater 
application requirements for some crops. It has been 
defined as the application of water to the soil at a 
rate sufficiently slow so that all water immediately 
enters the soil, with the result that the root zone is 
filled but onl\' a minimum area of the soil surface is 
wetted. In practice, small amounts of water are applied 
every day or so, depending on the weather and stage 
of plant development, through one to six emitters 
around each tree or vine, or along the full length of 
a porous hose in the case of truck crops. 



It has been estimated that about 40,000 acres are 
presently irrigated with drippers in California. Much 
of this is in San Diego County; however, the system 
is being tried in other locations throughout the State. 
The initial system cost is high; although, as with many 
sprinkler systems, operational labor costs can be kept 
fairly low. How widespread the future use of this 
system will be cannot be forecast with any degree of 
confidence at this time. Increased use should reduce 
applied water requirements, at least for young trees 
and vines and many truck crops. The effects of salt 
buildup in the soil as water is used and the leaching 
requirements need careful evaluation to reach conclu- 
sions regarding the overall water requirements. 

In selecting the unit applied water values for this 
study, consideration was given to those crops that 
could be expected to be grown on new irrigated land, 
the changes in cropping pattern that would likely 
take place on existing irrigated land, and the changes in 




Drip irrigotion of young pistachio nut tree 



71 



farm management which might take place in the fu- 
ture. While drip irrigation may become more widely 
accepted, it is concluded that the major change in the 
foreseeable future will be toward a greater use of 
sprinklers, with much of the new land and more of 
the presently irrigated land under sprinkler irrigation 
by year 2020. 



Agricultural applied water demands projected for 
1990 and 2020 under the four levels of alternative fu- 
ture development are presented by major hydrologic 
areas in Table 12, along with 1972 demands. The term 
"applied water" refers to the quantities of water that 
must be delivered to the place of use, such as a farm 
headgate, to satisfy the irrigated crop requirements. 



Toble 12. 1972 and Projected Agricultural Applied Water Demand 
(1,000 acre-feet) 





North 
Coastal 


San 

Francisco 

Bay 


Central 
Coastal 


South 
Coastal 


Sacra- 
Basin 


Delta- 
Central 
Sierra 


San 
Joaquin 
Basin 


Tulare 
Basin 


North 
Lahontan 


South 
Lahontan 


Colorado 
Desert 


Totals 


1972 


710 

720 
740 

720 
740 

710 
730 

710 
730 


250 

290 

330 

280 
320 

290 
310 

280 
280 


1.030 

1,240 
1.310 

1,200 
1,270 

1,190 
1,240 

1,200 
1,220 


920 

730 
530 

720 
510 

720 
520 

750 
520 


6,020 

7,940 
9,080 

7,540 
8,350 

7,050 
7,540 

6,960 
7,410 


2,470 

3,220 
3,700 

3,010 
3,540 

2,810 
3,250 

2.710 
3,020 


5,450 

6,620 
7,320 

6,390 
6.600 

6.040 
6.180 

5.750 
5.750 


10.890 

13.070 
14.870 

12.510 
13,720 

11,750 
12,360 

11,580 
11,750 


420 

430 
430 

430 
430 

430 
430 

400 
400 


310 

300 
250 

300 
250 

300 

250 

300 
250 


3,220 

3.320 
3,320 

3.320 
3,320 

3,320 
3,320 

3.320 
3.320 


31.700 


Alurnatite I 
1990 


37,900 


2020 

Alurnatite II 

1990 

2020.. 

Alurnatite III 
1990 


41.900 

36,400 
39,000 

34,600 


2020 


36.100 


Alurnatite IV 

1990 


34.000 


2020 


34.600 







Water for Power 

Water resources are developed and managed in 
many ways to produce energy and power. Hydroelec- 
tric plants use the force of falling water to spin tur- 
bines and generators to produce electricit>\ Thermal 
plants, both fossil fuel and nuclear, use water for cool- 
ing. Geothermal plants may either produce water from 
deep extractions or may use water for injection into 
deep heated strata. The consumptive use of water for 
power plant cooling is discussed in this section, while 
nonconsumptive uses of water for power are discussed 
later in this chapter. 

About 90 percent of thermal pow er plants in Cali- 
fornia presently use once-through cooling with saline 
or brackish water. In 1972, there were about a dozen 
plants using an estimated 25,000 acre-feet of fresh 
water for cooling in recirculating systems. In addition, 
an estimated 1.^,000 acre-feet of evaporation is caused 
b>' two plants that take fresh water from Sacramento- 
San Joaquin Delta channels for once-through cooling. 

A number of assumptions are necessary in calculat- 
ing the quantity' of cooling water needed in the future 
b\- thermal power plants. A simplified heat flow is il- 
lustrated in Figure 14, "Heat Balance Diagram". This 
diagram show s a modern fossil fuel power plant with 
an efficiency of over 37 percent. As illustrated by this 
diagram, when the plant is in operation, it requires 
about 20 cubic feet per second (cfs) to provide suffi- 
cient water for cooling and drift loss. Five cubic feet 



per second is an average value for blowdown which 
can vary considerably depending upon the quality of 
the makeup \\ater. These plants, however, do not op- 
erate continuously or always at full rated output. In 
1972 in California, the average capacity factor for 
thermal plants was about S6 percent. 

Cooling water requirements must include an allow- 
ance for blowdown. Blowdown is the continuous or 
intermittent wasting of a small amount of the circulat- 
ing cooling water to limit the increase in the concen- 
tration of solids in the water due to evaporation. A 
blowdown of \5 percent was assumed for the calcu- 
lations of cooling water requirements. The following 
factors and additional assumptions were used: 



Nuclear plants 


AF/Million K\VH 


1990 


2.4 


2020 


1.4 


Gas and Oil Plants 






1.42 


1990. 


1.27 


2020 


1.27 







As presented in Chapter III, an assumption was made 
that either one-third or tw o-thirds of the cooling water 
demand will be supplied from inland water sources. 
Combining these two alternative inland siting assump- 
tions with high and low projections of electricity used, 



72 



AIR FLOW EVAPORATION 
AND DRIFT - 20 CFS 




SOURCE: GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 703 



Figure 14. Heat Balance Diagram 




Rancho Seco nuclear power plant uses fresh water for cooling 



73 




Figure 15. Projected Demands for Fresh Cooling Water 



Figure 12, gives four levels of cooling water demand. 
These demands are presented in Figure 15. 

The projected cooling water requirements for the 
State were calculated for the four alternatives using 
the above factors and the generation given in Table 8. 
The results distributed to hydrologic study areas are 
shown in Table 13. 

Power plant cooling water demands will not neces- 
sarily all be met with new supplies of inland fresh wa- 
ter. Reclaimed waste water is a prime potential source 
of fresh water for power plant cooling. Also, as dis- 
cussed in Chapter III, advancement in technology may 
have a significant impact on the actual water demand. 
Some factors such as geothermal and possibly solar 
energy may increase the demand. On the other hand, 
air cooling, use of gas-cooled nuclear plants with gas 
turbines and higher efficiency, are more likely to re- 
duce the overall demand. While little effect is likely 
by 1990, one can envisage perhaps one-third of the 
heat being discharged directly to the atmosphere by 
2020, with an attendant reduction of one-third in the 
amount of cooling water required from that shown in 
Table 13. 

Another aspect to consider in estimating cooling 
water demand is that there are beneficial uses of warm 
cooling \\ ater \\ hich are quite likely to become more 
common as the cost of energy increases. The tremen- 
dous amounts of waste heat produced by power plants 
may become too valuable to be wasted. Warm cooling 
water is being used beneficially in other areas of the 
world. Future uses of warm cooling water which 
might become economical in this country , include 
agricultural uses such as greenhouse or soil heating, 
aquaculture, and mariculture. 



Table 13. Power Plant Fresh Water Cooling Req 
(1,000 acre-feet) 


uirements 






1972 


Alternali 


vc futu 


es 






1990 


2020 


Hydrologic study area 


I 


11 


III 


IV 


I 


II 


III 


IV 




18 


20 







0* 

38 


30 
SO 

100 

70 
10 

130 


30 

75 

35 
10 
70 

220 


30 

50 

20 
10 
40 

150 


30 


40 


20 


40 

130 


80 
140 
150 
140 
240 
100 
250 


40 

60 
100 

70 
130 

50 
130 

580 



50 
110 

60 

130 

350 





Delta-Central Sierra 

San Joaquin Basin 

Tulare Lake Basin 

South Lahontan 

Colorado Desert 



70 


60 


80 


■^"'i-""' 


390 


1,100 


210 



•-feet (included with indus' 



74 



Recreation, Fish and Wildlife 

The policy of the State recognizes concern for 
recreation, fish, and wildlife as primary purposes in 
the formulation and review of water projects. The 
California Water Code sets forth clear directives that 
facilities be provided for public recreational purposes 
and that fisheries and wildlife be preserved and en- 
hanced to the maximum justifiable extent. Federal pol- 
ic\', likewise, places emphasis on recreation, fish and 
wildlife. The polic\' has been demonstrated in the 
passage of both state and federal legislation on wild 
and scenic rivers and environmental qualit}', and in 
recent decisions b>- the State Water Resources Con- 
trol Board. 

In some parts of the State, especially the North 
Coastal area, the greatest local need for water will be 
for the purposes of recreation, and enhancement of 
fisheries and wildlife. Consequently, much of the fu- 
ture planning efforts, especially for Northern Cali- 
fornia rivers, would be directed toward developing 
water supplies to meet these needs. Recreation and 
commercial fishing presently comprise the second and 
fourth largest income producing industries in the 
North Coastal area. The anadromous fishery resources 
are extremely significant to both of these industries. 

In other areas of the State, such as the northeastern 
counties and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valleys, 
water is nedeed to replace depleted wetlands for water- 
fowl. 

Sfreamflow Maintenance 

The ability of a stream to support fish populations 
or to attract and support recreation activities is a 
function of its flow more than any other variable. 
Other factors, however, are important; the water must 
be of satisfactory quality and temperature, and the 
surrounding terrain and vegetation must be sufficiently 
attractive to provide a pleasing environment. 

Dams and reservoirs, properly operated, can provide 
for recreation and support fisheries by storing water 
during periods of high runoff and releasing it during 
the summer and fall seasons of low flow. This pro- 
vides benefits downstream in addition to the benefits 
of the man-made lake itself. 

In the 1930s, an ambitious program was conducted 
in the high Sierra by the U. S. Forest Service and 
sportsmens organizations to build a number of dams 
at the outlet of mountain lakes to maintain flows in 
the streams below them to support trout fisheries. The 
Department of Fish and Game and the Wildlife Con- 
servation Board continued this program into more 
recent years. This State program, by the 1960s, had 
provided about 50 dams in the central and southern 



Sierra Nevadas storing snowmelt and sending more 
than 10,000 acre-feet of water annually into more than 
400 miles of trout streams during late summer and 
fall \\ hen they would otherwise be dry or nearly so. 

There are numerous agreements between water de- 
velopers and other parties (often the State Department 
of Fish and Game) that specify conditions requiring 
maintenance of downstream flows. Often such require- 
ments are made a part of water rights and other 
agreements. Table 14 lists current streamflow amounts 
by hydrologic area to indicate the extent of this im- 
portant phase of water project operations. The flows 
covered by agreements and by the terms of permits 
and licenses are as varied as the watersheds they cover. 
Often, it is intended that they preserve, or mitigate 
damage to, existing resources. In other cases, the flows 
released provide enhanced fisheries and recreational 
opportunities downstream. 

Table 14. Summary of Flow Maintenance Agreements 
(normal year flows) 



Hydrologic study ; 



North Coastal 

Klamath River below Iron Gate Dam 

Mad River below Ruth Dam 

Trinity River below Lewiston Dam 

San Francisco Bay 

Russian River below Coyote Dam 

Nicasio Creek, Marin Co 

Scotty Creek, Sonoma Co 

Central Coastal 

San Lorenzo River. Santa Cruz Co 

Uvas Creek, Santa Clara Co 

Chorro Creek, San Luis Obispo Co 

Sacramento Basin 

Pit-McCloud Rivers above Shasta Lake 

Clear Creek below Whiskeytown Dam 

Sacramento River below Box Canyon Dam 

Sacramento River below Keswick Dam 

Feather River tributaries above Lake Oroville 

Feather River below Thermalito Afterbay 

Yuba and Bear Rivers System 

Upper American River and tributaries 

American River below Nimbus Dam 

Delta-Central Sierra 

Mokelumne River below Camanche Dam 

San Joanuin Basin 

San Joaquin River. . 

San Joaquin River tributaries 

.Merced River below Exchequer Dam -.. 

Stanislaus River above Meloncs Reservoir 

Tuolumne River below New Don Pedro Dam 

Tulare Basin 

Kern River below Fairview Diversion 

Kern River Hatchery Supply 

Salmon and Corral Creek Diversions in Tulare County 
Kings River below Pine Flat Dam 

North Lakontan 
Truckee River 

South Lahontan 



978 
236 
158 



75 



Some of the kinds of uses of water in stream and 
out of stream are illustrated in Figure 16. 

Wildlife Habitat Protection 

Water projects affect wildlife populations by inun- 
dating habitat in the reservoir area and by changing 
downstream river habitat as a result of the changed 
flow regime. The downstream effect can be either 
positive or negative depending on whether the regu- 
lated flows tend to increase or decrease the amount 
and types of vegetation, but the effect of reservoir 
inundation is almost always detrimental to deer and 
other terrestrial animals. 

Wildlife habitat losses can sometimes be mitigated 
through special habitat management of lands near the 
project area. However, often there is no way to ade- 
quately compensate for lost habitat "on site". There- 
fore, it is necessary either to experience a loss or ac- 
cept some type of a trade off, such as development of 
equivalent habitat at some site remote from the project 
(off -site mitigation). 

Riparian areas are an important wildlife habitat, and 
a significant consideration in water project planning. 
Riparian habitat consists of native vegetation that oc- 
curs along permanent and intermittent watercourses, 
sloughs, floodplains, overflow channels, drainage 
ditches, and lakes. These areas are dependent upon 
periodic flooding for their existence. According to the 



California Fish and Wildlife Plan*, published in 1966, ' 
there were an estimated 350,000 acres of riparian 
habitat in California. This is less than one-half of one 
percent of the total land area in the State, but the im- 
portance of this habitat to wildlife far exceeds this 
proportion. 

Refuges and marsh lands arc also extremely impor- 
tant to the maintenance of many decreasing wildlife 
species in California. There are presently 20 waterfowl 
management refuges in California operated b\' state or 
federal agencies, and numerous wetland hunting areas 
managed by private organizations. Some of these 
refuges and marshlands are located in water deficient 
areas. For example, the Kern and Pixley National 
Wildlife Refuges are under-developed because of the 
low availability and high cost of water. 

In California, which is the main wintering ground 
for waterfowl in the Pacific Fly^vay, marsh habitat has 
dwindled from an estimated original 3.5 million acres 
to about 400,000 acres presently. The demand for 
waterfowl hunting, and nonhunting activities such as 
birdwatching, photography, and sightseeing, continues 
to increase. It is quite evident that the continual loss 
of living space for wildlife and the loss of ready access 
to public lands for hunting and other uses are major 
problems facing wildlife management agencies. 



Department of Fish and Game, 







76 



Water and people just naturally go togethe 



IN STREAM 
(non-consumptive) 



OUT OF STREAM 

(consumptive) 



recreation 



wildlife 




Figure 16. Water Use for Recreation, Fish and Wildlife 



Some areas of the State have marshland for which 
the available water is inadequate for effective manage- 
ment for wildlife. Future water resources planning in 
these areas should consider the possibility of providing 
additional water supplies for wildlife habitat enhance- 
ment on these marshlands. Unlike fish spawning hab- 
itat and deer habitat, marshland habitat can be created 
on almost any flat land within the Pacific Flyway if an 
adequate water supply is available. The water can even 
be of relatively poor quality. Therefore, the possible 
creation of additional marshland habitat should also be 
given consideration in future water resource manage- 
ment. 

Fishery Miiigation and Enhancement 

Maintenance and enhancement of fisheries in the 
streams below water projects is of primary importance 
as is mitigation for lost fishery habitat above the 
project. Several fishery mitigation and enhancement 
techniques have been developed. Some have proved ef- 
fective while others have not. Following is a brief 



description of some of the more noteworthy tech- 
niques that have been tried. 

Fish hatcheries are the oldest and perhaps most 
successful means of increasing the numbers of fish in a 
stream. Experience has shown that most hatcheries 
must undergo an extended shakedown period of opera- 
tion before they become highly productive. Among 
the more successful hatcheries are the State Water 
Project Hatchery at Oroville on the Feather River, 
the Nimbus Hatchery on the American River, and the 
Coleman Hatchery on Butte Creek, a tributary of the 
Sacramento River. It appears that the be.st way of 
maintaining adequate salmon and steelhead runs is to 
construct modern fish hatcheries either at project sites 
or at other suitable locations having water of proper 
quantity, temperature, and quality. 

Rearing ponds offer a significant potential for in- 
creasing production of silver salmon and steelhead at 
reasonable costs, provided volunteers can be found to 
operate and maintain them. Otherwise, their costs ap- 
proach that of a hatchery. Rearing ponds are basically 
areas into which hatchery reared fingerling salmonids 



77 




Steeihead fishing on the lower American River 



are introduced, fed, and protected until they are ready 
to migrate to the ocean. The Humboldt Bay Fish 
Action Council is operating a rearing pond on Cochran 
Creek, a tributary to Humboldt Bay. A run of silver 
salmon has been reestablished in Freshwater Creek by 
planting fish reared in these ponds. 

Artificial spawning channels, another method of 
fishery enhancement, are man-made water courses, 
usually paralleling a natural stream, designed specifi- 
cally to provide spawning habitat for fish. Although 
they do not provide a habitat suitable for juvenile 
steeihead or silver salmon whicli remain in fresh water 
for at least one year, their potential for enhancing king 
salmon runs is considered quite good. 

There are four spawning channels in California that 
raise king salmon. They are located on the Merced, 
Mokelumne, Sacramento, and Feather Rivers. The 
largest of these facilities is the |20 million spawning 
channel of the Bureau of Reclamation on the Sacra- 
mento River at Red Bluff, which was completed in 
1971 as part of the Tehama-Colusa Canal of the Cen- 
tral Valley Project. About 5,000 adult king salmon 
were used to produce the initial brood stock. The 
spawning channel is expected to reach its ultimate 



capacity of 40,000 adults annually by 1982. 

Applied Water Demands 

The 1972 and projected 1990 and 2020 applied 
water demands for recreation, fish, and \\ildlife are 
shown in Table 15. The values represent water used 
in fish and wildlife management areas and refuges, and 

Table 15. Applied Water Demands for Fish, Wildlife and 

Nonurban Area Recreation 

(1,000 acre-feet) 





1972 


Estin 


lated 


Hydroiogic area 


1990 


2020 




323 
24 

2 

6 
125 

6 
91 
43 
11 

4 
20 


359 
37 
3 
19 

170 
7 
94 
68 
11 
16 
22 


362 


San Francisco Bay 


46 








23 




174 


Delta-Central Sierra 


9 




95 


Tulare Basin. 


70 




13 




22 




26 






Total 


555 


806 


846 







78 



the out-of-stream use by recreationists in park areas 
removed from population centers. In total, the con- 
sumptive uses of water for these purposes amounts to 
only about two percent of the State's projected 2020 
total water demands. However, in the specific man- 



agement areas this water is essential to maintenance of 
the present fish and wildlife populations. Not included 
in the projections is the water required for fish or 
wildlife enhancement, and instream requirements for 
fish, wildlife, and recreation. 




Farm ditches can be good habitat for wildlife 



79 



Other Water Demand Considerations 

This section discusses those aspects of water man- 
agement for which demands cannot be evaluated 
quantitatively. This is not to say that these considera- 
tions (environmental enhancement, water quality con- 
trol, flood control, and navigation) are not impor- 
tant — for, indeed, they are important. However, their 
water use cannot be identified separately, does not 
involve consumption of water, and can be satisfied 
generally by water controlled, conserved, and put to 
use for the other beneficial purposes described earlier 
in this chapter. 

Environmental Enhancement 

Environment and environmental concern are at the 
forefront in the public conscience. While the word 
"environment" is all-embracing, being the total com- 
plex of social and cultural conditions affecting an in- 
dividual or community, its consideration in this chap- 
ter is limited to its relation to water and water 
management. 

In a large sense, water is environment. People have 
an inherent aflinity for nearness to water in pursuing 
their various outdoor recreational and aesthetic en- 
deavors. More than half of the total outdoors recrea- 
tion in California is water associated, and the majority 
of this recreation is enjoyed on or near manmade 
lakes (reservoirs) and streams whose flows are aug- 
mented by releases from upstream reservoirs. 

Experience has demonstrated that water projects, 
including both reservoirs and streams with augmented 
flows from reservoir releases, have provided and con- 
tinue to provide substantial environmental quality, 
even though the facilities were not necessarily planned 
with that purpose in mind. The reason is that environ- 
mental enjoyment is compatible with many other 
project purposes. 

Environmental quality at existing projects can be 
enhanced by changes in policy of use. For example, 
measures are being taken to open up terminal storage 
reservoirs for public use, a move made possible by 
increasing the degree of treatment of the water sup- 
plies before delivery to users. The East Bay Municipal 
Utility District has recently opened some of its water 
storage areas to at least limited public use and plans 
to open other areas in the future. Similar measures are 
underway by the Metropolitan Water District of 
Southern California. With sufficient public interest and 
support, other existing water resource reservoirs in 
the vicinity of major metropolitan areas could prob- 
ably also be opened up to full or limited public use. 

The reservoirs of the State Water Project in South- 
ern California have been planned to maximize public 
use. This provides fishing and recreational lakes near 
large population concentrations in areas that previ- 
ously were deficient in fresh water recreation oppor- 
tunity. Oroville and San Luis Reservoirs, primary 



storage facilities of the State Water Project in north- 
ern and central California, were planned and con- 
structed with recreation as a primary purpose. A 
number of fishing access areas have been provided 
along the California Aqueduct. The Peripheral Canal 
is being planned with environmental quality as an 
important purpose. 

Current trends in the public demand for stream 
parkways are demonstrated by the local development 
and preservation of the scenic attributes of Los Gatos 
Creek in Santa Clara County, Big Chico Creek in the 
city of Chico and the American River in Sacramento 
County. Such demands have also resulted in studies 
currently in progress to find ways to preserve the 
flood control integrity of the levee systems of the 
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and the Sacramento 
and American Rivers while preserving as much vege- 
tation as possible. 

Stream channels used for water supply conveyance, 
such as Sacramento River and the lower Feather and 
American Rivers, can be a scenic attraction, as wxll 
as providing benefits for fisheries and recreation. 

It has been necessary to revise the concept of pro- 
posed stream channelization flood control projects as 
the public appears to be willing to accept the conse- 
quence of occasional flooding to the alternative of 
altering the character of the natural waterway and 
removing the native vegetation. An example of this 
occurred in Ross Valley, Marin County, where op- 
position of the local residents to construction of a 
stream channelization project has delayed its com- 
pletion. 

The current controversy regarding New Melones 
Dam on the Stanislaus River is another interesting e.x- 
ample. Part of the river is recognized as an outstand- 
ing white water stream and New Melones Dam has 
been strongly oppposed because the reservoir would 
inundate the white water reach. Two major reser- 
voirs, Donnels, and Beardsley, and several smaller stor- 
age facilities provide summer flows in the white water 
reach, and are almost solely responsible for the ex- 
istence of those flows. 

The Eel River as a wild and scenic river contrasts 
sharply with the Stanislaus, in that there is essentially 
no storage on the Eel, other than Lake Pillsbury water 
which is diverted out of the Eel River water- 
shed. Accordingly, the Eel has extremely high flows 
in the winter and very low flows during the summer. 
A most vivid example of such streamflow extremes 
occurred on the Eel River in the late summer and 
early winter of 1964. The mean daily flow of the Eel 
River at Alderpoint was at an historical low of 10 
cubic feet per second in September of that year, but 
just three months later during the December 1964 
flood, the flow of the river at this location reached 
the record instantaneous peak of over 560,000 cfs with 
the mean daily flow at 434,000 cfs. While this is indeed 
an "extreme" among streamflow extremes, it does 



80 



serve to illustrate the wide fluctuations in seasonal 
flows in this essentially unregulated river. 

At just about the time the summer water-oriented 
recreational season commences, i.e., from the first week 
in June and through mid-September, a rapid recession 
in streamflow occurs for most of California's rivers. 
Potentially enjoyable in-stream recreational uses dur- 
ing the peak summer recreational season are out of 
phase with natural streamflow conditions for many 
leisure time pursuits as well as for the sustenance of 
fish. 

Prudent water resources management may prove it 
desirable in the future to enhance the human and 
natural environment associated with many rivers. This 
may require new or additional measures for attenua- 
tion of damaging high flows and for augmentation of 
inhibiting low flows or both. On the other hand, some 
streams may be best left alone, consistent with the 
well-being of the people residing in their localities. 

Wild and scenic rivers are considered of high nat- 
ural environmental value by many people. The value 
of wild and scenic rivers is clearly evident, as nearly 
everyone derives enjoyment from such streams, 
whether it be camping, boating, rafting, hiking, pic- 



nicking, or merely contemplating their beauty. 

The recent and current move toward wild and 
scenic rivers is manifested in enactment of the Cali- 
fornia Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, a number of law- 
suits, and an initiative to include the Stanislaus River 
within the wild and scenic rivers system. All of these 
actions have been undertaken on the basic premise that 
dams are destructive of the natural environment. Yet, 
the fact is that the "premium" wild and scenic rivers 
which are most popular are generally those with 
■reservoirs upstream, from which water releases create 
the premium conditions. 

The Tuolumne River is a good example of a prem- 
ium white water stream where upstream storage con- 
tributes substantially to the unique white water con- 
dition. In an appendix to the Resources Agency 
report, "California's Protected Waterways Plan", 
February 1971, the Sierra Club describes the 18-mile 
reach of the Tuolumne from Lumsden Campground 
to Wards Ferry Bridge as 

". . . having received the distinction of being 

considered the finest and longest stretch of white 

water in the State, and probably in the world." 

(pg- F-53) 




Percolation ponds olong Los Gotos Creek 



81 



Cherry Valley and O'Shaunessy Reservoirs and Lake 
Eleanor are located upstream of that reach and release 
summer flows to be re-regulated in downstream New- 
Don Pedro Reservoir. Without those facilities there 
would be few days of white water rafting on the 
Tuolumne River. 

Wafer Qualify Confrol 

Water quality and water quantity are inseparable, 
and together, determine the suitability of water for 
beneficial uses, the objective toward which water 
quality control or protection is directed. 

The intensified and competing uses of the Nation's 
water resources, both as a source of supply and as a 
conveyance system for disposal of wastes, has prop- 
erty caused the Federal Government and a number of 
state governments to identify existing and potential 
problems and to take action toward their correction 
or prevention. Water quality occupies center stage at 
the present time. The need for protection of the 
quality of water to enable full and proper use of the 
water resources is receiving more and more public 
attention. 



Goals, Policies, and Progrojiis. At the federal level 
PL 92-500, administered by the Environmental Pro- 
tection Agency, establishes national goals and policy, 
sets forth comprehensive programs for water pollution 
control, provides grants for construction of treatment 
works, sets standards and provides for enforcement. 

At the state level, polic\' and programs are promul- 
gated by the State Water Resources Control Board 
and implemented with the assistance of the regional 
water quality control boards. The basic water quality 
authority for the State Board is set forth in the Porter- 
Cologne Water Quality Control Act. The policy 
clearly indicates the need to relate water quality to 
water uses and to reflect all values in regulations de- 
signed to attain the highest reasonable quality. 

Federal and state goals and policies are discussed 
in more detail in Chapter V. 

Demands for Water Quality Control. The demand 
for water quality can be demonstrated by the extent 
of the State Water Resources Control Board's planning 
program for water quality control which is discussed 
in some detail in Chapter V. This discussion also cov- 
ers the major water quality problems in each of the 16 




Water quality protection through evaporation of toxic waste Dow Chemical Co. pfiofo 



82 



basins. Figure 4. Another indicadon of the demand is 
the amount of funds involved. PL 92-500 includes 
authorization for 18 billion dollars for the period 
July 1, 1972, to June 30, 1975 for treatment works for 
municipal and industrial waste waters. The State of 
California through two separate referendums in 1970 
and 1974 has made available |500 million from bonds 
under the Clean Water Grant Program. For the 
1974-75 fiscal year the State Water Resources Control 
Board's list of clean water grant priorities covers 
projects that total over $2 1/. billion. The cost sharing 
formula for these grants for control of pollution from 
municipal wastes is 75 percent federal, 12/2 percent 
state and 121/ percent local. 

Water supplies for improvement and maintenance 
of water quality are to be provided from the New 
Mclones Project for the lower Stanislaus River and 
San Joaquin River. These specific releases will be 
available for downstream use in the Delta. Decision 
1379 of the State Water Resources Control Board 
calls for certain water quality conditions in the Sacra- 
mento-San Joaquin Delta which require release of 
stored water during periods of natural low inflow to 
the Delta. These demands are reflected in computa- 
tions of the water supplies available for diversion from 
the Delta. 

Flood Confrol 

One purpose of this chapter is to translate trends 
discussed in the previous chapter into projected de- 
mands for water service. Quantified demands for fu- 
ture state and federal flood control services cannot 
easily be calculated. The basis for payment for these 
services is changing, leading to uncertainty as to avail- 
abilitv of funds for construction. In the past, the direct 
user of flood control service has not been required to 
pay a significant part of the construction cost since 
national and state polic\- provided flood control in the 
interest of tlie econoni>- and health and \\ clfare of the 
people. It can be expected that damages to future de- 
velopment will increase at a slower rate if tlie recent 
measures to keep damage-prone development out of 
floodplains continue and ordinances are rigorously 
enforced. 

Residual Dmiiages and Flood Categories. Residual 
flood damages are the damages that occur despite the 
extensive flood control measures that have been taken 
by federal, state, and local agencies. In the last 20 years, 
they have occurred in the State at an average yearly 
amount in excess of 150 million. 

Residual flood damages have been classified into six 
categories for this report as to the physical situation 
that propagates the occurrences. They are: (1) nar- 
row floodplains in mountains and foothills — particu- 
larly Northern California, the eastern side of the south- 
ern San Joacjuin Valley and the south coastal area; (2) 
areas "protected" by substandard levees — or receiving 



less than an acceptable standard of protection befitting 
the situation; (3) water-course encroachments down- 
stream from reservoirs which prohibit design opera- 
tion for flood control without damage occurring — ex- 
amples are Shasta Reservoir on Sacramento River, Suc- 
cess Reservoir on Tule River, and Prado Dam on 
Santa Ana River; (4) areas subject to flash floods such 
as the southern deserts; (5) small urban areas; and (6) 
foothill and mountain canyon alluvial cones below 
areas subject to wild fires and subsequent heavy rains 
— principally in the south coastal area. 

Major Problem Areas. It is beyond the intent of 
this report to discuss all the many flood problems fac- 
ing Californians. However, five problems have been 
included as representing such a potential magnitude of 
damages and/or threat to life that they must be con- 
sidered significant. 

The Santa Ana River Basin floodplain in Orange 
County has experienced rapid transformation from a 
predominant!)' agricultural area to a highly urbanized 
area. The flood problem to this area stems principally 
from category 2 above but also relates to a lesser de- 
gree to category 3 as indicated above. 

Western Riverside and San Bernardino counties, up- 
stream from Orange County, have undergone urban- 
ization at an unprecedented rate. This has caused an 
increase in rapidit\' and quantities of runoflF from the 
upper watershed and has thus decreased the degree of 
protection afforded by Prado Reservoir — the major 
component of the Orange County flood control works. 
Consequently, what was thought, in the 1930s, would 
provide protection from a flood reasonably expected 
to occur under anticipated future devleopment of the 
\\ atershed, now provides protection from the 70-year 
return frequency flood. With a flood of this magnitude 
project design releases will cause damages estimated 
at 115 million due to downstream encroachments. 
Based on today's hydrology criteria, the standard de- 
sign storm against which protection would be pro- 
vided for this area would cause about $3 billion dam- 
ages and 100,000 acres would be inundated. 

There is need for structural measures to provide a 
high standard of protection. Flood insurance can help 
defray personal losses in an interim period, but it 
would accomplish notiiing toward preventing physical 
damages. 

At the otiier end of the State in the North Coast 
lies the Eel River Basin. This is a rural area of 3,600 
square miles. The economy is based principally on 
logging, recreation and limited agriculture. Because 
of the steep topography and the nature of the area's 
economy, development is primarily in the narrow 
floodplains, which characteristically experience rapid 
rising, high velocity floods of major consequences 
every few \ ears. Such floods not onl\' exert a dispro- 
portionate impact on tiie economy but create a very 
real and high risk to human life. This type of conse- 
(juence relates to catcgor\- 1 areas. 



83 



Structures such as levees would be the only solution 
to allow maximum use of the floodplain. But levees 
alone cannot be justified under present economic de- 
sign criteria and state statutes prohibit flood control 
storage projects that could be coordinated with levee 
protection. The only choices available are seasonal oc- 
cupancy in some reaches, flood proofing where hy- 
draulic conditions permit in others, and continual use 
of the existing flood warning procedures throughout 
the river system. These would minimize but not elimi- 
nate damages. 

The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta has a flood prob- 
lem of categoiry 2. The problem stems from the area's 
genesis — an area of some 50 islands reclaiming an ag- 
gregated 700,000 acres of intensely farmed, rich, or- 
ganic peat soil. Much of the area lying at or belo^\■ 
sea level is protected by levees, many constructed with 
local material and on unstable foundations. A large 
percentage of these levees arc substandard. The islands 
are compacting, oxidizing, and eroding, causing in- 
creasing hydraulic pressure on the subsiding land. This 
coupled with wave wash when certain wind conditions 
prevail, especially during high tides, poses a constant 
flood threat to the Delta. 

Average annual flood damages total 14.5 million. To 
protect and preserve the Delta will require an im- 



proved levee system and the initiation of certain flood 
proofing techniques for an\- additional urban devel- 
opment. 

The Sacramento River is the principal stream in 
California, accounting for 30 percent of the runoff 
in the State. It is an alluvial stream with meandering 
characteristics. In the reaches between Shasta Dam 
and the start of the Sacramento River Project levees 
near Ord Ferry, significant bank undercutting and 
erosion are occurring. 

Besides destroying valuable land and causing other 
costly property losses, the erosion threatens to cut 
off oxbows in the river which disrupts the hydraulic 
energy balance. A chain reaction then occurs both up 
and down stream. Although not occurring in any one 
flood or any one year, this chain reaction will even- 
tually cause additional problems if left unattended. 

Local interests claim that the regulated flows from 
upstream reservoirs are responsible for more serious 
erosion problems than would occur under natural 
conditions and that the cost to provide suitable bank 
protection is beyond their capability. 

Another factor in recent years is the increased boat 
use by recreationists. The boats' wave wash adds to 
the bank sloughing problem. 




u conlinuing pfobi 



84 



The erosion and sloughing will require bank sta- 
bilization measures. These measures could conflict with 
the characteristics of the river that make it a scenic 
attraction, a haven for wildlife and a popular boating 
and recreation stream. 

The last problem to be discussed lies in Santa 
Clara County. It results from a phenomenal growth in 
the floodplain and a local self-help flood control pro- 
gram that lacked the financial capabilities to provide 
the high degree of protection urban development de- 
mands or zoning regulations to limit growth in 
threatened areas. 

Santa Clara County was a predominantly agricul- 
tural area in 1950. Its population doubled bet\veen 
1950 and 1960 and has nearly doubled again. The 
Santa Clara Valley floodplain is transversed by two 
principal water courses. Guadalupe River and Coyote 
Creek flow from south to north into the southern 
tip of San Francisco Bay. Should the Valley experience 
a standard project flood, an estimated SI 00 million in 
damages would result and about 38,000 acres would be 
inundated. The principal urban area — City of San Jose 
— would be particularly vulnerable to this flood. 

To provide protection against the 1 00-year flood 
which is compatible with the National Flood Insur- 
ance Act, 161 million would be required. It is esti- 
mated damages for this frequency flood would be 
about 150 million. 

The local people in attempting to alleviate the more 
frequent flood problems with project works have 
essentially painted themselves into a corner. By pro- 
viding limited protection with the higher and more 
frequent economic benefits, the area has been cut off 
from federal funds. Under federal criteria, an im- 
proxed level of protection could not be justified in the 
studies that have been completed. Yet flood protection 
is needed now. At the present tax rate, on a pay-as- 
you-go basis, it w ill require 40 more years to complete 
the flood control works to provide 100 year flood 
protection. 

In Chapter V^ present ongoing activities and future 
flood control activities are considered in regard to 
satisfying unmet needs such as the problems just dis- 
cussed. 

Energy Generation 

An earlier section in this chapter, titled "Water for 
Power", discussed the demands for consumptive use of 
water for cooling thermal power plants. This section 
on energy discusses other nonconsumptive aspects of 
water use and energy generation. 

Hydroelectric Energy. Conventional hydroelectric 
energy developments use the force of falling water 
to spin turbines and generators to produce electric 
energy. Pumped storage type hydroelectric develop- 
ments use a power plant situated between an upper 




Figure 17. Pumped Storage Sites Under Consideration 



85 




IMPEfVIAL 
• VALLEY 



Figure 18. Geothermal Resource Areas 



and a lower reservoir. A pump-turbine turns a gen- 
erator to generate electricit)' during daily peak periods 
of demand as water is released from the upper reser\oir 
to the lower reservoir. The pump turbine is then re- 
versed for pumping water back to the upper reservoir, 
using energy from thermal power plants when it is 
not needed by consumers. The addition of pumped 
storage to a conventional hydroelectric development 
creates the ability to produce more power on peak 
when it is most valuable. 

In March 1974. the Department of Water Re- 
sources published Bulletin No. 194, a report of "Hy- 
droelectric Energy Potential in California". This re- 
port presented an inventory of existing and potential 
hydroelectric developments in California. Its purpose 
was to provide an overview of hydroelectric energy 
potential remaining in California and to identify those 
developments where additional analysis may be war- 
ranted. The report indicates that prompt action could 
increase the hydroelectric energy output of California 
about 30 percent by 1990. An additional significant 
amount of potential exists but its development may 
never be realized because of major engineering prob- 
lems, wild and scenic river systems, and adverse effects 
on fisheries. Even if this 30 percent expansion is 
achieved most of the expected future growth in elec- 
trical energy requirements will have to be met by 
other sources, such as nuclear and fossil fueled steam 
plants. Bulletin Xo. 194 did not consider pumped 
storage developments. 

Thermal plants supply low-cost base load energy, 
but they are not well suited to meeting peaking re- 
quirements. With the future emphasis on nuclear 
po\\ er plants and their associated lower fuel costs, the 
capability of meeting the daily peak power demands 
from hydroelectric installations will tend to favor 
pumped storage developments. A pumped storage in- 
stallation will increase the installed capacity of an 
electrical supply system, and its quick response and 
generally superior operating flexibilit\- make it ideal 
for operation during peak load periods and for system 
reserve service. Some of the more notable sites cur- 
rently under consideration for pumped storage in- 
stallations are shown on Figure 17. 

An important factor for single-purpose pumped 
storage projects is their overall energ\- loss. Losses of 
energy due to friction inevitably occur during both 
the pumping and generating operations. The result is 
thiit pumped storage projects consume more energy 
during off-peak periods than they generate on-peak, 
and therefore do not add energy to an electrical sys- 
tem. Their primar\- value is the provision of addi- 
tional generating capacity and energy to a system dur- 
ing periods of peak demand. If the current delays in 
developing large nuclear power plants are overcome 
and these nuclear power plants begin to predominate 
the overall electric power .system, there will probably 
follow a trend towards pumped storage developments 



86 



to meet peaking requirements. 

While the generation of hydroelectric energy does 
not consume water except for associated reservoir 
evaporation, use of available water resources to gen- 
erate smog-free electrical energy will continue to be 
an important function of water projects. The demand 
for energy could have significant inrtuence on which 
projects are built and when they are built. 

Geothermal Energy. Geothermal resources are de- 
fined as the natural heat of the earth and all minerals 
and solutions obtained from naturally heated fluids, 
(brines, associated gases, and steam) found beneath 
the surface of the earth. Oil, hydrocarbon gas, and 
other hydrocarbon substances are excluded from this 
definition. Geothermal energy occurs in three prin- 
cipal forms: (1) superheated steam, (2) superheated 
water, and (3) rock heat at depth. 

Geothermal energy has been used to generate elec- 
tricity for many years. In California, three locations 
shown on Figure 18 have been identified as either 
proven or potential geothermal power sites. They are 
The Geysers, near Cloverdale in Sonoma County; the 
Mono Lake area in Mono County; and the southern 
Imperial Valley. 



At The Geysers, superheated steam has been pro- 
duced from wells to generate electricity commercially 
since 1960. From the first unit, with a capacity of 
12,500 kilowatts (KW), energy production has been 
progressively increased to the present capacity of 
396,000 KW. Current plans are to install additional 
equipment to increase the capacity by 110,000 KW 
each year until the field reaches an estimated maximum 
capacity of over one million KW. This would be the 
largest geothermal power development in the world. 

The Mono Lake area is recognized as a geothermal 
area from which superheated water may be produced 
at some future date. The wells most recently drilled 
in this area yielded water that was too cool for effec- 
tive power development and were abandoned. How- 
ever, the U. S. Geological Survey is continuing to 
conduct field studies in the area. 

Attempts to develop geothermal resources in the 
Imperial Valley began in the mid-1920s. Recently, 
considerable new interest has been aroused by pre- 
liminary assessments of the overall availability of geo- 
thermal resources in the Valley. Various private and 
public entities are investigating the area. The Magma 
Power Company, the Magma Energy Company, the 




The Geysers — el 



ty from geothe 



87 



San Diego Gas and Electric Company, Southern 
California Edison, Southern Pacific Land Company, 
Phillips Petroleum Company, and the Getty Oil Com- 
pany have ongoing programs to explore the area and 
develop techniques for making use of its geothermal 
resources. 

Public entities active in the development of geo- 
thermal resources including the U. S. Bureau of Recla- 
mation, the federal Office of Water Research and 
Technology which includes the former Office of 
Saline Water, the U. S. Geological Survey, the Law- 
rence Laboratory of the Atomic Energy Commission 
at Livermore, the University' of California, and the 
California Department of Water Resources. 

The intensive ongoing private and public efforts in 
California will eventually provide enough knowledge 
to enable the Department of Water Resources to as- 
sess the overall potential of geothermal resources and 
to predict its impact on future water development. 

Navigafion 

Navigation can exert specific demands for water 
in order to maintain suitable depths for safe passage. 
Due to the shallow draft of most boats used for recrea- 
tion on the State's inland waters, water depth has 
rarely been identified as a recreation boating problem. 
Therefore, this discussion is limited to fresh water 
commercial navigation. 

The only significant commercial navigation on fresh 
water within the State extends from San Francisco 
Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta upstream 
to the Port of Stockton via the Stockton Deep Water 
Channel, to the Port of Sacramento via the Sacramento 
Deep Water Channel, and upstream on the Sacramento 
River to Colusa. 

Most of the fresh water channels used for commer- 
cial navigation are within the zone of tidal influence 
so that minimum depths do not depend entirely upon 
the rates of flow. The exception is the reach of the 
Sacramento River from Sacramento to Colusa. Under 
the Sacramento River Shallow Draft Channel Project 
Act, a 145 mile channel, up to 200 feet wide, was ex- 
cavated from Suisun Bay to Colusa. Downstream from 
Sacramento, the minimum depth of channel is 10 feet; 
upstream the minimum depth is 6 feet. 

Ocean going vessels now reach the Port of Sacra- 
mento through the deep w ater channel, and it is also 
used by barges that come as far as Sacramento. The 
principal commercial barge traffic on the Sacramento 
River involves delivery of petroleum products and 
rock for bank protection and export of rice and other 
grains. Total annual grain exports by barge arc on the 
order of 50,000 tons, a small proportion of the total 
quantity of farm products shipped from the Sacra- 
mento Valley. 

Very low river flows can result in below-minimum 
depths within the Sacramento River Shallow Draft 



Channel Project. The authorizing document for Shasta 
Dam provided for minimum releases of 5,000 cubic 
feet per second to maintain navigation depth. Re- 
leases for other Central Valley Project purposes gen- 
erally exceed the minimum requirement, but releases 
specifically for navigation are occasionally needed. 

There is concern that the planned deepening of the 
John F. Baldwin and Stockton ship channels from the 
Golden Gate into Suisun Bay and then on into Stock- 
ton may increase the amount of fresh water outflow 
from the Delta needed for salinity control. Results to 
date from available model tests by the U. S. Army 
Corps of Engineers on this eff^ect of deepening are 
inconclusive. 

Summary of Water Demands 

Table 16 summarizes by major hydrologic areas of 
the State, 1972 and projected 1990 and 2020 applied 
water demands under four levels of alternative future 
development described in Chapter IIL As a review, 
the following tabulation lists the variables used for 
each alternative future. Other factors afl'ecting pro- 
jections of future growth are not shown in the tabu- 
lation but were discussed in Chapter IIL 





Alternative Future 


Variable 


1 


H 


lU 


IV 


Population Growth 

Fertility series' 


c 

150,000 

D 

High 
Modified 

High 
H 


D 
150,000 

D 

Low 

Modified 

High 
M 


D 

100,000 

D 
Low 
1968 

Low 

H 


E 



Jgricullural Production 
National population 


E 
Low 




Modified 


Pourr Plant Cooling 

Energy demand* -- 

Inland plants' 


Low 







Notes: ' Average number of children born per woman of child-bearing age. 

' Low estimate based on pre-1970 data; high estimate reflects 1972-74 

' 1968 estimates used in Bulletin No. 160-70. 

* High estimate based on California Public Utilities Commission projection 

and low estimate on Rand Corporation Case 3. 
' Portion of new thermal plants requiring fresh cooling water. 

Table 16 includes only those demands for which 
quantitative determinations could be made, including 
urban, agricultural, power plant cooling, and recrea- 
tion, fish, and wildlife. It will be noted that only one 
future projection for recreation, fish and w ildlife w ater 
demand is show n in the table. The reason, as explained 
at the outset of Chapter III, is that insufficient knowl- 
edge is available now to discuss variations in demand. 

As defined earlier in the chapter, applied water de- 
mands are the quantities required to be delivered to 
the point of use, such as a municipal system, factory, 
or farm headgate. Net water demands are used in the 
next chapter of this bulletin to evaluate the water de- 
mand-w ater suppl\- relationship. Net demand is deter- 
mined for each stud\- area, after accounting for the 



88 



Table 16. 1972 and Projected Applied Water Demands by Alternative Futures 
(1,000 acre-feet) 





Urban 


Agricultural 


Power pla 


nt cooling 


Fish, 
wildlife 

r/cl- 


Totals 


Hydrologic study area 


I 


II 


III 


IV 


I 


II 


III 


IV 


I 


II 


III 


IV 


I 


II 


III 


IV 


North Coajial 

1972 

1990 


93 
104 
126 

990 
1.480 
2.240 

181 

308 
569 

2,370 
3.130 
4.830 

470 

700 

1.040 

173 
251 

537 

192 
295 

548 

363 
493 
798 

23 
40 
68 

89 
154 

387 

99 
148 

275 

5.040 
7.100 
11.400 


93 
102 
120 

990 
1.460 
2.070 

181 

300 
516 

2.370 
3,050 
4.360 

470 
687 
968 

173 
247 
490 

192 

287 
485 

363 
479 
718 

23 
40 
59 

89 
139 
326 

99 
142 
246 

5,040 
6,930 
10,400 


93 
101 
114 

990 
1,430 
1,940 

181 
289 
473 

2,370 
2,980 
4,120 

470 
674 
908 

173 
239 
451 

192 
279 
451 

363 
471 
679 

23 
39 
54 

89 
136 
306 

99 
139 

230 

5,040 
6,770 
9.730 


93 
97 
100 

990 
1.340 
1.570 

181 

252 
318 

2.370 
2,670 
2,980 

470 
621 

702 

173 
219 
323 

192 
249 

307 

363 
441 

530 

23 
32 
35 

89 
108 
143 

99 
126 
173 

5.040 
6.160 
7.170 


710 
720 
740 

250 
290 
330 

1.030 
1.240 
1.310 

920 
730 
530 

6.020 
7.940 
9.080 

2,470 
3,220 
3,700 

5,450 
6,620 
7,320 

10,890 
13.070 
14.870 

420 
430 
430 

310 
300 
250 

3.220 
3,320 
3,320 

31,700 
37,900 
41,900 


710 
720 
740 

250 
280 
320 

1.030 
1,200 
1.270 

920 
720 
510 

6.020 
7,540 
8,350 

2.470 
3.010 
3.540 

5.450 
6.390 
6,600 

10,890 
12,510 
13,720 

420 
430 
430 

310 
300 
250 

3.220 
3.320 
3.320 

31.700 
36.400 
39.000 


710 
710 
730 

250 
290 
310 

1.030 
1.190 
1.240 

920 
720 
520 

6.020 
7,050 
7,540 

2.470 
2.810 
3.250 

5,450 
6.040 
6,180 

10,890 
11.750 
12.360 

420 
430 
430 

310 
300 
250 

3,220 
3,320 
3.320 

31.700 
34.600 
36.100 


710 
710 
730 

250 
280 
280 

1.030 
1.200 
1.220 

920 
750 
520 

6.020 
6.960 
7.410 

2.470 
2.710 
3.020 

5,450 
5,750 
5,750 

10,890 
11.580 
11.750 

420 
400 
400 

310 
300 
250 

3,220 
3.320 
3.320 

31.700 
34,000 
34,600 


18 
30 
80 


50 
140 

20 
100 
150 





140 


70 
240 


10 
100 


130 
250 

38 

390 

1,100 


18 
30 
40 



60 

20 
75 
100 



70 


35 
130 


10 
50 


70 
130 

38 
220 
580 


18 

30 




50 

20 
50 
110 






20 
60 


10 



40 
130 

38 
150 
350 


18 
30 






20 
40 
70 






20 
60 






40 
80 

38 
130 
210 


323 
359 
362 

24 
37 
46 

2 
3 
6 

6 
19 

23 

125 
170 
174 

6 
7 
9 

91 
94 
95 

43 

68 
70 

11 
11 
13 

4 

16 

22 

20 
22 
26 

655 
806 
846 


1.120 
1.180 
1,230 

1,260 
1.810 
2.620 

1.210 
1.550 
1.890 

3.320 
3.900 
5.470 

6.610 
8,860 
10,400 

2,670 
3,570 
4,400 

5,730 
7,010 
8,100 

11.300 
13.700 
16.000 

454 
479 
507 

399 
478 
762 

3.340 
3.620 
3.880 

37.400 
46.200 
55.300 


1.120 
1.180 
1.220 

1,260 
1,770 
2,440 

1,210 
1,500 
1,790 

3.320 
3.820 
4.940 

6.610 
8.400 
9,550 

2,670 
3.340 
4.140 

5,730 
6.770 
7.250 

11.300 
13.100 
14.600 

454 

479 
498 

399 
463 
651 

3.340 
3.560 
3.730 

37.400 
44,400 
50,800 


1,120 
1.170 
I.2I0 

1.260 
1.750 
2.300 

1.210 
1,480 
1,720 

3.320 
3.750 
4,660 

6.610 
7.900 
8.670 

2.670 
3.110 
3,820 

5.730 
6,410 
6.730 

11.300 
12.300 
13.200 

454 

478 
493 

399 
460 
581 

3.340 
3.530 
3.710 

37,400 
42.400 
47.000 


1.120 


2020 

San Francisco Bay 

1972 -- 


1.190 
1.260 


1990 -- -. 


1 660 


2020 


1,890 


Central Coaila! 

1972 

1990 


1,210 
1.460 


2020 

South Coastal 

1972 


1.540 
3.320 


1990 


3,470 


2020 


3,520 


Sacramento Basin 
1972 -- 


6,610 


1990 


7,750 


2020 -. 


8,290 


Delta-Central Sierra 
1972 


2.670 


1990 -- 


2.970 


2020 


3.420 


San Joaquin Basin 
1972 


5,730 


1990 


6,090 




6,150 


Tulare Basin 

1972 


11,300 


1990 


12,100 


2020 


12,400 


North Lahontan 

1972 


454 


1990 


441 


2020 


444 


South Lahontan 
1972 -- 


399 


1990 


422 


2020 


418 


Colorado Desert 
1972 --- 


3,340 


1990 


3,510 


2020 


3.600 


1972 


37.400 


1990 


41.100 


2020 


42.900 







internal reuse of water and the losses associated with 
conveying water from the source to the user. As an 
example of reuse, return flows or drainage from a farm 
field may be used directly in an adjacent field or may 
be returned to the water supply distribution system 
for reuse in a more distant field. Other examples in- 
due percolation of excess applied irrigation water to 
ground water storage where it may be recovered by 
pumping, and percolation or runoff from urban yard 
watering which may also be recoverable. Reuse of mu- 



nicipal and industrial applied water occurs where sew- 
erage systems discharge to surface or underground 
fresh water bodies \\ hich also serve as supply sources. 
Not all surplus surface and percolating water supplies 
are susceptible to recovery. For example, water dis- 
charging to the ocean or percolating to saline water 
bodies is lost to the freshwater suppl>-. Return flows 
leaving the study area arc also lost for reuse by that 
area but may serve as a supply to another downstream 
area. 



89 



Table 17. 1972 and Projected Net Water Demands by Alternative Futures 
(1,000 acre-feet) 





Present 
1972 




Alternative 


1990 future 






Alternative 


2020 future 




Hydrologic study area 


I 


11 


III 


IV 


I 


II 


III 


IV 




940 
1,270 

950 
3,030 
5,780 
2,270 
4,650 
7,300 

430 

280 
4,070 


990 
1,820 
1,240 
3,770 
7,610 
3.110 
5,510 
9,200 
450 
330 
4,240 


990 
1,780 
1,200 
3,700 
7,200 
2,900 
5,350 
8,800 
450 
330 
4,180 


980 
1,760 
1.180 
3,640 
6,800 
2,700 
5,120 
8,290 
450 
320 
4,150 


980 
1,660 
1,150 
3,390 
6,630 
2.580 
4,960 
8,180 
420 
300 
4,140 


1,040 
2,630 
1,560 
5,200 
9,030 
3,860 
6,280 
11,000 
480 
510 
4,430 


1,030 
2,450 
1,480 
4,720 
8,240 
3,630 
5.710 
10,110 
470 
430 
4,300 


1,010 
2,310 
1,410 
4.480 
7,530 
3,360 
5,320 
9,160 
470 
370 
4.290 


1,000 


San Francisco Bay 


1,900 
1,250 




3.460 




7,080 


Delta-Central Sierra . 


3,010 




5.030 


Tulare Basin 


8,700 


North Lahontan 


420 




290 




4,210 








31,000 


38,300 


36,900 


35,400 


34,400 


46.000 


42,600 


39,700 


36,400 







Hydrologic study area demands met by imports 
from distant sources were increased to account for 
the losses occurring en route to the hydrologic study 
area and therefore represent the total water demand 
at the primary source, that is, at the initial diversion 
point in the case of a surface water supply project. 
This is in contrast with Bulletin No. 160-70 where 



import suppl\' requirements were specified at the hy- 
drologic study area without inclusion of conveyance' 
losses occurring outside the area. 

The summary of net water demands by hydrologic 
study area are shown for each alternative future in 
Table 17. 



90 



CHAPTER V 

SOURCES OF WATER AND WATER MANAGEMENT 



California's water requirements are being met in the 
traditional manner, primarily by regulation of surface 
water and by drawing on w ater in underground stor- 
age. However, most of the best damsites have been 
developed or are under contention for competing uses 
or environmental considerations. Similarly, ground 
water use now exceeds the natural replenishment capa- 
bility of the basins in many areas. 

Recent developments in technology give promise of 
a number of potential water sources which may serve 
as supplements to conventional water supplies. Future 
water management activities will include the integra- 
tion of these water sources into the overall water 
supply system. 

This chapter discusses the sources of water which 
at this time appear to offer the greatest potential for 
meeting the State's water demands in the future. In 
addition to the traditional surface conservation and 
ground water pumping methods, these include waste 
water reclamation, desalination, geothermal develop- 
ment, weather modification, more efficient use of 
water and water management practices. 

Surface Water Regulation 

About 60 percent of California's present water sup- 
ply is derived from regulation and diversions of the 
natural runoff from surface streams. Natural flows in 
streams vary from as little as zero in late summer to 
many thousands of cubic feet per second during win- 
ter or spring floods. A wide variation in the total 
quantity of annual runoff among wet, normal, and dry 
years can also be expected. Total runoff during a wet 
year may be more than 10 times the quantity of runoff 
in a dry year. However, relatively uniform and firm 
water supplies can be obtained from such streams 
through regulation in reservoirs. 

An extensive network of local, state, and federal 
storage reservoirs provides a significant degree of con- 
trol of the runoff of most streams in the more highly 
developed areas of the State. At present there are 1,090 
reservoirs in California operated by state and local 
agencies and by individuals which are under state 
jurisdiction as to safety and 150 federal reservoirs. Of 
these 1,240 reservoirs, 141 have storage capacity be- 
tween 10,000 and 100,000 acre-feet, 45 between 100,- 
000 and 1,000,000 acre-feet, and 10 have capacity 
greater than 1,000,000, acre-feet. Most of the larger 
projects are located on streams in the Central Valley. 
Major surface water supply and conveyance facilities 
are shown on Figure 19. Total storage capacity in Cali- 
fornia is about 39,000,000 acre-feet. 



Recenf Wafer Projecfs 

Completion of construction of the initial phase of 
the California State Water Project stands out as the 
State's most significant event in water resource devel- 
opment during the past four years. In 1973 one mil- 
lion acre-feet were delivered to water supply con- 
tractors through State Water Project facilities and the 
contractors have ordered deliveries of about 1.5 mil- 
lion acre-feet in 1974. Other major events in water 
resource development which have occurred in Cali- 
fornia since publication of Bulletin 160-70 are described 
below. 

Major developments by local water agencies include 
construction of additional storage, conveyance and 
treatment facilities by the Metropolitan Water Dis- 
trict of Southern California. Completed works include 
(1) portions of the tunnel and pipeline system which 
make up the Foothill Feeder, (2) Joseph Jenson Fil- 
tration Plant, (3) second Lower Feeder, (4) Sepul- 
veda Feeder, (5) Lake Skinner (formerly Auld Val- 
ley) and (6) a portion of San Diego Pipeline No. 4. 
The District is currently administering construction 
contracts for additional distribution and treatment 
facilities amounting to almost $100 million. 

Kern County Water Agency has initiated construc- 
tion of the Cross Valley Canal to transfer water from 
the California Aqueduct of the State Water Project 
to the vicinity of Bakersfield. Other water agencies in 
the western San Joaquin Valley have been expanding 
distribution works in State Water Project and Central 
Valley Project service nrc;is. 




Rollins Dam on Be 



91 




San Diego 







Santa Barbara 






Legend 

LOCAL DEVELOPMENT 
STATE WATER PROJECT 
FEDERAL DEVELOPMENT 



+ 



Ocean 



MAJOR SURFACE WATER SUPPLY 

and 

CONVEYANCE FACILITIES 

1974 



Figure 19. Major Surface Wafer Supply and Conveyance Facilities, 1974 



93 



Table 18. Projects Completed by locol Agencies 1971-1974 



Avenal Community Services District* 

Coalinga, City of* 

Crestline-Lake Arrowhead Water Agency 

Dudley Ridge Water District 

Empire Westside Irrigation District 

Hacienda Water District - 

Member Units of Kern County Water Agency, 
I^s Angeles Department of Water and Power.. 



Po«ay .Ntunicipal Water District* 



Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District. 
Diego County Water Authority 



San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water Dis 
Tulare Lake Basin Water Storage Distri. 



: and/or Project Facilitie 



Distribution System 
Distribution System 
Pumping Plants, Pipeli 
Distribution System 
Distribution System 
Distribution System 
Distribution Systi 
Water Wells in S: 



Fernando Valley 
pelin. 



iviiinage lanKs & Associated I 
Bouquet Canyon Emergency Stc 
South Haiwee Reservoir Bypass 
Poway Dam and Reservoir 



Distribution Systen: 
Pipeline Ht 
Pomerado Pipeline 
Devil Canyon-Azus, 
Distribution Systen 



.\lun. Wate 
Mun. Wate 
Mun. Wate 
Irr. Water 
Irr. Water 
Irr. Water 



Mun. Water 
Mun. Water 
Mun. Water 



enhancemt 
.Mun. Water 
Mun. Water 
Mun. Water 
Mun. Water 



Supply 
Supply 
Supply 
upply 
upply 
upply 
upply 
Supply 
Supply 
r Supply 
r Supply 
age. Re- 
and Fish 

r Supply 
Supply 
Supply 
Supply 



rriga 



Hydrologic 
Study Are: 



South Laho 
Tulare Basi 
Tulare Basi 



South Coastal 



South Coastal 
South Coastal 



South Coastal 
Tulare Basin 



* These Projects received partial Davis-Grunsky financing. 

t Northern portion being constructed by Metropolitan Water Dis 



Capital 
Cost 



1,100,000 

5,146,000 

4,300,000 

652,900 

48,100 

98,700 

76,196.400 

450,000 

5,000,000 

500.000 

2.300,000 

3,733.100 



11.000,000 
33,400.000 

1,800.000 
17.100,000 

2,221.000 



ct of Southern California. 



Construction is underw a\' on Indian Valley Dam and 
Reservoir on North Fork Cache Creek by the Yolo 
County Flood Control and Water Conservation Dis- 
trict. The project is scheduled for completion late in 

1974. 




Figure 20. 



Projects Completed Under the Davis-Grunsky Act 
1971-1974 



Figure 20 shows the projects completed b\- local 
agencies since the publication of Bulletin 160-70 
which were financed under the Davis-Grunsk\- Act*. 
Of the 29 projects shown, eight were partially fi- 
nanced 1)\- grants for the recreation and fish enhance- 
ment features of the projects. The remaining 21 were 
financed by construction loans. 

Table 18 lists additional major projects completed 
by local agencies since the publication of Bulletin 
160-70. Most of these projects were constructed to 
utilize water from the State Water Project. 

The Biiii'im of Rcchviiation has four projects under- 
way. Tehama-Colusa Canal has been completed from 
the Red BluflF Diversion Dam to Stony Creek. Folsom- 
South Canal has been completed from Lake Nimbus 
to Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Plant. San Luis Drain 
has been completed for approximately 84 miles of the 
total 188-milc conduit. 

Under a federal court ruling the Bureau of Recla- 
mation can proceed with construction of .\uburn 
Dam on the American River for 180 days from April 
I."?, 1974. Construction is enjoined thereafter, how- 
ever, pending approval of an amended environmental 
impact statement. Work has been completed on the 
.•\uburn-Foresthill Bridge. No construction is under- 
\\a>' on the authorized San Felipe Division of the 
Central V'allev Project. 

Projects by the Corps of Engineers w hich have ad- 
vanced in the last few years include completion of 
.Martis Creek Dam in the Truckee River Basin and 
iMojave Dam on the iMojave River near Victorvillc. 
Both projects provide flood control, recreation and 
some water supply. 

* Sections 12880 throviKlr 1289.1, California W.iHr Ccxli-. 



94 



The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to intervene 
in the controversy over construction of New Melones 
Dam on the Stanislaus River. It has thus left standing 
a lower court ruling tliat tlie project, wliich is under 
construction, meets the requirements of the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969. 

Highway relocation and preconstruction work has 
progressed at the Warm Springs Dam and Reservoir 
site in the Russian River Basin. A contract for con- 
struction of Warm Springs Dam, however, is cur- 
rently held up as the result of litigation in the federal 
court system between the Corps of Engineers and 
plaintiffs who represent organizations opposed to the 
project. 

Construction was started on Buchanan Dam on 
Chowchilia River and Hidden Dam on Fresno River 
in 1971; both projects are for water supply, flood 
control, recreation, and fish and wildlife enhancement 
purposes. The main dam contracts were awarded the 
following year, and project completions, including 
future downstream channel improvement and recre- 
ation facilities, are scheduled for 1976. 

The locations of these major projects, both existing 
and under construction, are shown on Plate 1 (inside 
back cover). 

Central Valley Area Wafer Projects 

Some of the remaining potential water projects in 
the Central Valley are described in the following 
paragraphs. iMan\' of the projects are alternatives to 
each other so not ail of them would be constructed. 
It should be recognized that estimates of amount of 
v\ater suppl\' from most of tlic projects arc affected 
by criteria regarding ( 1 ) releases to meet Delta out- 
flow requirements, prior downstream water rights, and 
navigation flow requirements (2) streamflow releases 
for fish preservation or enhancement, (3) reservoir 
space to be reserved for flood control, (4) maintenance 
of reservoir storage le\els for recreation, and (5) re- 
leases for generation of h\droclectric power. 

The Cottonwood Creek Project was authorized by 
the Federal Government in 1970 for construction and 
operation by the Corps of Engineers. Thus far, funds 
have not been provided for detailed planning and de- 
sign. This project consists of Dutch Gulch Reservoir 
at a capacity of 1,100,000 acre-feet and Tehama Reser- 
voir at a capacity of 900,000 acre-feet. Dutch Gulch 
damsite is located on the mainstem of Cottonwood 
Creek below its junction with the middle fork. Tehama 
damsite is located on the South P'ork of Cottonwood 
Creek. Total runoff at the two damsitcs averages 522,- 
000 acre-feet per year. The Interim Sur\ey Report for 
Cottonw ood Creek issued by the Corps of Engineers 
indicates that the project would have multiple pur- 
poses which include development of new water sup- 
plies totaling 275,000 acre-feet per year. Other project 
purposes would be flood control, recreation, and fish 
enhancement. 



iMillville Project on South Cow Creek and Wing 
Project on Inks Creek are currently under study by 
the Corps of Engineers. These multiple purpose reser- 
voirs could provide a combined yield of about 40,000 
acre-feet per year of new water supplies and would 
aid in reducing flood peaks on the Sacramento River. 

Schoenfield Reservoir on Red Bank Creek and Gal- 
latin Reservoir on Elder Creek are under study by the 
Department of Water Resources. The two multiple 
purpose reservoirs could provide a total of about 70,- 
000 acre-feet per year of new water supplies. 

The Glenn Reservoir-Sacramento River Diversion 
Plan is presently under preliminary study by the De- 
partment of Water Resources. This project would 
consist of Newville and Rancheria Reservoirs on Stony 
Creek, a gravity diversion from Thomes Creek into 
Newville Reservoir and a 5,000 cfs conduit-pumping 
SN'stem to transport winter flows from the Sacramento 
River to the reservoir and diversion system would 
provide a project with a yield capability of about 
900,000 acre-feet per year if operated in conjunction 
with the State Water Project. This multiple purpose 
development could also include a large hydroelectric 
pumped-storage development betw een Newville Reser- 
voir and Black Butte Reservoir. 

Marysville Project on the Yuba River was author- 
ized by Congress in 1966. Funds for construction have 
not been provided although Congress has appropriated 
some monies for post authorization studies. This proj- 
ect would consist of a 1,000,000 acre-foot Marysville 
Reservoir and a 1 50-megawatt pow er plant. The Yuba 
River, a major tributary of the Feather River, has a 
runoff approaching two million acre-feet per year. It 
is partially controlled at present by New Bullards Bar 
Reservoir on the north fork plus several other rela- 
tively small reservoirs. The project planned at the 
Marysville site would provide full regulation of the 
river near its mouth. Its purposes include flood con- 
trol, hydroelectric power, recreation, and water sup- 
pl>-. New water yield is estimated to be 1 50,000 acre- 
feet per year if operated as part of the Central Valley 
Project. 

Los Banos Reservoir would provide additional off- 
stream storage capacity in the western San Joaquin 
\\ille\' to supplement that of the existing San Luis 
Reservoir. The reservoir site on Los Banos Creek has 
potential storage capacity in excess of 3 million acre- 
feet. It would be filled with water from the Sacra- 
mento River Delta during winter and spring seasons. 
Water would be transported to O'Neill Forebay 
through the California Aqueduct and pumped into 
Los Banos Reservoir. If sized with active storage capa- 
city of 2 million acre-feet, Los Banos Reservoir would 
add a firm new yield of about 200,000 acre-feet per 
year to the State Water Project. Since Los Banos 
Reservoir would be near, but higher in elevation than 
both San Luis Reservoir and Los Banos Creek De- 



95 



tention Reservoir, it has a potential for pumped stor- 
age power generation if operated in combination with 
either of the other two reservoirs. 

The Cosumnes River Division of the Central Val- 
ley Project would regulate the Cosumnes River to 
provide a new water supply. A development under 
consideration by the Bureau of Reclamation includes 
Nashville Reservoir, with a capacity of 900,000 acre- 
feet, on the lower main stream and Pi Pi Reservoir, 
with a capacity of 70,000 acre-feet, on the middle 
fork, and Aukum Reservoir, with a capacity of 120,- 
000 acre-feet, on the south fork. The federal feasi- 
bility report on the Cosumnes River Division indicates 
that it would have multiple accomplishments which 
include provision of flood control, recreation, fish 
enhancement, and water yield of 145,000 acre-feet 
per year. The project has not been authorized for 
construction. 

The East Side Division of the Central Valley Proj- 
ect, as planned by the Bureau of Reclamation, would 
be primarily an aqueduct system extending from the 
Delta to the Kern River along the east side of the San 
Joaquin Valley. Its maximum capacity where it would 
have joint use with the Folsom South service area 
would be 7,000 cubic feet per second. Water supply 
for the East Side Division would be provided from 
Central Valley Project supplies allocated for that pur- 
pose and from yield of offstream storage reservoirs at 
the Yokohl and Hungry Hollow sites in Tulare 
County. Federal plans call for initial delivery capabil- 
ity' of 1,500,000 acre-feet per year and ultimate de- 
livery capability of up to 4,000,000 acre-feet annually. 
The aqueduct would serve areas in the eastern San 
Joaquin Valley where ground water is being over- 
drafted. The project has not been authorized by the 
Federal Government. 

Study is also being given jointly by the Department 
of Water Resources and the Bureau of Reclamation 
to a mid-valley canal that could provide water to some 
of the ground water overdraft areas in the eastern 
San Joaquin Valley. A mid-valley canal could also 
provide a connection from the California Aqueduct 
to the Friant-Kern Canal, facilitating coordinated op- 
eration of the two aqueduct systems. 

Additional surface water projects which have been 
studied at the reconnaissance level as possible future 
developments in the Central Valley include (1) en- 
largement of Lake Berryessa, (2) enlargement of 
Shasta Lake, (3) extension of the Bureau of Reclama- 
tion Tehama-Colusa Canal to provide service in Yolo 
and Solano Counties, and (4) construction of off- 
stream storage reservoirs at the Los Vaqueros site on 
Kellogg Creek in Contra Costa County and at the 
Sunflower site, located on the Kings-Kern County 
line in the western San Joaquin Valley. These proj- 
ect locations, except Los Vaqueros, are also shown on 
Plate 1. 



North Coasf Area Wafer Projects 

The Smith, Klamath, and Trinity and Eel Rivers 
are excluded from consideration for further develop- 
ment by the California Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. 
These rivers produce about 20,000,000 acre-feet of 
mean annual natural runofi^, or over 25 percent of 
California's total runoff. 

In the case of the Eel River, however, the Act pro- 
vides for legislative consideration of possible removal 
of wild river status for the Eel in 1985. Two reser- 
voir and conveyance systems previously studied on 
the Eel River, the Dos Rios and English Ridge proj- 
ects, could be used to regulate the headwaters of the 
Eel River for export to the Sacramento Valley and to 
provide flood peak reductions on the Eel River. The 
combined water yield of these two reservoirs could 
vary from about 500,000 to 1,000,000 acre-feet per 
year for various size reservoirs and plans of operation. 

Butler Valley Dam and Reservoir Project on the 
Mad River, which is authorized for construction by 
the Corps of Engineers, has been deferred indefinitely. 
The deferment is primarily due to the decision by 
voters of Humboldt County not to participate in the 
project. The reservoir, with a capacity of 460,000 
acre-feet, could control floods on the Mad River and 
yield about 120,000 acre-feet annually after meeting 
downstream flow requirements. 

Ground Water 

Ground water occurs in California primarily in un- 
consolidated sedimentary deposits which underlie 
much of the agricultural lands and large portions of 
the State's urban areas. Its development and use has 
been second only to that of the surface water sources. 
Relative freedom from contamination has made it es- 
pecially suitable for municipal use where protection 
of the public health is a prime consideration. Occur- 
rence of ground water in areas where surface water is 
in short supply and its availability to the users on de- 
mand has led to widespread use for irrigation on over- 
l\ing lands. Ground water currently furnishes about 
40 percent of total water use in California. 

In those areas requiring supplemental water to meet 
future requirements and which overlie Usable ground 
water basins, the basin characteristics, hydrolog)', and 
water quality must be examined to estimate the 
amounts and qualities of ground water whicli may be 
utilized. The four methods of basin operation gener- 
all\' in use are: (a) safe yield operation based on 
natural replenishment, (b) temporary overdraft, or 
mining, of ground water pending development of a 
supplemental surface water supply; (c) court ordered 
regulation of ^vithdrawals; and (d) sustained yield 
using natural replenishment and planned or incidental 
recharge with imported water. 

In areas where the ground water has already been 
put to extensive use, available data from well logs. 



96 



measurements of water levels in wells, chemical ana- 
lyses of water in wells, and other knowledge gained 
in development of the basin provide the basis for 
further study of the basin characteristics and deter- 
mination of more efficient operational procedures. On 
the other hand, in areas where the basin has been 
little developed, there is often little data on the basin 
characteristics which can be obtained short of an 
extensive and costly investigative program. Thus, pro- 
jections of future yields from development of unused 
ground water basins are subject to considerably more 
uncertainty than from the presently developed basins. 

Development of most sustained new yields from 
ground water, as with surface reservoirs, requires sur- 
plus surface water to provide the required annual re- 
charge of the basin. Exceptions include cases where 
pumping lowers ground water levels and reduces 
losses such as consumptive use by nonproductive 
vegetation, or subsurface outflow to saline water 
bodies or to salt sinks. New yields on an interim basis 
from overdrafting (mining) the ground water reser- 
voir may be a feasible alternative supply. However, 
consideration must be given to the effects which may 
result from the resultant decline in water levels, such 
as pumping costs, land subsidence, and change in 
water qualit\'. The limiting effects of these factors 
will vary with the local conditions, both physical and 
economic. 

Empty storage space in ground water basins may 
be used by importation of water from distant water- 
sheds for recharge and subsequent withdrawal — 
either on a "one-time" basis where surplus water or 
conveyance capacity arc limited in time; or on a 
cyclic basis where recurring surplus water and con- 
veyance capacity are available. 

Some idea of the effects of the variation in the 
ground water conditions with change in surface water 
can be gained from Figures 21 and 22. Figure 21 
shows the change in ground water levels in the San 
Joaquin Valley during a 5-year dry period, 1960-1965, 
when average annual surface water supply was only 
about 75 /o of normal. The changes shown in Figure 
22 are for a wet period, 1965-1970, when water sup- 
pi}' was about 125% of normal. In general, the areas 
served by ground water tend to have ground water 
level changes which follow the trend of runoff of 
tributary streams. However, areas served by the 
Friant-Kern and Aladcra Canals on the east side of the 
valley and by the Delta-Mendota Canal on west side 
show rising water levels even during the dry period 
as a result of continued full import supplies during 
the local drought period. During the above-normal 
period, there still remain many areas where heavy 
pumping draughts which are in excess of recharge 
capability are causing water tables to decline. Increas- 
ing deliveries from the California Aqueduct replaced 
considerable ground water pumping and resulted in 
a substantial decrease in the overdraft bv 1972. This 



effect was just beginning to show in the data pre- 
sented in the two figures. 

Activifies by the Depariment of Wafer Reiources 

In planning to meet future water requirements of 
the State, the Department has given ground water 
equal consideration with other alternative sources. 
The previously discussed general planning concepts 
illustrate some of the considerations which are a part 
of studies of future ground water development and 
management. 

A specific example of a current investigation by 
the Department of Water Resources is that of the 
potential recharge of Northern California surplus 
water in areas south of the Tehachapi Mountains for 
subsequent withdrawal, either to offset water supply 
deficiencies during periods of possible aqueduct shut- 
down or to defer capital expenditures for construc- 
tion of additional conservation facilities required in 
the event of critical dry period water supply condi- 
tions as the State Water Project approaches full deliv- 
ery operation. Investigation of this possibility is 
being conducted jointly by the Department of Water 
Resources and the members of the Southern Califor- 
nia Water Conference. 

In another study currently' underway, a cooperative 
effort by the United States Bureau of Reclamation 
and the Department of Water Resources, considera- 
tion is being given to alignments of a mid-valle\' canal 
located at the approximate latitude of the City of 
Fresno and running from the California Aqueduct on 
the west side of the San Joaquin Valley to the eastern 
areas of the San Joaquin Valley. Its purpose would 
be to convex- federal water through state and federal 
facilities to areas of long-standing overdraft in the 
eastern portions of the Tulare Lake Basin. Included in 
the operational aspects of this investigation will be the 
possibilities of ground water recharge and the direct 
delivery of water through distribution systems to 
areas presently relying totally or partially upon 
ground water overdraft for irrigation supplies. 

Additionally, the Department, in cooperation with 
federal agencies such as the United States Geological 
Surve\', Water Resources Division, and local water 
service agencies, has and is continuing to conduct 
h\drologic, geologic, and water qualit\' investigations 
to determine the availability of ground water resources 
in all areas of the State. 

Examples of these types of investigations are those 
being conducted in Northern California, in the South 
San Francisco Bay area, in Sacramento and Sonoma 
Counties, and in Livermore Valley. Also, the Depart- 
ment and the Kern County Water Agency are 
conducting a cooperative investigation, with the ob- 
jecti\e of assisting the Agency, through use of a 
mathematical model of the ground water basin, to 
determine means of managing the basin to make the 
best use of supplemental water obtained through the 



97 



FOOTHILL LINE 




^ 



1 



100 
















































\ 












\ 










700 
•00 




'> 












•^ 


— 


^ 



l«B0 IMO ItTO 



100 
ZOO 
SOO 
400 




rMo IMO i«rro 



100 

too 



■•eo laeo laro 



-LE6END- 

HYDR06RAPH0FWELL CHANGE INCREASE DECREASE 












IN FEET 

1 1 1 1 
0-20 1 1 1 1 

eo-40 1 1 1 1 

40-60 1 1 1 1 

60- OR MORE mH ^^ 

G-TIME SUBSIDENCE, 1 FOOT OR MORE 


\ 




t^ 


^ 




















YEARS 
AREA OFLON 



DATA NOT AVAILABLE 



Figure 21. Ground Water Change During Dry Period, 1960-1965 



98 




-LEGEND- 
HY0R06RAPH0FWELL CHANGE INCREASE DECREASE 

IN FEET 

0-20 dj nu 

20-40 I I I I 
40-60 I I I I 
60- OR MORE I I I I 
AREA OF LONG -TIME SUBSIDENCE, I FOOT OR MORE 



YEARS 



Figure 22. Ground Water Change During Wet Period, 1965-1970 



99 



facilities of the California Aqueduct. Similarly, in 
Southern California, investigations of operational 
modes and economic factors have been conducted for 
most of the major local water service agencies as a 
part of their programs to augment and better manage 
the water resources available to their areas. Areas 
presently under investigation are in Ventura County, 
San Jacinto Valley, Antelope Valley, Upper San Di- 
ego Area, and Arroyo Grande-Paso Robles Area. 

Another field of study by the Department consists 
of a preliminary evaluation of the probability of ob- 
taining producing wells (primarily domestic) in frac- 
tured rock of the mountain areas of California. 

The maintenance of a good quality ground water 
resource is dependent on its protection from degrada- 
tion from various possible sources. To this end, the 
Department of Water Resources has formulated a 
Ground Water Basin Protection program. Current 
studies include design of sea water intrusion barriers 
and sanitary landfills to protect related ground water 
bodies, determination of the effects of deep injection 
of oil field and industrial wastes on ground water. 




evaluation of well construction practices as related to 
h\drologic and geologic conditions in order to formu- 
late recommendations for water well standards, and 
surveillance of land subsidence as it relates to extrac- 
tion of ground water. The components of this pro- 
gram are varied from time to time as required to 
counter possible threats to the integrity of the ground , 
water resource. 

Among some of the major issues surrounding use 
of ground water are those of sustained or long-term 
overdraft and land subsidence due to compaction of 
deep confining clay beds such as have occurred ex- 
tensively in the San Joaquin Valley. 

The problems of overdraft on a long-term basis are 
those of diminishing ground water resources in stor- 
age and increasing costs of pumping and of deepening 
existing wells or drilling replacement wells due to 
declining ground water levels. However, in areas 
where alternative water supplies are relatively expen- 
sive, continued overdraft operation for a considerable 
period of time may still be the most economic man- 
agement plan. 

The problems associated with deep subsidence are 
primarily physical in that surface structures are dis- 
turbed by the lowering of land surface elevations 
caused by compaction of the underlying clay and 
silt la\ers under decreased pressures in the deeper- 
King confined aquifers. Basins with extensive under- 
ground cla\' structures will evidence correspondingly 
greater subsidence effects than basins with minimal 
compressible material. In the latter case, subsidence 
may be only a minor problem. 

The above-cited issues have specific problems; how- 
ever, they arc not without some offsetting benefits to 
the areas affected. For example the condition of long- 
term sustained overdraft is mostly evident in the east- 
ern portions of the Tulare Lake Basin where an 
agricultural economy has developed in ^\■hich Fresno, 
Kings, Tulare, and Kern Counties rank among the top 
dollar-producing agricultural counties in the United 
States. Without use of the ground water in storage 
by overdraft pumping, and imported water, such 
development w ould not have occurred. The capability 
to pay for imported water was significantly- increased 
by the economy built upon ground water. 

Deep subsidence, although capable of being arrested 
1)\' reducing the extraction rates of water from the 
undcr!\iTig confined aquifers, cannot be reversed by 
present!)- known technology. However, in areas 
where deep subsidence has already occurred, there 
ma\- be future as well as past benefits related to opera- 
tion of the ground water basin.* For example, future 
increased recharge to the forcbay areas casterl\- from 
the subsiding San Joaquin \'alle\- area, even though it 
exceeds extraction from the westerly confined aqui- 
fers, will not result in vertical upward movement or 
return of the ground surface to original conditions, 
but it will reduce or eliminate further downward 



100 



subsidence of land surfaces alread\- affected. Future 
operation of the ground water reservoir over a range 
of pressure variations which do not exceed the new 
equilibrium conditions will cause little if any addi- 
tional subsidence. Additionally, the water released by 
consolidation of compressible sediments in undcrhing 
confined aquifers may be considered as a one-timc- 
onlv water suppl>- which would not otherwise have 
been available. Total water derived from this source 
in the San Joaquin \'alle\ was estimated by the U. S. 
Geological Surve\' to be 15,600,000 acrc-fect during 
the period 1926-1970 *. Over one-half this amount 
was withdraw n in the last 20 }ears. The area of sub- 
sidence in excess of one foot resulting from this 
ground water extraction is shown in Figures 21 and 
22. 

Ground Water Condifions 

A brief sunmiary of the present knowledge of 
ground water conditions in each hydrologic study 
area (Figure 2) is presented in the following discus- 
sion which is based in part on a report by the U. S. 
Geological Survey.* 

The computations of useable storage do not reflect 
potential problems such as deep subsidence, or poor 
qualit\- water that might be induced b\- pumping if 
water in these basins is lowered to the depths in- 
dicated. 

North Coastal Hydrologic Area. Within the pre- 
dominantly mountainous North Coast Hydrologic 
Area ground water occurs in 13 alluvial-filled valleys, 
comprising a total area of about 1,300 square miles. 
Some of these alluvial valleys in the northeastern part 
of the area also contain extensive water-bearing vol- 
canic formations. Water-bearing deposits in these val- 
leys range in thickness from about 50 to 2,000 feet. 

Total storage capacity of the basins for which de- 
terminations have been made is nearly 1,000,000 acre- 
feet. The usable storage capacity, where determined, 
totals 700,000 acre-feet; the limiting factors are the 
possibility of sea-water intrusion and aquifer materials 
of low permeability which do not readily yield water. 
Generally, the quality of ground water is excellent; 
however, in isolated areas there are poor quality 
waters with total dissolved solids of more than 4,800 
milligrams per liter (mg/1). 

Properly constructed wells in many areas can yield 
as much as 1,000 gallons per minute. Wells in the 
Butte Valley basalt formation of volcanic origin 
yield larger quantities of flow, ranging from 2,000 
to 4,000 gallons per minute. So far, ground water 
levels do not indicate an overdraft. However, pump- 
ing in Butte Valley does exceed earlier cursory esti- 

» J. T. Poland, B. E. LotKicn, R. S. Ireland, and R. G. Pugli, "Land 

Subsidence in the San Joaquin Valley, California, as of 1972," 

U.S. Geological Survey open-iile report, 1973. 
* U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division, Open-File Report, 

"Summary of Ground Water Data as of 1967, California Region," 

July 24, 1969. 



mates of the safe yield of that basin. Water levels have 
remained fairly constant over the past several years. 

San Francisco Bay Hydrologic Area. Most usable 
ground water in the San Francisco Bay Hydrologic 
Area is found in the Santa Clara Valley and in six 
smaller alluvium-filled vallc)-.s, all of which are ad- 
jacent to and partially underlie the San Francisco Bay. 
These seven areas, together with eleven other scat- 
tered basins which have been identified as significant 
sources of ground water, have a total area of about 
2,000 square miles. AVatcr-bearing deposits range in 
in thickness from 100 to 2,000 feet. 

The ground water basins of the area are estimated 
to have a capacity of at least 10,000,000 acre-feet and 
a usable capacity of at least 5,000,000 acre-feet. 

Although much of the area is served by imported 
water, ground water still is pumped extensively from 
Livermore Valley, Santa Clara Valley, and other 




101 



South Ba\- areas. Most of this ground water is of ex- 
cellent quality, although the intrusion of saline water 
from the San Francisco Bay system has caused signifi- 
cant problems in the past. .Also, in the Santa Clara 
Valley area, ground \\ater withdrawals haye caused 
subsidence of the ground surface. One effect of this 
subsidence has been to cause levees along the bay- 
shore to be overtopped during periods of high tides. 

After completion of tlie South Bay Aqueduct of 
the State Water Project in 1962, deliveries of im- 
ported water from this source were begun in Alameda 
and Santa Clara Counties. This water has been used 
to recharge the ground water basin, and subsequently 
subsidence and much of the intrusion of saline water 
has ceased. Water levels in Santa Clara and Livermore 
V^alleys have shown marked recoveries to historic 
levels. 

Water levels in North Bay areas have show n little 
change over the years, an indication that these ground 
water basins may be able to yield larger quantities 
of ground water than at present. 

Central Coastal Hydrologic Area. With a predomi- 
nant mountainous terrain, the Central Coastal area's 
usable ground water occurs in alluvium-filled valleys 
and coastal plains and in deeper lying aquifers. Sig- 
nificant sources of ground water have been identified 
in 24 basins with a total area of about 3,500 square 
miles. Water-bearing deposits range from 200 to 4,000 
feet in thickness. 

The gross storage capacit)' in the Central Coastal 
area is 20,000,000 acre-feet, of which 7,600,000 acre- 
feet are usable. The limiting factor is sea water in- 
trusion. The dissolved solids content of the water is 
generalh' less than 800 mg/1, but locally is more than 
11,000 mg/1. 

Ground water is the main source of suppl\' in the 
Central Coastal area, and present use exceeds the aver- 
age supply by about 140,000 acre-feet per year. In 
the northern region of the Central Coastal area the 
major problem is in the lower Salinas \^alley where 
ground water use in excess of recharge capability has 
lowered water levels below sea level and has caused 
sea water intrusion in the bayshore area. Long associ- 
ated with the upper aquifer, sea w ater intrusion now 
threatens the low er aquifer as well. Monterey County 
is considering a plan to convey Salinas River water 
to the area for surface application to alleviate tiic 
problem. The authorized San Felipe Project of the 
Bureau of Reclamation could also provide surface 
supplies to this area as \yell as to smaller overdraft 
areas in the lower Pajaro Valley, where sea water in- 
trusion is also a threat, and in the Hollister area. 

In the southern region, there is a current overdraft 
of about 50,000 acre-feet per year, mainly in Santa 
Barbara Count\-, but including inland areas of San 
Luis Obispo Counts'. Completion of the Coastal 
Aqueduct of the California State Water Project could 
help reduce this overdraft. 



South Coastal Hydrologic Area. The south coastal 
area is comprised of coastal valleys separated by 
mountainous areas. Significant ground water sources 
have been identified in 44 basins with a total area of 
about 3,000 square miles. Included are four large 
basins, the Los Angeles coastal plain, the San Gabriel 
\'alley, the Orange Count)- coastal plain and the up- 
per Santa Ana River Basin; and three major smaller 
basins, the Oxnard Plain, Fillmore, and San Jacinto 
Basins. Water-bearing deposits range from 50 to 2,- 
500 feet in thickness. 

The storage capacity of the basins is about 100,- 
000,000 acre-feet of which 7,000,000 is estimated to be 
usable. Limiting factors arc possible sea water intru- 
sion, thin alluvial material, and locally, high pumping 
lifts. The dissolved solids content of the water is gen- 
crall\' less than 1,000 mg/1, but localK' is more than 
36,000 mg/1. 

There is a current annual overdraft of 160,000 acre- 
feet, mainly in Ventura County, the Upper Santa Ana 
Ri\cr Basin, and Coastal Orange Count)-. Additional 
imported water from the State Water Project should 
eliminate this overdraft by 1990. 

Sacramento Basin Hydrologic Area. In this h\dro- 
logic area, 2 1 valley areas have been identified as signi- 
ficant sources of ground water, and the\- have a total 
area of about 6,150 square miles, of w hich 5,000 square 
miles are in the Sacramento \'alle\-. The water-bear- 
ing deposits range in thickness from about 100 to 3,000 
feet. 

The storage capacit\-, as determined for 17 of the 
basins, is nearl\- 55,000,000 acre-feet, of which more 
than 33,000,000 acre-feet are in the Sacramento \'al- 
lc\-. This estimate is based on a deptli of 20-200 feet 
for tlie Sacramento \'alle\-, and docs not include the 
deeper aquifers. The usable storage capacitx- in the 
Sacramento \'alie\- is estimated at 22,000,000 acre-feet; 
the limiting factors are economic considerations, aqui- 
fer materials of low- pcrmeabilit\-, potential land sub- 
sidence, and qualit\- of water. The dissolved-solids 
content of the ground water is generally less than 
500 mg/1, but locally is as much as 2,800 mg/1. 

Ground water is used extensivelx- for irrigation pur- 
poses in the Sacramento \'alle\ , and some ground 
water is pumped for irrigation use in the Upper Pit 
River region. 

In 1972, 1,500,000 acre-feet of ground water w-as 
pumped to meet applied water demands for irrigation 
and domestic use in tJic Sacramento Basin hxdrologic 
unit. While in general the basin has an adequate sup- 
pi)- of ground water for present demands, there are 
several local areas along the west side of the Sacra- 
mento \'allc)- tiiat have incurred o\crdraft problems 
during dr\- periods when pumping drafts were heavy. 
Annual oxertlraft in these areas totals about 90,000 
acre-feet. 

Delta Central Sierra Hydrologic .-Irea. It is esti- 
mated that the Sacramento \'allc) portion of the 



102 



Delta-Central Sierra Unit contains a total of about 
64,000,000 acre-feet of ground w ater. Certain portions 
of this unit, notably the central Delta area, contain 
quantities of nonusable saline ground water. In some 
of the surrounding area, ground water levels in recent 
\cars were at markedly lower elevations than at pres- 
ent. In Solano County, this was the case prior to the 
completion of the Bureau of Reclamation Solano 
Project; now, with surface water deliveries, water 
levels have shown a significant recovery to historic 
levels. 

Water levels arc still declining in San Joaquin 
County, where overdraft of the basin is estimated to 
be on the order of 120,000 acre-feet per year. \Vater 
levels in this area decline at an average rate of about 
5 feet per \ear, caused b\' pumpage which exceeds 
recharge. This decline has caused the eastward migra- 
tion of saline ground water from the central Delta 
area. 

Sa7i Joaqtiiu Hydrologic Area. Ground water 
provides a substantial portion of the water supply 
necessary to meet the water demands of the San 
Joaquin Basin. For the entire basin about 35 percent 
of the agricultural applied water demand and, with 
the exception of the foothill and mountain areas, 
nearly all of the municipal and industrial requirements 
are met b>' ground water. During the period 1962 
through 1966, an average of almost two million acre- 
feet annually was extracted for agricultural use and 
119,000 acre-feet annually for municipal and indus- 
trial use.* 

The water-bearing sediments which underlie the 
valley floor portion of the San Joaquin Basin contain 
large amounts of fresh water of suitable mineral qual- 
ity for agricultural and urban use. The Department 
of Water Resources has estimated the storage capacity 
and the amount of water in storage by analyzing 
thousands of well drillers logs.t The follo^\•ing tabu- 
lation presents an example of the magnitude of the 
ground water resource. 



Depth Range 
CFe«) 


Storage Capacity 
(Acre-feet) 


Water in Storage 

as of Spring 1961 

(Acre-feet) 


0-200 . 

0-500 


43,400,000 
95,800,000 


36,000,000 
85,400,000 



Ground water withdrawal in excess of replenish- 
ment since the spring of 1961 has reduced the amount 
of ground \\ater in storage b\- about 2,000,000 acre- 
feet. 

During the 10-year period 1958 through 1967, there 
was an average annual overdraft of ground water in 

• U.S. Geological Survey open-file reports on ground water pumping in 
the San Joaquin Valley, California, and unpublished reports of 
ground water pumping i)y Turlock, Modesto, and Oakdale Irriga- 
tion Districts. 

t Department of Water Resources unpublished report entitled "San 
Joaquin River Basin Storage Capacity Values", August 1951. 



Storage of 154,000 acre-feet, of which 140,000 acre- 
feet was \ielded 1)\- dewatcring aquifers and 14,000 
acre-feet was \iclded by squeezing water from satu- 
rated cla\s due to declining piezometric levels. This 
later yield is sometimes referred to as "deep subsidence 
_\ield from ground w ater w ithdrawal" and is evidenced 
by a lowering of the land surface. The yield from 
this source is considered to be equal to the land sub- 
sidence volume. Figure 21 shows the areal extent of 
land subsidence in the San Joaquin \^alley caused by 
ground water withdrawal. 

The 1972 overdraft of ground water is estimated at 
250,000 acre-feet annually. The principal areas of over- 
draft arc the areas cast of the San Joaquin River that 
lie to the southwest of Merced Irrigation District and 
to the west of Chowchilla Water District and Madera 
Irrigation District. Other areas being overdrafted are 
the lands developed to irrigated agriculture just west 
of the Sierra foothills in Stanislaus, Merced, and 
Madera Counties. In general, the areas of overdraft 
arc outside the boundaries of organized agricultural 
water agencies and have inadequate surface water sup- 
plies. 

Fxcept for the scattered overdraft areas, the basin 
has adequate surface supplies and shallow depths to 
ground water. Some of the ground water pumping 
in the northeastern portion of the valley floor is nec- 
essary to prevent excessivel\' high water levels. In the 
overdrafted areas there is a significant amount of re- 
charge to the ground w ater basin from natural stream- 
flow and subsurface inflows. 

Tulare Basin Hydrologic Area. Ground water is a 
major source of water suppl\' in the Tulare Basin. 
About 65 percent of the agricultural applied water 
demand and virtuall\- all of the municipal and indus- 
trial applied water demands are met by ground water 
pumping. During the period 1962 through 1966, gross 
ground water withdrawals averaged 6,800,000 acre-feet 
per year for agricultural use and 300,000 acre-feet per 
year for municipal and industrial use.* 

The w ater-bearing sediments under the valle\- floor 
portion of Tulare Basin contain vast amounts of water 
of suitable qualit\' for agricultural and urban uses. The 
Department of Water Resources has estimated the 
storage capacity and the amount of fresh water in 
storage by analyzing thousands of well drillers logs.t 
The following tabulation presents an example of the 
magnitude of the ground water resource. 



Depth Range 

(Feet) 


Storage Capacity 
(Acre-feet) 


Water in Storage 

as of Spring 1957 

(Acre-feet) 


200 


88,000,000 
187,000,000 


48,000,000 


0-500 


134,000,000 



* U.S. Geological Survey open-file reports on ground water pumping irt 

the San Joaquin Valley, California. 
t Department of Water Resources unpublished report entitled "C.round 

Water Geology of the Tulare Basin", May 1963. 



103 



Ground water withdrawal in excess of replenish- 
ment since spring of 1957 has reduced the amount of 
ground water in storage by about 20,000,000 acre-feet. 

During the 10-year period 195S through 1967, there 
was an average annual overdraft of ground water in 
storage of 1,470,000 acre-feet, of which 910,000 acre- 
feet was yielded by dew atering the sands and gravels 
of the aquifer s>stcm and 560,000 acre-feet w as yielded 
by squeezing w ater from the saturated clays of the 
aquitards caused by declining subsurface water pres- 
sures induced b\' ground water withdrawals. 

The increase in water demands since the period 
1958 through 1967 has more than been offset by recent 
imports from the State Water Project and the San 
Luis Division of the Central A^illey Projects. Never- 
theless, the 1972 overdraft of ground w ater in storage 
is estimated at 1,300,000 acre-feet annually. The major 
portion of the rccentl\' expanded imports has been 
to the worst subsidence areas and has reduced ground 
water withdrawal and land subsidence rates. 

The rate of overdraft varies w idely throughout the 
basin. In fact, some areas are experiencing stable or 
even rising water levels. In other areas the rate of 
overdraft is moderate, and ground water could con- 
tinue to be mined for years w ithout any adverse effect 
other than increased pumping costs and energy usage. 
In still other areas, the overdraft is severe and the 
ground water in storage is being rapidly depleted. 

Recent water deliveries from the Central Valley 
Project and the State Water Project have slightly 
increased the maximum sustained pumpage because of 
recharge to usable ground water through seepage 
losses from convexancc facilities and application of 
water to agricultural lands in excess of evapotranspira- 
tion. Part of the w ater is delivered to land w hich does 
not overlie usable ground w ater and is therefore not 
a source of recharge. 

North Lahontan Hydroloiric Area. iVIost of the 
usable ground water in the prcdominantl>' mountain- 
ous North Lahontan H\ drologic Area occurs in the 
scattered valle\s that are filled w ith alluvium and ma- 
terial of volcanic origin. 1 he area contains eight val- 
ley fill areas w hich have been identified as significant 
sources of ground water. The total area of the eight 
valleys is about 1,300 square miles. The water-bearing 
deposits range in thickness from about 250 to 1,000 
feet. The total storage capacity has been estimated for 
seven of the basins and is nearly 23,000,000 acre-feet. 
However, the usable storage capacit\' has not been 
determined; the limiting factor is the quality of water. 
The dissolved solids contents of the water is generally 
less than 500 mg/i, bur iocalK' is as much as 2,000 
nig/1. 

Ground water is used for irrigation primarily in 
Surprise Valley and Hone\' Lake \^alley. In recent 
years many wells have been drilled in the Surprise 
Valley area to augment water supplies. In 1972 an esti- 



mated 56,000 acre-feet of ground water was pumped 
for irrigation in the hydrologic area, mostl_\' in the 
northern part. There arc no indications of ground 
water overdraft in the area. 

South Lahovtaii Hydrologic Arc.i. Most usable 
ground water in this predominant!)' mountainous area 
occurs in alluvium-filled valle\s, of which 50 have 
been identified as significant sources of water and 
whicli iiavc an area of more than 13,000 square miles. 
The water-bearing deposits range in thickness from 
30 to about 2,000 feet. 

The total storage capacity- of the area's basins is 
presently estimated at about 194,000,000 acre-feet of 
w hich about 700,000 acre-feet are known to be usable 
in Indian Wells \'alle\-, the onI\- basin where a deter- 
mination has been made. Water qualit\' is variable; 
most valle\'s have some ground water with less than 
800 mg/1, dissolved solids but many also ha\e water 
with several thousand mg/1. 

Most of the ground water use is in the Antelope 
\'allc\- and the Mojavc River Basins, both of w hich are 
in an overdraft condition totaling about 120,000 acre- 
feet per year. State Water Project imports are ex- 
pected to eliminate the overdraft by 1990. 

Colorado Desert Hydroloi^ic Area. This desert area 
lies between the Colorado River and mountain ranges 
located about 50 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean. 
Significant ground water resources have been identified 
in 45 alluvium-filled vallexs covering an area of about 
12,800 square miles. Thickness of water-bearing de- 
posits ranges from 50 to 2,800 feet. 

Total storage capacity" of the hydrologic area is 
about 158,000,000 acre-feet; and usable capacit>', deter- 
mined only for the Coaciiella \'alle\\ is 3,600,000 acre- 
feet. Water quality varies from basin to basin; most 
\alle\s have some ground water with less than 600 
mg/I dissohed solids, but some have as much as several 
thousand mg/I. The qualit\' of the large volume of 
ground w ater in the Imperial \'ailc\- is so poor that its 
use is vcr\' limited. 

Ground water is used niainlx- for agriculture in the 
Coachella \'alle\' where a current overdraft is esti- 
mated to be about 33,000 acre-feet annuallw The over- 
draft could be reduced to 1 5,000 acre-feet or less be- 
fore 1990 b\- increased imports from the State Water 
Project. There is also an overdraft of about 5,000 acre- 
feet per year in Lucerne Valle\'. 

Waste Water Reclamation 

In the p i tUlie^ n iii n.l3 puring the las' decade, waste 
water treatment has probably been most closely asso- 
ciated with the movement to reduce the pollution of 
streams and otiicr water bodies. While this effort has 
been motivated largely b\ aesthetic and ecological con- 
cerns, the result has been to require more complete 
treatment of wastes before they are disposed to water 
bodies and .so to make them more suitable for reclama- 



104 



tion and reuse. Also, rhe added treatment and cost 
induced by these requirements reduces the incremental 
cost of treatment for reclamation purposes and im- 
proves w aste water reclamation's competitive position 
when compared \vith alternative water sources. Gi" 
caui'serTne increasing demands foy*ll pwpo.WK M'hieh 
Sare being placed on the limited w ater supplies in some 
areas iiavc also been a prime motivation for seeking 
the available in-area .sources of ne^\■ \\ater which waste 
water reclamation can provide. 

As California's urban areas have grown, larger quan- 
tities of \\ aste \\ ater have been collected and convened 
to central points for treatment and have b^-ome more 
readily available for reclamation. About z?^ million 
acre-feet of iminicipal, waste water « presently proc- 
essed Cftch-^'CT T I and^^rcprcsents a significant potential 
for reclamatiwrrto meet demands for various purposes. 

Waste \\ater reclamation is sometimes implemented 
as a means of waste disposal, i.e., the primary purpose 
of the reclamation is to dispose of treated effluent 
while the beneficial use derived from the effluent so 
discharged is incidental. However, the Department 
considers the term "waste water reclamation" to mean 
the planned renovation of waste v. ater with the intent 
of producing usable water for a specific beneficial 
purpose. The California Water Code defines reclaimed 
water as ". . . water which, as a result of treatment 
of w aste, is suitable for a direct beneficial use or a con- 
trolled use that would not otherwise occur.* 

Municipal and industrial waste water discharged to 
inland fresh water bodies is subject to redivcrsion and 
incidental or unplanned reuse. Reclamation of this wa- 
ter will improve the (]ualit\' but will not increase the 
quantity of water — will not add "new water" to the 



13050(n) Califuri 



system. This is also true of most of the agricultural 
water used in the San Joaquin Valley and other inland 
areas where return flows from farm applications are 
returned to the supply system and arc reu.sed until the 
progressive accumulation of salts renders the water 
detrimental to plant growth. Reclamation of the re- 
sultant saline drainage flow docs constitute "new wa- 
ter", but the flows are onl\' a small fraction of the 
total applied \\'ater. The same is true of municipal and 
industrial wastes in inland areas w hich are disposed of 
by evaporation, by percolation to saline ground water 
bodies, or by other methods where the effluents are not 
readily reusable. In coastal areas where municipal and 
industrial wastes are discharged to saline waters of the 
ocean, ba_\s, or estuaries and are lost to the freshwater 
c\cle, the reclamation of w astes also constitutes a "new 
supply". Since most of California's population is con- 
centrated in the coastal cities, these areas offer the 
greatest opportunity for economic reclamation of 
w aste water. About 50 percent of the water supplied 
for municipal purposes will be discharged as waste 
water. Of this amount approximate!)' 40- percent can 
be reclaimed and the remainder must be used to con- 
vey residual salts and solids to disposal sites. 
— Table 19 shows the disposition of treated municipal 
and industrial waste water discharged in 1972. As 
shown, 1.7 million acre-feet of treated waste effluent 
produced during 1972 was discharged into the ocean 
and into saline bays and estuaries. It is the reclamation 
of this waste water that ofi^ers the primary potential as 
a "new" source of Avater. As shown in Table 19, the 
sum of the intentional and incidental reclamation in 
the inland hydrologic areas is a very large percentage 
of total waste w ater production, being well over 90 
percent in the Sacramento, Delta-Central Sierra, and 
San Joaquin areas. 



Table 19. 


Sumtnary of Urban Waste Water Production Dispose 


, and Reclamation Practices in 


972 








Kslimated 

population 

served 

(1,000's) 


Waste 

produced 
(1,000 A¥) 






Waste watt 


r reclaimed 






Waste war 


r discharge 






Intentional 


Incidental 


Total 


Net" 


To salin 


waters'" 


Hydrologic study area 


Quantity 
(1,000 AF) 


Percent' 


Quantity 
(1,000 AF) 


Percent' 


Quantity 
(1,000 AF) 


Percent' 


Quantity 
(1,000 AF) 


Percent' 


(1,000 AF) 


Percent' 




85 
4.578 
718 
11.021 
618 
902 
356 
719 

56 
176 
162 


73 
583 
114 
1,287 
106 
131 
60 
116 
11 
20 
22 


1 
8 
5 
57 
12 
8 
26 
45 
6 
7 
6 


1 
1 
4 
4 
11 
6 
43 
39 
55 
35 
27 


6 
32 
35 
152 
86 
121 
32 
45 
3 
8 
12 


8 
6 
31 
12 
81 
92 
53 
39 
27 
40 
55 


7 
40 
40 

209 
98 

129 
58 
90 
9 
15 
18 


10 
7 
35 
16 
92 
98 
97 
78 
82 
75 
82 


72 
575 
109 
1.230 
94 
123 
34 
71 
5 
13 
16 


99 
99 
96 
96 
89 
94 
57 
61 
45 
65 
73 


66 
540 

62 
1,066 








90 


San Francisco Bay 


93 
54 




83 


Sacramento Basin 





Delta-Central Sierra 





San Joaquin Basin 





Tulare Basin 










South Lahontan.. 



5 






Total 


19,391 


2,523 


181 


7 


532 


21 


713 


28 


2,342 


93 


1,735 


69 







> Ocean, bays, and < 
■ Of the amount of waste • 
' Discharges to Salton Sea 
Source: DWR Bulletin No 



t of waste water produced le 



i-72, "Inventory of Waste Water Production and Wa 



. Practices in California", 1972 (. 



105 



Use of Reclaimed Waste Water 

The fe;isil)ilit\- of reclamation and reuse of waste 
water will vary with each individual situation. How- 
ever, some of the obvious parameters which will affect 
reclamation are: 

1. Quality of the w aste w ater. 

2. Cost of treatment. 

3. Cost of conve>ancc and distribution in tiic area 
w here it will be used. 

4. Price that users are w illing and able to pa>'. 

5. Public acceptance of the use proposed. 
\'arious public health, physical, aesthetic, economic, 

and other restraints will determine how each of the 
above factors affects the feasibilit\ of any given rec- 
lamation project. For example, the direct use of re- 
claimed water for domestic needs is not practiced in 
California because public health authorities are un- 
certain that stable organics * and virus and other dis- 
ease-producing agents can be removed from waste 
water. Also, such use has not yet gained public ac- 
ceptance. The results of recent public-opinion surveys 
on the use of reclaimed w ater indicate that the major- 
ity of those questioned opposed the use of reclaimed 
water for personal use, e.g., drinking, cooking, bath- 
ing, and laundering. In one particular statewide sur- 
vey,! only 0.8 percent of 972 persons questioned 
opposed the use of reclaimed w ater in road construc- 
tion; however, 56.4 percent of the same group opposed 
its use as drinking w ater. 

At present, reclaimed water is used chiefly for agri- 
cultural, industrial, municipal irrigation, recreational, 
and ground water recharge purposes. 

Agricultural uses include irrigation of (1) pasture, 
(2) fodder, fiber, and seed crops, (3) crops that are 
grown well above the ground, such as fruits, nuts, and 
grapes, provided they are not harvested after they 

* Stable organics are those organic materials which are not removed from 
waste water as a result of treatment using conventional primary 
and secondary sewage treatment processes. 

t William H. Bruvold and Henry J. Ongerth, "Public Use and Evalua- 
tion of Reclaimed Water," Journal of American Water Works As- 
sociation, May 1974. 



have fallen, and (4) crops that are processed so that 
pathogenic organisms arc destroyed prior to human 
consumption. 

Industrial uses of reclaimed water include cooling 
w ater, process wash water, boiler feed water, quench- 
ing spray water, fire protection, and secondary- 
product recoverw These are carried out chiefl)' at 
metallurgical manufacturing and fabrication plants, 
electric-power generation plants, oil refineries and 
petro-chemical plants, and in mining and quarrying. 

The direct use of reclaimed water for municipal ir- 
rigation and recreational pursuits includes (1) irriga- 
tion of parks, freeway landscapes, golf courses, and 
athletic fields, (2) creation of scenic and ornamental 
lakes and ponds, (3) the maintenance of recreational 
lakes — for picnicking, boating, swimming, etc., and 
(4) irrigation at thermal power plants and industrial 
plants. 

The use made of water resulting from intentional 
reclamation of municipal and industrial wastes in 1972 
as reported by municipal, federal, and private agencies 
is shown in Table 20. The locations of these reclama- 
tion operations are shown in Figure 23. Of the total 
181,000 acre-feet of intentional reclamation shown in 
Table 20, an estimated 50,000 acre-feet, or 28 percent, 
represents a "new" water supply; that is, had this 
amount not been reclaimed, it would have been dis- 
charged to saline waters and lost to the usable fresh- 
w ater supply. The remaining 131,000 acre-feet would 
have been available for incidental reuse through dis- 
posal to land or to streams. 

Potential Future of Waste Water Reclamation 

Of the waste waters from which reclamation could 
provide a "new" suppl_\", onh' a portion will normally 
be reclaimed. High total dissolved solids or specific 
constituents may make abi'ut 1^ percent of the waters 
uneconomic for the possible uses in the area. Also, a 
portion of the water will be required to convey con- 
centrated wastes to points of disposal or to prevent 



Table 20. Inlenlior 



a\ Use of Reclaii 
(acre-feet) 



ed Water In 1972 





Industrial 


Irrigation 


Ground water 
recharge 


Recreation 


Log deck 
sprinkling 


Wildlife 
habitat 




Hydrologic area 


Crops 


Landscape 


Golf course 


Total 


North Coastal 

San Francisco Bay 

Central Coastal 


100 
2,800 

900 


SCO 
3.200 
5,400 
20,200 
5,000 
8,400 
25.300 
44.100 
3,600 
2,600 
3,600 


1,000 
9,600 

200 
200 


200 
2,700 

200 
200 

3.666 
1.600 


100 
21,200 

966 

466 
200 


3,800 
700 


4.900 
2.866 


1.700 


600 
8,200 
5.500 




57,200 


Sacramento Basin 

Delta-Central Sierra 

San Joaquin Basin 

Tulare Basin 


11,600 
8.400 
25,700 
45,400 


North Lahontan 


6,400 
6,600 




6,300 






Totals 


3,800 


121,900 


11.000 


8,500 


22,800 


4,500 


7,700 


1.700 


181,900 



106 



accumulation of salts in the soil, and this use may ac- 
count for from 20 to 30 percent of the waste water 
whicli is available for reclamation. Therefore, an aver- 
age of about 60 percent of available waste water could 
ultimately be reclaimed. 

Table 19 shows that in 1972, intentional reclamation 
amounted to 7 percent of waste water produced; how- 
ever, the sum of the intentional and the incidental 
reclamation amounted to nearly 30 percent of pro- 
duction, or about one-half the potential reclaimable 
water. 

Five Hydrologic Study Areas that appear to offer 
especially favorable conditions for reclamation and 
reuse of waste water include: 

1. San Francisco Bay 

2. Central Coastal 

3. South Coastal 

4. San Joaquin 

5. Tulare Basin 

These areas are considered particularly suitable for 
reclamation and reuse of waste water to alleviate prob- 
lems associated with (1) present and projected de- 
mands for supplemental water, (2) relatively high 
salinity of much of the basic water supplies, (3) sea 
water intrusion in the coastal areas, or (4) high costs 
of alternative supplemental supplies. 

In the three large coastal metropolitan areas, i.e., 
San Francisco Bay, Los Angeles Metropolitan, and 
San Diego Metropolitan, reclamation of waste water 
offers particular potential as an alternative water sup- 
ply. These basins depend to some extent now, and will 
depend to a greater extent in the future, on good 
qualit\' \\ater imports, and much of the waste water 
produced in these basins is of reusable quality. How- 
ever, the average mineral quality of the waste water 
potentially available in the South Coastal H\'droIogic 
Study Area is about 1,000 parts per million, and its 
use for municipal purposes would be limited unless 
desalting or blending with better quality water were 
practiced. 

Table 21 provides projections from a recent De- 
partment report *, by urban area, of (1) total munici- 
pal and industrial waste production, and (2) the 

Table 21. Municipal and Industrial Waste Water Production in 
Coastal Metropolitan Areas (1,000 acre-feet) 





Total waste 
produced 


Su 


liable for 
clamation 


Are.! 


1970 


1990 


2000 


1970 


1990 


2000 


San Francisco Bay 

Monterey Bay 


607 
50 
70 
1.070 
110 


1.140 
140 
230 

1.730 
260 


1,360 
180 
340 

2,160 
390 


560 
50 
60 

890 
80 


950 
140 
190 
1.450 
200 


1,140 
180 
290 




1.800 




300 








' Department of Water Resources Bulletii 
Reclamation, Stale of the Art," March 1 



Figure 23. Waste Water Reclamation Facilities 



107 



amount of discharged wastes that, considering present 
and planned water supplies, would be chemically suit- 
able for reclamation. Much of the waste water from 
these areas, if reclaimed, would represent a "new" 
water supply in lieu of discharge to saline waters. The 
amount of water that nia\- be reclaimed in each area 
will depend on various factors, including costs, suit- 
ability of the water for various uses, and marketing 
factors. 

Both the San Joaquin and Tulare Lake Basins offer 
potential for reclamation of agricultural waste water. 
Recent estimates indicate that, at the 1970 level of 
development, some 87,000 acre-feet of agricultural 
waste water which could no longer be recycled were 
generated each year in these two basins. The amount 
is expected to increase to 400,000 acre-feet by 1990. 

Some means of disposal or reclamation of these 
waste waters is fast becoming a necessity. In the San 
Joaquin Valley, the Bureau of Reclamation is con- 
structing the first phase of the San Luis Drain to 
remove agricultural wastes from the San Luis Project 
service area. As an interim measure the agricultural 
waste water will be conveyed to Kesterson Reservoir 
and used for wildlife management. 

At the present time, the average salt concentration 
of this agricultural waste water is about 6,800 milli- 
grams per liter (mg/1). For most purposes, this ex- 
ceeds the maximum practicable limit for reuse without 



desalting treatment. How ever, as salts arc leached from 
the soil and removed from the basin, the average min- 
eral concentration is expected to decline to about 3,000 
mg/i by the year 2000. The lower concentrations in 
later years will increase the utilit\- of waste water use 
from an economic standpoint. 

Two possible alternatives exist for tlie use of this 
highly saline waste water: 

1. It could be desalted to provide additional local 
water supplies. 

2. It could be softened and used for power plaut 
cooling. 

Cost of Waste Water Reclamation 

Since state and federal regulatory agencies will re- 
quire at least the equivalent of secondary treatment 
for all wastes discharged into surface water, including 
the ocean, by 1977, costs for additional steps for waste 
water reclamation will be lower in the future. The 
costs of outfall lines and any associated pumping for 
disposal of treated sewage effluent would also be less. 
Costs allocated to se\\age treatment and to waste water 
reclamation should reflect equitable sharing of savings 
through multipurpose projects. 

The costs of reclaimed water vary widely, depend- 
ing on the quantity and quality of the waste water, 
disposal rc(]uirenicnts, treatment rc(]uircmcnts, in- 




Whittier Narrows waste water reclamation pta 



108 



tended uses, and the transportation requirement to the 

site of use. Present costs range from: ' 

1. Two to five dollars per acre-foot in areas where j 

reclaimed water can be used for irrigation near i 

the treatment plants; I 

! 2. Twenty to forty dollars per acre-foot where ex- ' 

, pensive treatment, storage, transportation and i 

j disposal arc required; and ; 

3. More than |100 per acre-foot where more ex- ' 

tensive treatment, such as desalting, is required. 

Activities by the Department of Water Resources | 

The Department of Water Resources has for many 
i years had statutory responsibilities to study and pro- 
mote waste \\ater reclamation. These responsibilities 
were reiterated and brought up to date by the 1973- 
74 Legislature in AB 3815 which is called Waste 
Water Reuse Law of 1974. In addition to re-express- 
ing state policy that there should be maximum reuse 
of waste water for satisfying beneficial water needs, 
the Department is directed to consider use of waste 
water for power plant cooling as well as for other 
purposes, and is authorized to study the technology 
of the reuse of waste water and further the develop- 
ment of the technology of reclamation of waste water. 
The Department of Water Resources' current reclama- 
tion activities include: 

1. An annual statewide inventory of waste water 
I production and reclamation practices and technology, 

published in the Bulletin No. 68 Series. 

2. Studies in specific areas to (a) report on the cur- 
rent status of waste water reclamation practice and 
update the state of the art, (b) determine the possi- 
bility of using reclamed water to both meet future 
water demands and solve water quality problems, (c) 
define specific waste water reclamation possibilities, 
and (d) determine the environmental and ecological 
effects from the use of reclaimed water. The results 
of these studies are published in the Bulletin No. 80 
Series. 

3. Investigations and studies leading to (a) the im- 
plementation of waste water reclamation projects, or 
(b) a determination of the potential of reclaiming 
water from a specific waste or for a specific use. 

The scope of present and future planning investiga- 
tions of waste water reclamation potential is, perhaps, 
typified by the Department's recent participation in 
and preparation of a report for the San Francisco Bay 
Area Interagency Waste Water Reclamation Study. 
Participants included 16 federal, state, and local water 
agencies and several local sanitation districts. The re- 
port presents a summary of information on waste 
water discharges in the Bay area, identifies possible 
markets for reclaimed water, and discusses the aggre- 
gation, conveyance, treatment, and storage systems 
necessary to connect waste water sources to reclaimed 
water markets. The study focused on the possibility 
of using the reclaimed waste water for augmentation 



of delta outflow; and, in addition to direct use for that 
purpose, indirect means \\-ere investigated. These in- 
cluded substituting reclaimed \\ater for irrigation and 
ground water recharge demands in the Bay area and 
for irrigation in the adjacent HoUister area and in 
the Delta-Mendota and San Luis service areas in the 
San Joaquin Valley. Also, the possibility of using re- 
claimed water as a cooling supply for power plants 
\va.s considered. A number of alternative projects were 
investigated, and costs were estimated to range from 
190 to $130 per acre-foot of delivered water. The 
Department is engaged in further study of reclama- 
tion of this waste water. 

A listing of reports by the Department of Water 
Resources for the years 1950 through 1972 and brief 
descriptions of the activities of the Department are 
given in Bulletin No. 189.* 

Legal Requirements and Public Acceptance 

Regulations and requirements for the quality of 
water from all sources that can be used by the public 
are set by federal, state, and local authorities to protect 
both the public health and the environment. Regula- 
tions and requirements for the use of reclaimed waste 
water are prescribed in accordance with the Water 
Reclamation Law (Division 7, Chapter 7 of the State 
Water Code). Statewide waste water reclamation 
criteria are set by the Department of Health for those 
uses of reclaimed waste water which affect the public 
health. The regional water quality control boards then 
set requirements in relationship with these waste water 
reclamation criteria upon either the producer of the 
reclaimed water or the user, or both. 

Currently, the Department of Health has established 
waste water reclamation criteria for irrigation of 
fodder, fiber, seed, and some food crops. Generally, 
the food crops eaten raw which will not come in 
contact \\ith the reclaimed waste water or those 
which are cooked in a controlled environment, such 
as in a cannery, may be irrigated with reclaimed 
water. Also, criteria to protect the public health have 
been established for recreation impoundments and 
landscape irrigation. While the Department of Health 
has not as yet established waste water criteria for 
ground water recharge, it has issued a position paper 
as it pertains to the development of basin plans for 
the State Water Resources Control Board. The De- 
partment of Health states that direct injection to 
ground water is prohibited and that surface spreading 
will be considered on a case-by-case basis. It further 
states that it would be its position to recommend 
against waste water reuse in small ground water basins 
or where the quantity to be reused would be a large 
amount with respect to the quantity of water in the 
basin. The Department of Health would also require 
the abandoment of any projects where reclaimed waste 
water appeared in a local water supply well. 

• Department of Water Resources Bulletin No. 189, "Waste Water Rec- 
lamation, State of the Art," March 1973. 



109 



The public is conscious of the need for conserving 
water resources, and many feel that the reuse of re- 
claimed waste \\atcr, except for domestic purposes, is 
acceptable pro\ided the necessary precautions to pro- 
tect the public health arc taken. The health authorities 
feel that the reuse of reclaimed waste water for do- 
mestic and municipal \\ atcr supplies should be banned 
until such time as the effects of stable organics upon 
the public health arc full>" understood, until reason- 
able methods of identification and measurement of 
stable organics and viruses have been developed, and 
until fail-safe treatment processes for the total removal 
of stable organics and viruses have been perfected. 

The reuse of waste water in the past, and currently, 
has been controlled b\' the requirements set by the 
Department of Health. Future knowledge and tech- 
nolog\- will probably permit the criteria for use of re- 
claimed \\aste \\ ater to be more easily met and allow 
a higher degree of recycling and more direct municipal 
and industrial reuse. 

Desalting 

Established desalting processes are in operation in a 
number of arid areas in the v. orld which are in prox- 
imity to the ocean or other saline water bodies and 
\\here the relatively- high cost is competitive ^\ith 
available alternatives. The distillation process is highly 
developed and, for small and medium capacit\- appli- 
cations, has been in use for man\' \ears, during which 
time single-unit capacit\' has risen to several million 
gallons per da>'. The electrodial\sis and reverse os- 
mosis processes have also been applied to commercial 
production of fresh water. 

In California thus far, there has been limited incen- 
tive for applying existing desalting technology for \\a- 
ter resources development due to the high costs and 
to the highly developed surface and ground A\ater 
systems ^\■hich have made large quantities of water 
available at reasonable cost. However, a number of 
industries in California use desalting to provide proc- 
ess water and for production of bottled water. Also, 
most of the power plants sited adjacent to the ocean 
have sea water distillation facilities for producing 
boiler feed \\ ater and, in some cases, for other in-plant 
uses. Output of the dcsalters ranges from about 30,000 
to 400,000 gallons per daw Total state production is 
probably not more than 2 to 3 thousand acre-feet per 
year. 

There are no municipal applications of desalting in 
California today; however, studies b\- the Department 
of Water Resources indicate that desalting could bene- 
fit a number of small and medium-size communities 
that have poor quality water. For the most part, these 
communities are isolated from developed water s\s- 
tems and local water supplies are highly mineralized. 
Desalting has been u.scd in onl\' a few California com- 
munities, such as the clectrodiahsis plant and the re- 



verse osmosis test unit which were operated for a 
number of \ears at Coalinga, and the standby sea wa- 
ter distillation unit on Catalina Island. The Coalinga 
plants were used to desalt ground water until good 
qualitN surface water was imported. 

Cosfs of Desalfing 

Inflation and the energy crisis have delivered some 
heavy blow s to the economics of saline w ater conver- 
sion. Advances in technology w ere unable to keep up 
with rising inflation from about 1970. Until that year, 
advances in technology were steadily decreasing the 
cost of desalted water in small-capacitx' plants from 
about S6 per 1,000 gallons (S1950 per acre-foot) a dec- 
ade before to about Si per 1,000 gallons ($325 per 
acre-foot) in 1970. Capital costs were about Si per 
gallon per day of plant capacit\'. 

The trend in capital cost reduction was reversed in 
the earlv 1970s when escalation increased costs more 
rapidly than advances in technological improvements 
reduced them. The estimated capital cost for the pro- 
posed 40,000,000 gallon per day Diablo Can\ on distil- 
lation sea water desalter was about S66,000,000 or $1.65 
per gallon per day of plant capacit\' at 1971 prices. 
These costs w ere substantialh' greater than would have 
been estimated for a large-capacity plant in the late 
1960s. The at-site cost of desalted water was estimated 
to be about 1240 per acre-foot. Delivery into the San 
Luis Obispo-Santa Barbara Counties service area 
brought the cost up to about S300 per acre-foot. 

One of the major means for the control of salinity 
of Colorado River water delivered to Mexico under 
the agreement reached by the United States and Mex- 
ico is to blend river water with desalted water from 
a proposed ver\ large capacity desalting complex. 
About 100,000 acre-feet per year of desalted water 
will be produced b\- reverse-osmosis or possibly elec- 
trodialwsis equipment capable of producing 100,000,000 
gallons per da\-, making this facility by far the largest 
desalter in the world. The saline feed to the desalter 
will be brackish agricultural return water from the 
W'ellton-Mohawk Drain in Arizona. The waste water 
desalting plant and facilities are estimated to cost about 
$62,000,000 or about 62 cents per gallon per day of 
plant capacity. The unit cost of producing the desalted 
water from the 100,000 acre-feet per \ear plant is 
estimated to be about $136 per acre-foot. 

For several of the California communities investi- 
gated by the Department of AV'ater Resources w here 
desalting could be used to improve the quality of the 
brackish ground water supply, the estimated capital 
cost for reverse osmosis plants ranges from 75 cents to 
$5.00 per gallon per day of plant capacitw The plant 
capacities varied from 20,000 to 1,000,000 gallons per 
day. The water production costs ranged from about 70 
cents to $4.50 per 1,000 gallons ($230 to $1,460 per 
acre-foot). 



110 




Water Factory 21, Orange County 



Energy Required 

\^ari()us forms of energy are used for desalting, de- 
pending on the desalting process and the source of 
energy available. Steam is used to heat water for the 
distillation processes. Pumps are used to create pres- 
sure in the feed water in the reverse osmosis process 
and electricit\' is used in the electrodialysis process. 

EnergN' is expended to create the steam and drive 
the pumps. The heat generated b\' burning natural gas 
or oil, or nuclear fission can be used to generate the 
steam. The pumps are usually driven b\' electric 
motors. 

The amount of energ\' used for desalting can var\' 
with the concentration of salt in the water to be de- 
salted, the amount of salt to be removed, and the 
amount of water to be treated. For desalting sea 
water, a small vapor compression distillation desalter 
uses nearl\' 100 kilowatt-hours of electricit\' for ever\' 
1,000 gallons (33,000 kilowatt-hours per acre-foot) of 
fresh water produced. A large-capacity multistage 
flash distillation plant would use about 50 kilowatt- 
hours per 1,000 gallons of water produced. For the de- 
salting of brackish ground water with small-capacit\- 
membrane desalters, about 10 kilowatt-hours would be 
used per 1,000 gallons. For comparison, 10 kilowatt- 
hours would also be required to pump 1,000 gallons of 
water a vertical distance of 2,700 feet, the equivalent 
of the combined lift of the three southernmost San 
Joaquin \'alley pumping plants of the State Water 
Project, Wheeler Ridge, Wind Gap, and A. D. Ed- 
monston Pumping Plants. 



Acfivifies by the Department 

The Saline Water Conversion Program was initi- 
ated in the Department of Water Resources in 1957, 
and since that time several cooperative efforts with the 
federal Office of Saline Water * have been undertaken. 
After participating in financing and the operation of 
the Point Loma sea water conversion plant and the 
San Diego Saline Water Test Facility, the Department 
in 1969 intensified its cooperative efforts in the devel- 
opment of potential desalting applications and sites, 
and in the development of a large-capacit\- protot\pe 
desalter. 

A stud\- was made to select a site for a prototype 
desalting plant that would be a full-size, first-of-a-kind 
plant. A reconnaissance-level surve\' identified po- 
tential markets for desalted water in water service 
areas along the California coast and possible sites for 
obtaining a steam suppl\" from a power plant. The 
Diablo Can\'on nuclear power plant on the coast near 
San Luis Obispo was selected for the protoypc studw 
The Diablo Can\on protoype desalter study included 
a 40 million gallon per da\' sea water desalter that 
would use some of the steam produced by the nuclear 
generating plant now under construction at Diablo 
Can\on b\' the Pacific Gas and Electric Companw 
The desalter consisted of two units of 20 mgd capacity 
which was more than three times the capacit\' of any 
individual units in the world at that time. Al.so pro- 



' Office of Saline Water (OSW) a 
Research have been combined v 
search and Technology. Referon 
past activities of that ofHce and 



the Office 


! of Water Resources 


in the nev 


.■ Office of Water Re- 


to OSW i 


n this report concern 


pre\'ious n 


ame is therefore used. 



Ill 



posed was a 62-milc pipeline to conve\' desalted water 
into parts of San Luis Obispo County and Santa Bar- 
bara County. 

As a result of this study the Department of Water 
Resources issued a feasibility report * which recom- 
mended that the U. S. Congress and State Legislature 
authorize the project as described in the report and 
provide the means to finance the construction and 
operation of the project. However, the Office of Saline 
Water reported to the 1972 Session of Congress that 
a large-scale prototype desalting project had not been 
satisfactorily identified that \\ ould meet all of its re- 
quirements. Since the prototype project would not be 
feasible without federal participation in funding, no 
further action has been taken on this project. 

The present on-going desalting program includes 
the assessment of membrane desalting processes for 
selected types of brackisli and \\ astc waters and an as- 
sessment of possible desalting applications in the State. 

In 1971 an experimental reverse osmosis desalting 
unit to desalt agricultural waste water was installed at 
the Firebaugh Test Station, 40 miles west of Fresno, 
under an agreement \\ itii the University of California 
which has provided technical guidance in the testing 
program. Also, the Office of Saline Water joined the 
Department of Water Resources in a cooperative 
agreement in 1972 for testing at Firebaugh b\- furnish- 
ing two reverse osmosis test units in operation at Fire- 
baugh to determine the technical fcasibilit\' of desalt- 
ing agricultural waste water. Desalting of the waste 
water could provide a quantit\' of water for reuse and 
at the same time serve to concentrate the waste into 
a mucii smaller volume. 

The Department's participation in this effort at Fire- 
baugh has led to a discover)- that b\' adding an ion ex- 
change w ater softening unit in series with the reverse 
osmosis desaiters it is possible to attain an efficienc\- 
of 90 percent recovery of the treated feed water. Pre- 
vious efforts liad attained 70 percent efficienc\'. 

Under another cooperative agreement with the L^ni- 
vcrsity of California in 1973, the University produced 
a reverse osmosis unit which the Department provided 
to the iMetropolitan Water District of Southern Cali- 
fornia to operate at the F. E. Wc\mouth .Memorial 
Softening and Filtration Plant. The Department's unit 
is being operated b\ the Metropolitan AV'atcr District, 
along with four other types of reverse osmosis units 
owned by the District, to determine the fcasibilit\' of 
desalting Colorado River W^atcr for qualit\' improve- 
ment. 

In 1973, the Department joined in an ongoing pro- 
gram of the Cit\' of San Diego for the desalting of un- 
treated municipal waste water. The City has made 
some successful inroads into this area of desalting, and 
the Department will provide studies on, among other 

• State of Cjlifcirnia, IXpartmc:it of Water Resources and United Slates 
Department of the Interior. Office of Saline Water, "Feasibility 
Report, Diablo Canyon Desalting; Project", March 1972. 



things, the determination of the concentration of virus 
in the product water. 

To assess the potential for small desalting installa- 
tions for improvement of local water supplies the De- 
partment made an inventory of 1 1 1 small and medium 
size communities in California where water quality 
problems exist in the municipal water supply. The 
communities included in the inventory' are located in 
various parts of the State, although the majority are 
in Southern California. In each community excessive 
concentration of salts occurs in existing municipal 
water supplies, potential supplemental municipal water 
supplies, or municipal waste waters. The communities 
are isolated from existing and proposed water project 
facilities that could feasibly provide a better water 
supply. All facilities required for a desalting applica- 
tion were assessed for each community and estimated 
capital costs, annual costs, and unit costs were deter- 
mined for each system. 

Desalting may play a role in the operation of future 
electric generating plants at inland sites by enabling 
operators to use brackish agricultural waste water for 
cooling and also to meet the requirements of the En- 
vironmental Protection Agenc\' for disposal of brines 
resulting from the evaporative cooling process. The 




ental tubulor reverse osmosis dcsLjIhruj 



112 



agricultural waste water generally contains concen- 
trations of scale-producing constituents that must be 
reduced by ion exchange softening before the water 
can be economically used for cooling. It is desirable to 
concentrate the blowdown waste from the evaporative 
cooling process to facilitate its disposal. The distilla- 
tion desalting process may be used for this purpose, 
and the concentrated ■waste from the distillation proc- 
ess could provide an economic source of brine to re- 
generate the ion exchange resins used in the soften- 
ing process. There is a need to develop design and cost 
data for both of these systems before the potential of 
either can be fully evaluated. To meet this need, the 
Department is planning a development and testing pro- 
gram with technical assistance from the University of 
California. 

Future Poienfial of Desalination 

In the future, desalting can play a role in specialized 
applications to improve management and conservation 
of California's water resources. It is visualized that 
metropolitan areas will more intensively manage their 
e.xisting water supplies. There will be a need to pro- 
vide salt balance in ground water basins, to improve 
water quality, to reuse water, and to meet regulatory 
requirements for waste water discharges. In some cases, 
these management processes will require desalting. 
Hence, it is anticipated that desalting in California will 
find relatively small, but wide-spread use in the next 
10 to 30 years. The membrane desalting processes 
(reverse osmosis and electrodialysis) are likely to play 
a major role in desalting brackish waters. For coastal 
communities that need additional quantities of fresh 
water there may be limited applications for sea water 
desalting, using the distillation process. 

Geothermal Water Potential 

Since the late 1960s, considerable attention has been 
focused on the possibility of utilizing geothermal heat 
to produce fresh water from the saline ground water 
that sometimes occurs in geothemial regions. 

Necessary conditions for geothermal fresh water 
production include a geothermal heat source, an ade- 
quate supply of brine, and a market for fresh water. 
The most economic development of geothermal re- 
sources is believed to result from a facility which com- 
bines the production of power and water and possibly 
mineral by-products. Disposal of waste products will 
also require a method which is economical and which 
protects the environment. 

Of the three major geothermal areas in California 
(Figure 18) which have been investigated for com- 
mercial e.xploitation, the Geysers in Sonoma County, 
the Mono-Long Valley-Casa Diablo area, and the 
Southern Imperial Valley, onl\' Imperial Valley ap- 



pears at this time to have the quantities of hot subsur- 
face brine sufficient to support large scale production 
of water. At least nine anomalies — areas beneath the 
surface where ground temperatures are above normal 
as a result of near-surface penetration of heat from the 
hot magma of the earth's core — have been identified 
between the Salton Sea and the Mexican Border. Figure 
24 shows the location of the anomalies where temper- 
ature gradients have been investigated.* Other areas 
have been identified on the basis of favorable geologic 
conditions as potential areas for further investigation. 
Estimates of the amount of hot brine in the basin range 
from 1 to 5 billion acre-feet. Assuming the lower value 
for brine in storage, usable quantities at temperatures 
of 300° F or more have been estimated at 200 million 
acre-feet. Perhaps an additional 100 million acre-feet 
may also be usable at lower temperatures. 

It is probable that in addition to reinjection of con- 
centrated brines from the desalting process, it will be 
necessary to replace the water withdrawn from the 
underlying sediments to maintain subsurface pressures 
and to prevent land subsidence. Limited amounts of 
this recharge water might be obtained from the Salton 
Sea or other local drainage sources, but large-scale de- 
velopment would probably require importation of sea- 
water from the Pacific Ocean or from the Gulf of 
California. 

The Bureau of Reclamation has been conducting a 
freshwater-production research project in cooperation 
with the Office of Saline Water at the Mesa Anomaly 
in the Imperial Valley. In 1972, the Bureau of Recla- 
mation drilled and completed a geothermal well to a 
depth of 8,000 feet where a temperature of 400°F 
was measured. Pressure and temperature were ade- 
quate to produce steam and a brine with a salinity of 
about 17,000 milligrams per liter (mg/1) (sea water 
has 34,000 mg/l). In 1973, two experimental desalina- 
tion units, each capable of 20,000 to 50,000 gpd, were 
erected near the well to test the operation of both 
multistage flash distillation and vertical tube evapora- 
tion processes. Production of fresh water has been in- 
termittent in line with the project's purpose of iden- 
tifying and solving the problems unique to desalination 
of brines by use of geothermal heat. In 1973, a second 
well was drilled to a depth of 6,000 feet, where the 
temperature is about 370°F and the liquid salinity is 
about 2,400 mg/1. Three additional wells were com- 
pleted to a depth of about 6,000 feet in 1974. These 
wells arc still being tested, but present plans call for 
use of one well to develop injection techniques and 
the four remaining wells to develop water production 
methods. 

The Department of Water Resources is monitoring 
the programs conducted bv private and public entities 
with the objective of establishing the physical and 

* Data from report by the Bureau of Reclamation, "Geothermal Resources 
Investigations, Imperial Valley, California, Developmental Concepts", 
January 1972. 



113 



GREES 
EPTH 




Figure 24. Thermal Anomalies in the Imperial Valley Area 



114 



economic feasibility of geothermal resources develop- 
ment in the Imperial Valley as soon as possible. Also, to 
further define conditions at the Dunes anomaly, the 
Department drilled a 2,000 foot test hole in 1972. 
Maximum temperature encountered in the test hole 
was 21 ST. Cores, fluid samples and logs for this well 
were collected and analyzed and preliminary results 
were published in a joint report by the Department 
and the University of California, Riverside.* 

As with the production of power by use of geo- 
thermal fluids, economic development of fresh water 
will depend on solutions of technical problems, many 
of which result from the high mineral content of the 
subsurface brines. The scaling and waste disposal 
problems niav prove to be the most difficult. Land sub- 
sidence and potential for induced seismic activity are 
very important environmental questions that need 
stud\'. Odor and noise problems can be solved but need 
special treatment. Information currently available is 
not adequate to permit a reliable projection as to the 
amount of water that can be produced competitively 
with alternative sources of water. 

Geothermal power is not e.xpected to make a rela- 
tively large contribution to power production in the 
next decade or two. Without the economic advantages 
of the combined power-water production process, and 
considering the relative difficulty of desalting geother- 
mal fluids as compared with other available saline 
sources, geothermal water production appears to have 
limited potential for immediate commercial exploita- 
tion as a source of significant quantities of additional 
water. 

Further investigation is required to establish the 
feasibility of any large, new, geothermal operation. 
More geologic and engineering knowledge is needed 
to ( 1 ) refine estimates of the amount of brines and of 
the utility of the heat contents, (2) solve the scaling, 
corrosion and environmental problems, (3) develop 
acceptable methods of disposing of geothermal pollu- 
tants, (4) determine costs of fresh water production, 
and (5) establish the economic feasibilit)- and justi- 
fication of such production. 

If geothermal fluids in the Imperial Valley prove 
to be an economical source of water, they might aug- 
ment the Colorado River supplies now used in South- 
ern California and alleviate the increasing water quality 
problems there. Fresh water could be (1) added to the 
Colorado River, (2) used as a direct supply to meet 
municipal and industrial demand in the Imperial Val- 
ley, or (3) blended with Colorado River water in the 
AU-Amcrican Canal system. 

Although not oriented specifically to the production 
of fresh water from geothermal brines, many govern- 



' California Department of Water Resources and University of California, 
Riverside. The Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, a 
Joint Study by Coplen, Tyler B.; Combs, Jim; Rex, Robert W.; 
Burchalter, George; and Laird, Robert. "Preliminary Findings of 
an Investigation of the Dunes Thermal Anomaly, Imperial Valley, 
California, 1973". 



mental and private entities are engaged in investiga- 
tions and research programs related to the recovery 
of minerals and the production of power. Knowledge 
obtained from these programs will add to the data 
needed for early findings as to the practicality of 
fresh water production from the valley's geothermal 
resources. 

Weather Modification 

The weather is both man's friend and foe, and its 
control has long been a dream which is just now be- 
ginning to show a glimmer of promise of realization. 
However, the very nature of weather — its vagaries, 
its unpredictable swings from plenty to paucity, the 
complex nature of its processes — makes evaluation of 
the effects of weather modification operations difficult. 
While the procedures for seeding clouds in California 
to increase precipitation has been developed to a fair 
degree in recent years, the processes for evaluating 
the efl^ects of seeding have been slower in develop- 
ment and acceptance as assured indicators of incre- 
mental water production. Changes in precipitation fall 
within the range of natural variation and are difficult 
to identify. Therefore, statistical analyses are used in 
attempts to evaluate the effects of cloud seeding oper- 
ations, a process which can be improved mainly by 
accumulation of additional operating experience and 
data and by a better understanding of the precipita- 
tion process. 

During the 1971-72 year there were 12 weather 
modification projects conducted in California. Three 
of the projects were research and development ori- 
ented, three were primarily to increase hydro-power 
production, and the balance were to increase the 
availability of water supply. The locations of the proj- 
ect target areas are shown in Figure 25. 

Research activities were primarily sponsored by the 
U. S. Department of the Interior as part of its nation- 
wide Project Skywater. The California Department 
of Water Resources founded several activities of the 
California State University, Fresno Foundation, in 
conjunction with the Project Skywater effort. Results 
from state participation included: 

1. Classification of Sierra Nevada winter storms by 
types. 

2. Evaluation of a quantitative precipitation model — 
assessment of winter precipitation factors. 

}. Establishment of requirements for a winter-time 
cloud-seeding operation in the Feather River and 
North Yuba River basins. 
During 1972 the Bureau of Reclamation sponsored 
three field trials in California. Activities were con- 
ducted by the Desert Research Institute, University 
of Nevada, as part of the Pyramid Lake Pilot Project 
to increase water supply. In this program, efforts arc 
oriented toward determining whether increased pre- 



115 




/•- - 



cipitation can be promoted on the lee side of the 
Sierra Nevada crest. Results of tiie first season's opera- 
tion indicated a possible 14 percent increase in pre- 
cipitation.* 

In the CENSARE (C£A'tral SkrrA REscarch) proj- 
ect the Fresno Foundation accumulated additional evi- 
dence of precipitation increase. A supplemental final 
report t \\as published August 31, 1973, which in- 
cludes tiie follo\\ing observations: 

1. Precipitation enhancement of 5 to 10 percent oc- 
curred as a result of cloud seeding. 

2. Some potential exists for summer-time cumulus 
seeding in the CENSARE target area. 

The third project, conducted b\- Aerometric Re- 
search, Inc., in the Santa Barbara region, studied the 
downwind effect and precipitation duration of various 
seeding efforts. Results indicate that aerial seeding at 
very heavv rates produces decreased precipitation in 
primary target areas and large increases 50 to 100 
miles downwind. 

Another aspect of precipitation modification activi- 
ties is the assessment of the ecological-environmental 
effect of such activities. A stud>-, supported by the 
Bureau of Reclamation and the Department of Water 
Resources, was made by the Center for Regional En- 
vironmental Studies, California State Universit)-, San 
Diego, of such items as: effects of seeding agents, 
physical effects, ecosystem effects, and social effects. 
Preliminary results indicate the follow ing general con- 
clusions: 

1. The insolubility of silver iodide, the principal 
seeding agent, and the small quantity used, make 
any immediate danger to the environment un- 
likely — monitoring should continue to allow 
evaluation of any long-term effect. 

2. Research on effect of seeding agents is not areally 
unique, and research results could be transferred 
to other areas — study of the cumulative effect of 
long-time seeding is desirable. 

3. Effect of an ecosystem of 5-10% increase in pre- 
cipitation is not likely to be significant — some 
redistribution of plant and animal species may 
take place, but \\ ith little detrimental effect. 

4. Some aggravation of summer fire hazard may 
occur if plant vegetative growth is significantly 
increased. 

5. The effect on transportation facilities ma>- be the 
greatest social effect, with a negative impact if 
the duration of storms is increased. 

6. Effects of increased precipitation would fall 
within natural >ear-to-year variations — cumula- 
tive effect for a given year could be a problem 
if natural late season precipitation is large. 



Bur 



197; 



[mospheric Wate 
Annual Report,' 



Figure 25. Weather Modification Target Areas in 1971-1972 
116 



of Reclamation. Divisi 
agement, "Project Sk>'Ava 
1973. 

t California State University, rresno Foundation, Atmospheric Water 
Resources Research, "Supplemental Final Report — Volume I» Summary 
of Accomplishments", AuRtist 31, 1973, prepared under Bureau of 
Reclamation Contract No. 14-06-D-6592. 



7. Public response to a survey regarding attitude 
toward the precipitation modification program 
is essentiall\- noncommittal at this time. 

A recent analysis has been completed by North 
American Weather Consultants, for the Bureau of 
Reclamation, of potential increases in precipitation and 
streamflow resulting from modification of winter orog- 
raphic storms. Included in the first report* on the 
analysis is a stud\- of the Sacramento Basin which 
indicates significant increases may be possible from 
precipitation modification activities. Actual estimated 
increases were based on unregulated runoff without 
elimination of incremental precipitation which might 
tend to increase the severity of winter flood runoff. 
Thus, while the values cited in the report give a some- 
what high estimate of increase, they do indicate that 
the Feather, Yuba-Bear, and American Rivers sub- 
basins have a good potential for significantly increased 
runoff. Future activities in the field of precipitation 
management will be concerned with continuation of 
several ongoing pilot projects, completion of programs 
for evaluating the ecological-environmental effects, 
and the development of additional pilot projects to 
determine factors for consideration in assessing the 
feasibility of developing additional water supplies from 
operational precipitation manageiuent projects. 

The Department of Water Resources is currently 
planning for a pilot project in the Feather River Basin. 
Subject to satisfactory completion of an Environmental 
Impact Report, seeding of a portion of productive 
storms is expected to commence in the fall of 1975. 
Active participation b\- other agencies is desired to 
provide a coordinated effort which would result in 
areawide conclusions on full operation feasibilit\'. 

Weather modification involves uncertainties regard- 
ing downwind impacts beyond target areas, partic- 
ularly as they relate to claims of decreased potential 
precipitation, claims for increased costs due to floods 
and snow removal, and other possible litigation. These 
matters require careful study and w ork with the public 
and organizations who would be affected. 

The estimated costs of producing incremental 
amounts of runoff arc generally very low. The cost 
of associated acti\itics for environmental protection 
and insurance or facilities to protect against uncertain- 
ties and claims cannot be reasonably estimated on the 
basis of current knowledge. 

Management Concepts and Practices 

Future large-scale surface water development, con- 
trol, and conveyance projects in California face signif- 
icant obstacles, both economic and institutional. The 
number of desirable storage dexclopment sites is 
rapidly diminishing, and those that do remain arc often 

» Robert D. Elliott, Jack F. Ilannaford, Russell W. ShalTcr, North 
American Weather Consultants, "Twelve Basin Investigation, Volume 
I, Report No. 15-18", May 15, 1973. 



far removed from the areas of need. Yet demands for 
water in California continue to increase. 

A significant possibility for meeting at least some 
part of these grow ing water requirements lies in more 
effective water management practices. 

Water is nianaged in California by individuals, pri- 
vate companies, local agencies, municipalities, and the 
state and federal governments. Management tradition- 
ally has been performed at the lowest practical level, 
by individuals and local agencies when pos.sible; and 
local entities have guarded against infringement of this 
management right by large government agencies. Joint 
exercise of powers authority, given many local agencies 
by state law, has been used by two or more local 
agencies to manage water resources where one agency 
alone could not effectively do so. When there has 
been a need for a large importation project whose 
cost exceeded the financial capability of the local agen- 
cies, the project has usually been constructed, operated 
and managed b\' a larger agency, with the local 
agencies acting as contractors who then manage the 
local distribution and use of the water. 

This section discusses water management practices 
as they relate to more effective use of water, more ef- 
fective use of facilities, ground water modeling, flood 
control, and waterways management. 

More Effective Use of Water 

Making more effective use of the water supplies cur- 
rently available is popularl\' considered a prime 
mctiiod to help satisfy a portion of the increased de- 
mands for water. Since many of the methods for im- 
proving use of water are so inexpensive, and some may 
even save money too, it is important that all reason- 
able steps be undertaken. The extent of overall water 
saving and reduction in need for additional water sup- 
plies is, however, much less than generall\' believed 
because there is alrcads' a high degree of reuse of ex- 
cess water from incflicient operations. With the excep- 
tion of waste water discharged to the ocean and that 
which is so brackish it must be discarded, nearly all 
of the excess now returns to the water supply system 
for reuse. There will, however, be x\ater quality ad- 
vantages in reducing water use, as well as some water 
savings, and improved methods should be pursued. 

In this context, more effective use includes luorc ef- 
ficient use. Efficiency can be defined as "doing things 
right" whereas effectiveness is defined as "doing the 
right things". Some general approaches toward more 
effective use of present water supplies include: 
(1) application of farming and irrigation practices 
which result in the least waste of water, (2) elimina- 
tion of wasteful practices in the use of urban \\ater 
supplies, and (3) utilization of poor qualit}- water 
when feasible. 



117 



Practices which might extend the effective use of 
irrigation water are listed below: 

1. Utilize water distribution systems which provide 
uniform application of irrigation water and which 
allow controlled application to wet only the root 
zone. The increasing use of sprinkler irrigation 
is an example of this. New drip irrigation tech- 
niques also demonstrates some promise on selected 
crops in areas where water is very expensive. 
Drip irrigation is discussed more fully in Chapter 
I\' under "Agricultural Water Use". 

2. Improve timing of water applications to reduce 
nonrecoverable runoff and deep percolation. 

3. Eliminate nonbeneficial water-consuming ground 
cover in orchards. 

4. Improve soil structure to increase its water intake 
rate. 

5. Line farm ditches to reduce seepage loss. 



The cost of water is a principal influencing factor 
in urban water use. Cost consciousness on the part of 
the user can effectively be created by metering water 
use. However, most of the high use, unmetcred cities 
are in the Central Valley where water not consump- 
tively used returns to the water cycle. Most coastal 
cities which discharge se^\■age effluent to the ocean 
are now metered. 

In general about half of the ^\•ater suppl\' to urban 
homes is used outside of the home and the other half 
is used inside. Use of landscaping which does not re- 
quire much water can yield significant savings. Most 
of the savings in homes w ould be dependent on being 
water conscious and continually making efforts to 
save water in using appliances. 

Water resources which arc not usable for normal 
agricultural or domestic use because of quality con- 
siderations can be used in some circumstances for 
specialized purposes within a service area and thereby 




Avocados drip irrigated on a steep hillside in Son Diego County 



118 



extend the effective use of the area's good quahty 
water. Examples of this practice are listed below. 

1. Cooling water for thermal power plants and other 
industrial purposes. 

2. Application for esthetic purposes in municipal 
areas or for irrigation of golf courses and citv 
parks. 

>. Blending with a suitable volume of high quality 
water to obtain an increased supply of water of 
satisfactor\- qualit\'. 

4. Creation of wetlands and wildlife refuges. 

More Effeciive Use of Faciliiies 

There are many individual water projects and sys- 
tems in California, and at the present time, most are 
operated on an independent basis. Opportunities exist 
in cctrain areas for joint operation of surface water 
facilities ^\■ith ground water basins. In the Central 
\^allev, the state and federal water projects arc oper- 
ated through coordination to make effective use of 
the water suppl\" available in the Sacramcnto-San 
Joaquin Delta. 

The Department of Water Resources and other 
leading water agencies in California arc pursuing stud- 
ies directed toward full development of the potential 
capability of existing water supply facilities. For ex- 
ample, agreement was recently reached with power 
companies contracting for purchases of Oroville power 
which will allow operation of the facilit\' at levels 
below that of the maximum flood control reservation 
during the flood season in an effort to reduce the 
amount of spill which bypasses the power plant. 

The transportation facilities of the State Water 
Project w ill continue to have additional capacity dur- 
ing the nonirrigation seasons of each year for convey- 
ing water that is excess to the contractors' projected 
needs. During years of above-normal inflow to the 
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, additional volumes of 
water w ill be available for delivery to offstream stor- 
age sites — either on the surface or in ground water 
basins. This stored \vater would then be available to 
lessen the impact of dry-year deficiencies and reduce 
ground w ater pumping lifts. The Bureau of Reclama- 
tion has carr\ovcr storage — except in dry years — 
which is utilized as a nonfirm supply in some of its 
service areas. 

An example of what can be accomplished in the 
area of more effective use of facilities is embodied in 
a cross-valley canal under construction by the Kern 
County Water Agency. This facility was originally 
intended to transport normal year deliveries of water 
from the State Water Project to an area near Bakers- 
field. Negotiations have been successfully concluded 
which provide for an increase in capacit)' of this aque- 
duct to facilitate the delivery of Bureau of Reclama- 
tion water, available in the Delta, through the excess 
capacity of the State Water Project, including the 



joint state-federal San Luis canal, and through the 
Kern County Water Agency canal to water-deficient 
areas on the east side of the San Joaquin Valley. 

There are many potential opportunities for surface 
water exchanges among water agencies. Use of surface 
water instead of ground water in coastal areas can 
reduce the threat of sea water intrusion into ground 
w ater basins. In some cases ground water basins can 
effectively be used for water distribution in lieu of 
constructing surface distribution systems. The rapidly 
increasing cost of energy nia\' make some water ex- 
changes feasible if pumping can be decreased thereby. 

Ground Wafer Modeling 

.\vailabilit\- of large capacity electronic computers 
has made possible a new approach to management 
of ground water basins to increase water supplies, re- 
duce costs and improve operational flexibility. Man- 
agement of a ground water basin involves the planned 
use of ground water storage in conjunction w ith local 
and imported surface water storage and use of sub- 
surface aquifers in conjunction with pipelines and 
canals for movement of water. Such management may, 
depending on the management objective, require de- 
liberate augmentation of natural recharge to place 
necessary quantities of water underground, and 
planned extraction patterns and facilities to control 
both removal of ground water and its movement 
through the basin's aquifers. It may also involve meas- 
ures to prevent degradation of the ground water. 

Ground water management objectives for a basin 
ma\- include one or any number of the following: 

1. Utilize all sources of water to obtain the lowest 
cost water supply. 

2. "Aline" previously stored ground water supplies 
to dela\' construction of w ater importation facili- 
ties or distribution systems. 

i. Control location and movement of degraded 
water already in the ground water system. 

4. Control sea w ater intrusion into a ground w ater 
system. 

5. Prevent adverse salt buildup in a ground water 
resource. 

6. Predict the expected life and yield of a ground 
w ater resource in an overdraft situation or mining 
operation. 

7. Utilize the ground water basin reservoir to store 
excess surface water for later use and thereby in- 
crease the total available supply. 

8. Operate the ground water reservoir at levels be- 
low those causing drainage problems and above 
those causing subsidence or quality problems or 
necessitating deepening of large numbers of wells. 

In developing ways in which ground water can 
be used to help meet water demands, the collection, 
analysis and verification of a large amount of geologic, 



119 



hydrologic, and water quality information is necessary. 

The relations bet\veen the physical properties of a 
ground water basin can be approximately expressed 
by equations; therefore, a mathematical model can be 
used to verif\- the analysis and to test alternative ways 
of utilizing the ground water basin in conjunction 
with surface supplies, facilities, and storage. The model 
programmed on a high-speed electronic computer can 
then be verified. The prrcc^s is essentially one of trial 
and error and is too laborious to do by hand. The 
verified model can be used to test alternative plans so 
that a wide variety of alternatives can be tested in a 
short time and at a reasonable cost. 

The results of both basic ground water resource 
studies and more advanced studies evaluating alterna- 
tive operational plans have been used beneficially by 
both the Department of Water Resources and local 
agencies. On a statewide basis, they provide additional 
knowledge on the role ground water can play in 
satisfying demands for future-^trter supply and stor- 
age. To ensure that the study results will be realistic, 
the information is developed for local areas that use 
or have in storage significant amounts of ground water 
and in cooperation with local agencies responsible for 
operation of the ground ^\■ater basin. This method of 
conducting ground water studies provides a better 
understanding of local institutional and economic re- 
straints on the full utilization of grouod \\ater supplies 
as \\ ell as the full conserucnces (Vroverdraft, sea \\ater 
intrusion, and water quality degradation. 

Local agencies ha-.e benefitted mainly b\- being able 
to make decisions on ground water management based 
on fact instead of speculation. Decisions on how much 
imported \\ater to purchase, when to purchase it, and 
where to appl_\' it have been influenced by model 
studies in many areas of the State. Because there are 
a number of other factors involved, a local agency 
ma\' not alw ays select the least expensive alternative, 
but will review the range of alternatives and select 
the one best suited to their area. Examples of uses of 
model studies developed cooperatively with the De- 
partment of Water Resources are: (1) Metropolitan 
Water District of Southern California used financial 
information extensively in its pricing-policy studies; 
(2) San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District 
used the stud\' information to plan and operate its 
water distribution system and to keep the local voters 
apprised of water planning in the area with the result 
that it has been able to pass necessary water bond is- 
sues; (3) City of Pasadena has used the mathematical 
model of Ra_\mond Basin to evaluate the effects of 
shifting recharge and extraction locations, under a 
"safe-yield" operation condition, on water level ele- 
vations, water quality, and the cost of water resources 
management in the basin; and (4) Sacramento County 
water purveyors are using model studies in developing 
a countywide plan to integrate ground and surface 
water supplies. 



Other agencies, although they have not used the 
results of the investigations directly, have increased 
substantiall\- their understanding of water management 
options. Their interest in considering the use of ground 
water basins for regulation of surplus State Water 
Project water is considered to be a consequence of 
their participation in the ground \\ater modeling pro- 
gram. 

Ground water basins for which models were de- 
veloped by the Department of Water Resources in 
cooperation A\ith other agencies are: 

North Santa Clara Countv' 

Fremont Stud\- Area (Niles Cone) 

Livermore \^alley 

Coyote Basin (Santa Clara County) 

Sacramento County 

Kern County 

Coastal Plain of Los Angeles County 

San Gabriel Valley 

Chino-Riverside Area 

Bunker Hill-San Timoteo Area 

Ventura County 

Raymond Basin 

Waferway Management Plans 

Water\\a%- management planning is a subdivision 
within the more universal field of water management. 
Waterw a\' management concerns primaril\- those fac- 
tors related directly to the rivers and streams and to 
their immediately adjacent land areas, whereas water 
management involves matters of basin-wide and even 
trans-basin scope. 

In 1971, the Legislature directed the Resources 
Agenc>' to prepare detailed waterway management 
plans for specified streams in the North Coastal and 
northern San Francisco Bay Hydrologic Study Areas.* 
In the following year, the Administrator of the Re- 
sources Agency was further directed to prepare and 
administer river management plans under legislation 
establishing the State W'M, Scenic, and Recreational 
System.** 

The objectives of the Resources Agency's Water- 
Way Management Program are: 

1. To protect and enhance scenic, recreational, geo- 
logic, fish and wildlife, historic, archaelogical and 
similar values associated with riverine environ- 
ments, without unreasonably limiting other re- 
source uses, where the extent and nature of such 
uses do not conflict with the public use and en- 
joyment of these values. 

2. To assist in maintaining or enhancing water qual- 
ity. 

3. To provide opportunities for river-oriented rec- 
reation which is consistent with protection of the 
qualit\- values associated with the rivers. 

•Senate Bill No. 1285, Chapter 761, Statutes of 1971. 
••Senate Bill No. 107. Chapter 1259, Statutes of 1972. 
Also, see Chapter 1 of this report. 



120 



4. To maintain those rivers included in the State 
Wild and Scenic Rivers System in natural and 
free-flowing conditions for the benefit and en- 
joyment of the people of the State. 

5. To identify measures for flood control and 
streamflow augmentation which may be neces- 
sary and desirable to enhance the riverine en- 
vironments ^^■here such measures do not conflict 
with natural, free-flowing and other requirements 
of the rivers included in the system. 

Waterway management plans are currently under 
preparation for the Smith and Klamath Rivers. Pro- 
gram activities in progress include: 

1. Identification of actions presently in effect or 
required to insure safeguarding of scenic, fishery, 
wildlife and recreational values; 

2. Preparation of information on flood control, in- 
basin water conservation and streamflow aug- 
mentation needs and possible measures required 
exclusive of permanent mainstream dams or other 
facilities \\hich A\ould advcrselv affect the nat- 



ural and free-flowing character of the rivers; 
3. Preparation of estimates of recreational develop- 
ments necessary, river access and controls desired, 
possible adjacent land use, and associated costs 
to achieve greater human enjoyment of these 
rivers. 
The above work is carried out by the Resources 
Agency in cooperation with local government entities 
and the appropriate federal agencies where federal 
lands are involved, and it is coordinated closely with 
the related studies of the State Water Resources Con- 
trol Board in its preparation of Comprehensive Water 
Quality Control Plans for the Smith and Klamath 
Rivers. Similar coordination is maintained with the 
State Board of Forestry in its development and imple- 
mentation of new Forest Practice Act rules and regu- 
lations. 

Subsequent to public hearings, it is anticipated that 
the Smith River Waterway Management Plan Report 
will be submitted to the California Legislature for its 
consideration earl\' during the 1975 Session. 




Smith River at the junction of the North Fork and Middle Fori< 



121 



Flood Confrol 

Flood control management is discussed in this chap- 
ter in regard to processes that arc available or being 
considered for preventing flood damage, programs and 
projects that are under\\a>' that prevent flood damage 
and studies by various agencies that will lead to future 
programs or projects for floodplain management. 

Methods of Preventing Flood Daviage. There arc 
two general categories of flood control measures to be 
considered in planning for damage control — structural 
and nonstructural. The two differ in function. Struc- 
tural measures are designed to control water. Non- 
structural measures arc intended to control people's 
actions. In the structural category are such features as 
reservoirs and detention basins, flood\\a\s and by- 
passes, levees, and channel improvements. Nonstruc- 
tural measures include floodplain regulation, flood 
forecasting and warning procedures, flood proofing, 
• watershed land treatment, and flood insurance. 

Theoretically, structural measures could provide the 
maximum reduction in damages to existing land use 
development while allowing the most intensive use of 
flood-prone lands. Realistically, structural measures 
are not an absolute protection from flood damage. 
Project design capacity which governs the degree of 
protection from the return frequenc)' of floods is 
limited by economics. Projects are usually sized ac- 
cording to estimated damages prevented over an as- 
signed life of the project that at least equal the cost of 
the project calculated with an interest rate. A greater 
degree of protection is usuall\" provided where a high 
threat to life exists. Protection from flooding may be 
further diminished by change in land use in the up- 
stream basin after project completion. Projects lure 
development by providing a sense of securitw Con- 
sequentl\', projects designed with a limited capacity 
pose the greatest threat to man's encroachment on 
floodplains by setting the stage for greater disaster than 
would occur without an existing project. Unless eco- 
nomics will allow a very high degree of protection for 
urban development, no "project only" alternative 
should be considered. It should be mandatory to in- 
corporate nonstructural measures such as regulatory 
land use controls and flood proofing and flood warning 
procedures. 

Notwithstanding the limitations, there are some flood 
problems where only structural measures will protect 
a desired land use. Structures are required to train and 
contain stream channels on sediment debris cones found 
below mountain canyons and to protect agricultural 
development on valley floors. 

Nonstructural measures are an important aspect in 
any overall flood control plan. Nonstructural measures 
attempt to regulate development within a floodplain 
to that which can withstand flooding or be capable of 
evacuation. 



The success of nonstructural measures depends on 
several factors, not least important, human attitudes. 
The cooperation and coordination of various levels of 
governmental service agencies are required to establish 
reasonable building codes and zoning regulations. 
These regulations must be hard and fast w ith respect 
to future amendments that would relax them, mindful 
of individual's property rights, enforceable, and be 
enforced in the future. Paramount for success is the 
attitude of the private citizens who must initiate actions 
requiring personal expenditures and time, sometimes 
before the need has actually been demonstrated to 
them. 

Zoning and building codes hold the greatest prom- 
ise for those areas not >et developed, but potentially 
vulnerable to future development pressure. Floodplain 
zoning can be used as an interim solution, prior to 
future structural measures if it is clear that there is a 
lack of safe alternative land available for regulated 
grow th. For those areas where other lands are available, 
floodplain zoning would allow uses compatible with 
flooding or provide open spaces for future generations 
to enjoy. Nonstructural floodplain management would 
also reduce the trend of increasing flood damage in 
developing areas where existing projects afford a low 
degree of protection from floods. 

Flood forecasting is a tool that can help reduce 
flood damages. It may be employed by itself or in 
conjunction with other available measures. Flood fore- 
casting is essential in the successful operation and 
maintenance of flood control projects. It is prerequisite 
to successful floodplain evacuation and to implement- 
ing certain t\pes of flood proofing procedures. Flood 
forecasting success in reducing damages is dependent 
on several factors. There must be enough time for 
people to act after the initial warning. There must 
be a local organization geared to receive w arnings and 
disseminate pertinent information to the floodplain 
dwellers. And, the forecasts must be reliable enough 
to create confidence in the users so thc\" will take 
the neccssar\' actions in subsequent events. 

Flood proofing embodies permanent and temporary 
structural changes and adjustments to propert\- in the 
flood hazard area. Two common practices are grading 
ordinances that require the ground level for streets 
and buildings to be above flood stages and construction 
of buildings so the first floor can be inundated with- 
out much damage. Flood proofing is particularl\' suited 
for areas where flood stages and velocities are low 
and adequate advanced warning time is available. The 
cost to provide flood proofing measures must be borne 
b>- the local property owners. 

Watershed treatment involves treating the land to 
retard runoff and reduce erosion. Land treatment is 
most applicable to small upstream portions of basins. 
In general, such measures are ineffective toward reduc- 
ing flood damages in areas much removed from the 
lands where the treatment has been applied. In steep 



122 



mountainous areas adjacent to urban development 
where \\ild fires occur, seeding of ground cover after 
a fire is done as soon as possible prior to the rainy 
season. The purpose is to retard rapid erosion and 
ensuing mud and debris flows that disrupt dow nstrcam 
project operation and may inflict other costiv damages, 
too. Success depends on adequate germination and 
growing time before heavy rains begin. 

Flood insurance is available to eligible communities 
as a result of the National Flood Insurance Act of 
1968. The act as amended in 1973, will provide strong 
incentives for local communities to regulate land use 
and \\ill require the floodplain dweller to share more 
fully in the costs to mitigate damages in the future. 

Present Flood Control Activities. This discussion 
primarily reports state and federal flood damage reduc- 
tion programs. .Man\- smaller projects are being con- 
structed b\- local flood control agencies. However, 
there is no systematic compilation of information on 
the work in flood control accomplished hv local agen- 
cies. 

The tabulation below lists major structural projects 
currently underway. Those projects, where construc- 
tion started since 1970, are indicated with an ".\". 



Davis' 

Hidden 

Buchanan 

New Melones 

Auburn 

Warm Springs 

Local Proierls' - 

Los Ant-eles River. 
Lyie & Warm Cree 
Santa Paula Creek 
Sweetwater River. 
Walnut Creek 

IVatershed Projecti'^ 3 
Carpinteria Valley, 
Central Sonoma.. 
Main Street Canyc 

Mustang Creek 

Napa River 

Revolon Slough 



Constr. 

Begun 
Since 
1970 



Contra Costa Co. 



.Merced Co. 
Napa Co. 



Hydrologic 
Study Are: 



San Joaquin 
San Joaquin 
San Joaquin 



South Coastal 
South Coastal 
South Coastal 
South Coastal 
San Francisco 



Central Coastal 
San Francisco 
South Coastal 
San Joaquin 
San Francisco 
South Coastal 



' U.S. .\rmy Corps of Engineers is constructing agency — See Plate I for location 

of dams and reservoirs. 
- Projects for which the State has a financial obligation. 
' U.S. Department of Agriculture. Soil Conservation Service is the funding agency. 

The State has not been as active in construction or 
planning projects to alleviate flood problems as have 
the federal and local agencies. Two of the dams the 
State built for the California State Water Project pro- 
vide flood control. The\' are Oroville Dam on the 
Feather River and Del Valle Dam in Livermore \'alley. 
The Department of Water Resources also designed 
and constructed the lower San Joaquin River Flood 
Control Project. The State's principal involvement has 
been as a financial partner in eligible local projects and 
in non.structural implementation programs directed to- 
ward reducing flood losses. 



The United States Army Corps of Engineers has a 
Flood Plain Information Service Program undcrwav. 
A floodplain information report typically includes 
maps, flood profiles, and other display and narrative 
material on the extent, depth, and duration of past 
floods, and similar data on floods that may reasonably 
be expected in the future. To date 91 reports have 
been completed; 15 are ongoing and 35 others planned 
for completion over the next several years. This in- 
formation is essential for analysis of nonstructural 
measures. Similar studies are conducted by the Depart- 
ment of Water Resources in cooperation with local 
agencies. 

The State requires local agencies to zone floodplains 
to be protected by authorized federal flood control 
projects to prevent incompatible development. The 
State Reclamation Board, which has jurisdiction over 
flood control projects in the Central X'alley of Cali- 
fornia, is establishing "designated floodways" to pre- 
vent incompatible de\clopment in flood channels under 
its jurisdiction. 

The National Flood Insurance Program is just get- 




Urbon development below debris control structure 



123 



ting undeiwaw Ir shows great promise of correcting 
many floodpiain cncroaclimcnt problems that do not 
justify structural remedies. Additional federal staff is 
needed to keep pace with increasing public desire to 
participate in the program. 

The Department of Water Resources expends ap- 
proximately $725,000 annua!l\- on the following activi- 
ties: in cooperation w ith the National Weather Serv- 
ice to provide timel\- flood w arnings and forecasts for 
river basins greater than 200 square miles in area; to 
administer the Cobey-AIquist Flood Plain Manage- 
ment Act to regulate floodplains prior to construction 
starts of authorized projects; b\' establishing priorities 
among the requesting local agencies for floodpiain in- 
formation studies b\' the Corps of Engineers; to assist 
local communities in qualifying for federal flood in- 
surance; and to provide engineering scr\ices to the Rec- 
lamation Board on its Designated Floodwa\' Program 
— a program to prevent encroachments in Central \"al- 
ley w ater courses to preserve adequate floodw a\ s. Tiie 
Department expends an additional 54,200,000 annuall\- 
on other flood control activities including maintenance 
of Central \"alley flood control systems. 

The Corps of Engineers has 23 major and minor 
general investigations undcrw a\- at a cost of $1,900,000 
annually. 

The U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conser- 
vation Service is currently spending about 5450,000 
per \ear on 5 w atershed works plans and 3 ri\er basin 
planning studies in California. 

The flood problem in the Delta, discussed in Chap- 
ter I\', was studied by the Department of Water Re- 
sources and several alternative solutions presented * for 
public discussion. The opinion siiared b\- most suggests 
structural protection from a flood-return interval com- 
mensurate w itii agricultural lands should be provided. 
The cost should be allocated to all levels of govern- 
ment and among the different purposes that stand to 
gain from such protection. 

The Corps of Engineers has been requested 1)\- the 
State Legislature to stud_\- the existing levees and ren- 
der a report by the fall of 1976. The Corps has stated 
the investigation would require more time because of 
the man\- diverse problems involved. No investigative 
work is underway at present as federal funds have not 
been made available. 

Cognizant of the need for more state participation 
in flood management, the Department of Water Re- 
sources initiated a 3-_\ear study in Jul\- 1974 to eval- 
uate flood damage pre\ention. The study, at a cost of 
about $500,000, in consultation w ith local go\ernment 
and flood control agencies will review existing and 
proposed flood control works, estimate the degree of 
protection from flooding, identif\- residual flood prob- 
lems, and examine and evaluate flood management con- 
cepts as they might resoh e existing problems. 



Water Quality Control Planning 

(This section of ihe report was prepared by the 
State Water Resources Control Board) 

Iniroducfion 

Ir is the responsibility of the State Water Resources 
Control Board to regulate the activities and factors 
which affect or may affect the qualit\' of the waters 
of the State in order to attain the highest w ater quality 
which is reasonable considering all demands being 
made and to be made on those waters and the total 
values involved.* Qualit\- and quantity are so inter- 
related that they must be considered together, a fact 
recognized by the Legislature which has placed the 
responsibility' for both quantity- allocation (water 
rights administration) and control of qualit\' upon 
the Board. 

The State's Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control 
Act of 1969 established the present control mecha- 
nism. The Act requires the formulation and adoption 
of water quality control plans by each of the nine 
Regional \Vater Quality Control Boards "for all areas 
w irhin the region"'. I^ The plans become effective upon 
approval by the State Board. The Act also provides 
that the approved \\ater quality control plans shall 
become a part of the California \\'atcr Plan when 
"reported to the Legislature". i 

P'ederal requirements for water pollution control 
plans did not appear until the issuing of the federal 
regulation 18CFR 601.32-33 on July 2, 1970, which 
specified that no grant for waste treatment works can 
be made unless the project is included in an effective, 
current basinw ide plan for pollution abatement con- 
sistent with approved w ater quality standards. 

The Porter-Cologne Act requires that "each Reg- 
ional Board shall establish such water qualit\' objectives 
in water quality control plans as in its judgment will 
ensure the reasonable protection of beneficial uses and 
the prevention of nuisance; ..." § Further, the plan 
shall contain a program of implementation for achiev- 
ing water quality objectives w hich includes a descrip- 
tion of the nature of actions to be taken, a time 
sclicdule and a description of surveillance to be under- 
taken to determine compliance with objecti\es. The 
federal regulation in effect at the start of the compre- 
hensive planning program required the plan to take 
into account sources of pollution, volume of discharge, 
character of effluent, present treatment, the effect of 
the discharge on the water quality in the basin and 
establish a detailed program of abatement. These reg- 
ulations emphasized facilities for -the abatement of 
municipal and industrial pollution problems. 



"Delta Levees, What is t 
sources, September 1973. 



rulurer" Dipaitmcnt of Watci Re 



• S ISOOO. tjliforni.1 Wali-r Cmlc. 
+ S 13240, California Water Code. 
t S 13141, California Water Code. 
5 S 13241, California Water Code. 



124 



The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amend- 
ments of 1972, which were enacted after the compre- 
hensive planning program was well underwa\', im- 
posed a number of additional requirements. Under the 
1972 Amendments the plan must include at least 
effluent limitations and schedules of compliance with 
established degrees of treatment, compatability with 
all elements of applicable areawide wastewater man- 
agement plans, a statement of total maximum daily 
pollutant loads, procedures for revision, authority for 
intergovernmental cooperation, an adequate program 
for implementation, controls over disposition of waste- 
\\ atcr treatment residuals and an inventory and rank- 
ing of needs for construction of waste treatment 
works. 

The comprehensive plans \\ ill be an extension of the 
Interim Water Quality Control Plans adopted and 
approved by the Regional Boards and the State Board 
in June 1971. The Interim Plans \\ill serve as a guide 
for water qualit\- management until tiie comprehensive 
plans are completed, adopted and approved. 

The comprehensive plans for each of the sixteen 
basins comprising the State have been under prepara- 
tion since Ma)- 1972, and will be completed by De- 
cember 1974. The plans will be published as reports. 
Adoption and approval are anticipated to be accomp- 
lished within a few months after completion. The 
plans will be assessed and revised as necessary to 
reflect current conditions and technology. 

Purposes of ihe Plans 

The purposes of the comprehensive Water Quality 
Control Plans are to: ( 1 ) establish beneficial uses to 
be protected and the water quality objectives which 
will ensure the reasonable protection of established 
beneficial uses; (2) describe the optimum conceptual 
basinw ide strategy to achieve the water quality objec- 
tives and management goals; (3) delineate and evaluate 
the viable alternatives for treatment and control of 
point and nonpoint sources to meet established water 
quality objectives; (4) select from the alternatives by 
a process which considers costs, flexibility to adapt 
to future changes in conditions, resources commit- 
ment, environmental impacts and socio-economic 
aspects to obtain a recommended control plan; and 
(5) provide information which allows the State to 
establish priorities for construction grants and issuance 
of waste discharge permits. 

The goals of the State in water quality management 
are implied in Section 13000 of the Water Code 
(Porter-Cologne Act) by the w ords ". . . The quality 
of all waters of the State shall be protected for use 
and enjoyment by the people of the State." The goals 
of the Federal Act are more specifically stated in 
Section 101 of PL 92-500 as follows: 

(1) The objective of the Act is to restore and main- 
tain the chemical, physical and biological integ- 
rity of the Nation's w aters. 



(2) It is the national goal to eliminate discharge of 
pollutants to navigable waters by 1985. 

(3) It is the national goal that wherever attainable, 
an interim goal of water quality which provides 
for the protection and propagation of fish, 
shellfish and wildlife, and provides for recrea- 
tion in and on the water he achieved by July 
1, 1983. 

(4) It is a national policy that the discharge of toxic 
pollutants in toxic amounts be prohibited. 

(5) It is the national policy that Federal financial 
assistance be provided to construct publicly 
owned waste treatment works. 

(6) It is the national polic\^ that areawide waste 
treatment management planning processes be 
developed and implemented to assure adequate 
control of the sources of pollutants, and 

(7) It is the national polic\- to develop technology 
necessary to eliminate the discharge of pollutants 
to navigable waters, waters of the contiguous 
zone and the oceans. 

The above Federal goals w ere extended and provided 
a time element in Section 301, PL 92-500, wherein the 
effluent limitations establish minimum, or mandatory, 
degrees of treatment to be afforded by publicly ow ncd 
and other than publicly owned treatment w orks. The 
effluent limitations are set forth in Table 22. Definitions 
of "secondary treatment", "best practicable control 
technology currently available", "best practicable 
waste treatment technology", and "best available tech- 
nology economically achievable" by the U. S. En- 
vironmental Protection Agency establish limiting 
values for certain pollutant parameters. 

Table 22. Mandotory Waste Treatment Requirements 
Public Law 92-500 



By July I, 1977. 
By July I. 1983. 



Publicly Owned Pla 



Best Practicable Control 
Technology Currently 
Available 



iest Practicable Waste 
Treatment Technology 



Best Available Techn 
ogy Economically 



The plans have been developed to comply with the 
planning requirements of the Porter-Cologne Act and 
Sections 106, 201, 208, and 303 of the Federal Water 
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (PL 92- 
500). 

Plan Preparation 

The basin planning program is managed by the Di- 
vision of Planning and Research of the State Board in 
conjunction with the staff of the Regional Boards. In 
order to fully utilize planning data contained in the 
files of various state and regional agencies, the State 
Board contracted with these agencies to prepare re- 



125 



ports of planning information related to tiieir areas of 
interest. 

The Department of Water Resources prepared re- 
ports on land and water use, economic, employment 
and land use projections, population distribution, water 
quality modeling, present and historical \\atcr quality 
and, in addition, prepared maps of hydrologic subunits. 

The Department of Fish and Game prepared reports 
on water quality and quantity data, present and future 
water use and waste loads for DF&G installations, 
present and future demands for fish and wildlife, water 
qualit\' and quantit\' problems related to fish and \\ild- 
life, and development of water quality objectives for 
waters having beneficial uses related to fish and \\ ild- 
life. DF&G also provided input for preparation of en- 
vironmental impact assessments for the basin plans. 

The Department of Health provided information on 
beneficial uses of water and water supply quality prob- 
lems, present and projected domestic water use, and 
identification and evaluation of existing wastewater 
reclamation projects. 

The Department of Parks and Recreation reported 
upon existing and potential public and private recrea- 
tional areas, estimates of present and projected park 
attendance, present and future water and wastewater 
requirements for parks and recreational areas, and pres- 
ent and future recreational area waste management 
practices. 

The Department of Conservation provided an in- 
ventory of mines and mine pollution, data related to 
soil and vegetation conditions and their affect on the 
production of sediment, information on current and 
projected operations of the timber industry, forest 
management practices, problems of and procedures for 
control of water pollution related to oil, gas, and gco- 
thermal operations, and opportunities for utilizing 
wastewaters in the oil and gas industry. 

These state agencies were retained under contract to 
provide assistance to the planners during plan prepara- 
tion on an as-needed basis. 

The State Board also entered into contracts with 
local and regional planning agencies to provide plan- 
ning data and assistance. These agencies include the 
Association of Bay Area Governments, Sacramento 
Regional Area Planning Commission, Southern Cali- 
fornia Association of Governments, Comprehensive 
Planning Organization (San Diego), Association of 
Monterey Bay Area Governments, San Luis Re\- 
Santa Margarita Joint Committee, Ventura Regional 
County Sanitation District and Lompoc \^alle\- Region. 

Development of the basin plans was performed 
under contracts between the State Board and public 
agencies and private consulting organizations. These 
organizations and the respective basins are identified in 
Table 23. 

The Board contracted w ith the consulting joint ven- 
ture of CD.M/Banks Consultants to serve as the Office 



126 



Table 23. Basin Planning Organizations 



Department of Water Resources 

Brown & Caldwell. Water Resources Engineers, Inc., Voder- 
Trotter-Orlob & Associates 

Daniel, Mann, Johnson & Mendenhall/Koebig & Koebig, Inc 

Bay-Valiey Consultants (Bechtel Corp., Consocr-Townsend & 
Associates, CHsM-Hill, Hydroscience).. 

Kaiser Engineers _ 

Santa Ana Watershed Planning Agency 

James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Inc. 



IB, 2. 3 
4A. 4B, 5D 



of Technical Coordination (OTC) which furnished 
administrative and technical advice and assistance to 
the Board in matters relating to the preparation of the 
basin plans. 

Planning Criteria and Consfrainfs 

The basin plans \\ ere prepared within a framework 
of criteria, policies, base conditions and environmental 
constraints. The first objective was to meet the require- 
ments of the laws, regulations and policies which pro- 
vide basic legal control. Further the intent was to de- 
velop a set of basin plans which address the water 
qualit\' management problems of each of the basins 
indi\idually while considering the inter-basin and state- 
wide problems so that the basin plans, considered to- 
gether, will provide a consistent and continuous over- 
all statewide plan. Interface problems among the 
basins are formidable in California where major inter- 
basin transfers of ^\'ater occur. 

Although planning was already well under wa\-, 
ciianges, some of which were rather drastic, w ere made 
to comply with PL 92-.^00 which became effective on 
October IS, 1972. The problem was further compli- 
cated by the considerable arra\' of specific new reg- 
ulations that began to emerge from the L\ S. Environ- 
mental Protection Agenc\- shortl\' after passage of the 
.\ct and are still being promulgated as this planning 
effort nears completion. Ever\- attempt has been made 
to comply w ith these regulations. 

The several policies and plans of the State AX'atcr 
Resources Control Board which affect basin planning 
are described brieH\' below. These policies and plans 
provide the added details needed to carr\- out the in- 
tent and general pro\ isions of the law s. One objective 
of the comprehensive stud\- w as to look at the impact 
ot these plans and policies on the water resources, and 
upon the people, to determine if changes are advisable. 

Four State Board (lolicics and plans provided polic\' 
guidance in this comprehensive planning program. 
Ihey are the ( I ) State Polic\- for XV'atcr Quality Con- 
trol (State Polic>); (2) Statement of Polic\- with Re- 
spect to .Maintaining High Qualit> of Waters in Cali- 
fornia (N'ondegradation Policy); (3) Water Quality 



if 



il 



E 



k 



b 



is 



Control Plan for Ocean \V'aters of California (Ocean 
Plan); and (4) Water Quality Control Plan for Con- 
trol of Temperature in the Coastal and Interstate Wa- 
ters and Enclosed Ba\"s and Estuaries of California 
(Thermal Plan). Tiic State Polic\- stresses that control 
decisions must assure protection of water resources for 
m.ixinium beneficial use; that municipal, agricultural 
and industrial w astcw atcrs must be considered an in- 
tegral parr of the total fresh water resource; that 
wastewater management is dependent upon a balanced 
program of source control, treatment of wastewaters, 
reuse of reclaimed water, and proper disposal of ef- 
fluents and residuals; and that wastewater reclamation 
and reuse shall be encouraged. 

The Xondegradation Polic\' esscntiall\' provides that 
\\ hcrever existing qualit\' of water is better than need 
he to adequate!)' support existing or potential beneficial 
uses or to comply with established policy, the existing 
high quality w ill be maintained. Exception is allowed 
only if any change \'. ill be consistent with the maxi- 
mum benefit to the people, will not unrcasonabl\" af- 
fect beneficial uses and w ill not result in qualit\- lower 
than that prescribed by other policies. 

1 he Ocean Plan sets forth limits or levels of water 
qualit)' for ocean waters to ensure protection of bene- 
ficial uses and prevention of nuisance, and states that 
the discharge of wastes shall not cause violation of 
these quality objectives. The plan describes acceptable 
bacteriological, physical, chemical, biological, toxicity 
and radioactive limits in both numerical and descrip- 
ti\ c terms. The plan prohibits the discharge of haz- 
ardous substances and sludge, bypassing of untreated 
wastes, and requires that waste discharges not alter 
natural water quality in areas designated as having 
special biological significance. 

Ihc Thermal Plan imposes limits on the temperature 
of waste materials discharged to waters of the state 
classified as cold interstate waters, warm interstate w a- 
tcrs. coastal waters, enclosed ba\s, and estuaries. In 
general, existing elevated temperature discharges are 
re(]uired to be at such a temperature as to assure pro- 
tection of beneficial uses and areas of special biologi- 
cal significance. New elevated temperature discharges 
are assigned specific limits on the temperature of the 
discharge as well as the resulting temperature of the 
mixed receiving and wastewaters. 

1 he basin plans have been prepared to encompass 
a planning period from the present through the year 
2000. Projections of population, employment, water 
use, land use, industrial output, and agricultural pro- 
duction v.ere used to estimate the situations that are 
most likely to occur in the planning period. The plans 
were prepared according to base line projections and 
because projections arc onl\- informed guesses, sensi- 
tivity of the plans to projections other than base line 
were assessed. 



Population projections prepared b\' the California 
Departments of Finance and Water Resources were 
used: the Rase Plan or D-150, and Alternate E-O. The 
letter designates the fertility rate, or births per female 
of 2A5 for Series D, and 2. 11 for Series E. The num- 
ber designates the annual net in-migration to the State 
in thf)usands. Common to all three projections w as the 
"benchmark" population data provided by the Nine- 
teenth Decennial Census of Population of the Unitetl 
States, -April 1, 1970. 

The D-150 projection was used as base line except 
that for areas designated as "air-critical" because of 
air pollution problem, the E-O projection must be 
base line. State grant fund regulations place limitations 
upon grant eligibility for excess or future capacity to 
be built into collection and treatment facilities by 
limiting eligible project costs. Capacity in excess of 
present needs to handle projected municipal and com- 
mercial growth for 10 years is grant eligible for treat- 
ment plants, and for 20 years for sewers, interceptors 
and outfalls. Capacity in excess of this must be funded 
locally. No capacity for industrial growth is grant 
eligible. In the planning program, latitude was al- 
lowed in selection of alternative projections for sensi- 
tivit\' studies to account for local opinions. 

Certain other basic considerations in planning were 
established as "base conditions" to assure that the 
various basin plans were basically consistent and uni- 
form statewide. Planning was carried out according to 
these stipulated "base conditions" but the effects on 
the basic plan of possible changes in these base condi- 
tions were investigated. The established base conditions 
for the planning program are listed in Table 24. 

Planning program guidelines were developed by 
the State Board staff and Oflnce of Technical Coordi- 
nation to establish consistent planning conditions for 
use by the various basin contractors. Twenty-six such 
planning management memoranda were issued en- 
compassing a wide range of subjects. In addition, 
standardized information on design parameters, fa- 
cilit\- performance, construction costs, interest and 
escalation rates, and energy requirements for facilities, 
was developed and distributed for use in the program. 
Uniformity and consistency in planning for all basins 
was achieved by the use of these management memo- 
randa and standardized information items. 

Planning Sfrategy 

A planning strategy w as developed for the prepara- 
tion of the basin water quality control plans. The 
strategy meets the requirements of the Porter-Cologne 
Act in that it begins with the establishment of benefi- 
cial uses, establishes water quality objectives to pro- 
tect those beneficial uses, evaluates alternative means 
to meet these objectives, selects a recommended plan, 
and provides a plan and program for implementation 
all within a framework of the water quality control 



127 



policies of the State Board. The strategy also pro- 
vides for the classification of segments into \\'ater 
quality or effluent limitation classes, the allocation of 
assimilative capacity, consideration of nonpoint sources 
and development of water quality management plans 
as required by the Federal Water Pollution Control 
Act Amendments of 1972. 

Figure 26 is a graphic representation of this planning 
strategy. The strategy applies to both surface and 
groundwaters even though the federal requirements, 
strictly interpreted, applies only to navigable waters. 
For purposes of these plans, the State Board considers 
that navigable waters are defined as all surface waters 
of the State. 

The planning strategy is carried out for each water 
body, surface or groundwater, classified as a segment. 
A segment is a water body having common hydro- 
Table 24. Base Conditions for Planning 



Project 


Base Condition Status 


1. 


Western Delta Overland Water Suppiv 


Joint construction and operation by 




System 




SWP and CVP. Operative by 1985. 


2. 


Kellogg Unit, Federal C\T 


Xot constructed within planning 








period. 


3. 


Folsom-South Canal 




Facility to be completed to its origi- 
nally planned southern terminous 
by 1985. 


4. 


Hood-Clay Connection 




Facility to be constructed and opera- 
tive when demands exceed Folsom- 
South Canal supply available at 
\imbus under SWRCB Decision 
D-1400. 


5. 


Eastside Division, Federa 


CVP 


Facility will not be built within plan- 
ning period. DWR-Kern Co. Cross 
Valley Canal to be considered an 
alternative. 


6. 


Export from .Vortli Coast 


Streams 


Xo additional diversions from North 
Coast Streams within planning 
period. 


7. 


San Felipe Division. Fede 


ral CVP 


Evaluate as one alternative for meet- 
ing future water demands in serv- 


8. 


East Bay MUD American 


River Project 


Evaluate as one alternative for meet- 
ing future demands. Value of qual- 
ity to be considered. 


9. 


Extension o{ Coastal Aq 


ueduct to San 


Coastal .\queduct will be completed 




Luis Obispo and Santa B. 


rbara 


at such time water demands indi- 
cate need. 


10. 


New Melones Project 




Construction as planned will take 
place. 


11. 


Baldwin Ship Channel 




Evaluate quantity and quality ef- 
fects of proposed facility on the 
Delta. 


12. 


Colorado River Quality 




Present TDS at Imperial Dam is 850 
mg/1 with uniform degradation to 
1.250 mg/1 by year 2000. Cali- 
fornia diversions limited to 4.4 X 
lO'^ afa except in surplus years. 


U. 


Peripheral Canal 




Two cases to be considered: 

(a) Joint federal and state construc- 
tion and operation. 

(b) State construction and operation 
with federal continuation of 
cross-Delta flow. 


14 


SWP Diversions 




Will meet SWP Schedule .\ contract 



Abb _„.. 

SWP — State Water Project 
CVP — Central Valley Project 
SWRCB — State Water Resources Control B. 
DWR — Department of Water Resources 
MUD — Municipal Utility District 
TDS — Total disolved solids 
mg/1 — Milligrams per liter 
afa — Acre feet per annum 



logic characteristics (or flow regulation patterns) and 
common natural physical, chemical and biological 
processes, including reactions to external stresses. T\\ o 
classes of segments are defined. An effluent limitation 
class segment is one in which water qualit\' objectives 
will be met with the implementation of mandatory 
treatment processes called for in PL 92-500 (Table 
22) for point \\aste sources. A water qualit>' class 
segment, conversely, is one in \\hich establislied w ater 
quality objectives will not be met upon implementa- 
tion of mandatory treatment processes for point \\aste 
sources. The designation of a segment as w ater quality 
class means that higher degrees of treatment \vM be 
required for point waste sources and/or control meas- 
ures must be imposed to decrease nonpoint waste 
loadings. 

The planning strategy may be divided into four dis- 
tinct steps each of which must be completed before 
starting the next. The first step in the planning proc- 
ess, selection of beneficial uses for a segment, is made 
by the Regional Board \\ith input from the other 
public agencies, tlie public and the basin contractor. 

In the second step, the most strict of the three water 
quaiit\- constraints; i.e., state polic\", nondegradation 
polic\', or quality to protect the beneficial use, is then 
selected as the basis for the water qualit\' objectives 
for that segment. Water quality objectives are de- 
termined early in the planning process and remain 
fixed throughout the process except for two situations 
in \\ hich a change may be considered. The first is a 
change to a better water quality through enhancement 
which \\ ill be described later. The second is a change 
to lower water qualit\' objectives to be considered 
only as a last resort, and onl\' in a situation where un- 
controllable waste loads make it impossible to meet 
the recommended water quality objectives. The latter 
situation is not show n on Figure 26. 

The third step, the classification of surface water 
segments into either the effluent limiration class or the 
\\ ater qualit\- class, involves the determination of the 
magnitude and location of wnste loads in the segment 
that \\i\\ be discharged into the segment w aters. Non- 
point waste loads heretofore uncontrolled and uncon- 
trollable loads are included as well as all point source 
waste loads. All loads are projected to future condi- 
tions expected to occur at the point in time fur w hich 
the plan is being developed. 

For point source waste loads, the estimated un- 
treated loads arc first determined and then reduced by 
the amount of treatment afforded by mandatorx' treat- 
ment le\els. For nonpoint loads, consideration is given 
to sources, magnitudes and reasonable means of con- 
trol. The estimated future nonpoint loads are reduced 
by whatever degree of control is to be applied under 
the selected management strategy. The remaining 
loads are combined with the point source loads which 
remain after mandator)- treatment. To obtain the 
residual segment loading, a judgment factor is added 



128 



1 1_^ 1 ^ 



n 



Figure 26. Statewide Planning Strategy for Water Quality Management 



129 



to account for hydrologic uncertainty and a factor of 
safety. This residual segment loading is applied under 
selected critical flow conditions and the estimated 
future water quality in the segment determined. Some 
of the available assimilative capacity within the estab- 
lished water quality objectives may be reserved for 
possible new loadings in the future. Estimated future 
quality is checked against the established water quality 
objectives. If the estimated segment water quality is 
better than or equal to the objectives, the segment is 
an effluent limitation class and, if not, the segment is 
a water quality class. 

The fourth step is to develop, in detail and with 
full consideration and evaluation of all reasonable al- 
ternatives, the recommended management plan, in- 
cluding facilities. For effluent limitation class segments, 
this involves the development of alternative plans us- 
ing the mandatory treatment levels for point source 
pollutant control and any nonpoint source control 
measures considered in the computations which led 
to the classification. 

For water quality class segments, the net available 
assimilative capacity of the segment within the estab- 
lished water quality objectives under selected critical 
flow conditions is allocated among the point and non- 
point waste load sources. Due allowance is made for 
natural background loading, loadings from upstream, 
hydrologic uncertainty, any reserve to be made for 
the possibility of new loadings in the future and a 
factor of safety. Progressively higher degrees of treat- 
ment are applied to the point sources and more strin- 
gent control measures to the nonpoint sources until a 
balance is obtained between projected residual waste 
loadings on the segment and the estimated assimilative 
capacity available for those loadings. It may be found 
necessary to prohibit some or all point source waste 
discharges to the segment, particularly in cases where 
the residual uncontrollable nonpoint waste discharges 
are large, in order to meet the water quality objectives. 

There may be water quality class segments for 
which it is clearly unreasonable or even impossible 
to meet the water quality objectives established in the 
second step of the planning process because of ex- 
cessive costs or inability to control nonpoint waste 
sources sufficiently. In such cases, it may be necessary 
to revise the water quality objectives downward. 
However, the justification for accepting lower water 
quality must be clearly demonstrated. 

In developing alternative plans, consideration is 
given to the possibilities of regionalization and integra- 
tion of facilities for municipal and industrial wastes. 
These alternative plans are evaluated, along with any 
alternatives developed through consideration of en- 
hancement. Selection of the recommended plan from 
among the alternatives is made considering cost-effec- 
tiveness, environmental impacts and functional effec- 
tiveness, reliability, flexibility, program acceptability 
and amenability to implementation. The institutional 



and financial arrangements necessary for implementa- 
tion of the recommended plan are set forth and made a 
part of the plan. 

Enhancement is defined as an improvement of the 
water quality of a segment over the water quality ob- 
jectives as determined in the second planning step. En- 
hancement is a viable alternative in situations where 
there is a demonstrable economic or environmental 
advantage to be gained by having higher quality water 
or where higher water quality can be achieved at low 
incremental cost. 

If enhancement appears to be possible, trial higher 
quality objectives are established, the net assimilation 
capacity (sec Figure 26) of the segment is determined, 
allocations are made and the resulting segment quality 
is estimated. This may take several trials to arrive at an 
acceptable and cost-effective set of objectives. 

Plan Reports 

Each of the basin plans will be published in a report, 
entitled Comprehensive Water Quality Control Plan. 
The report is prepared in two parts. Part I, Water 
Quality Control Plan, contains a statement of the plan 
and its environmental assessment and includes those 
portions to be adopted and approved by the Boards. 
Part II, Supporting Information, contains information 
which supports the development of the plan. 

Each plan contains an assessment of the expected ef- 
fects the plan will have on the environment including 
the socio-economic effects it will have on people. In 
addition, each plan includes a surveillance and monitor- 
ing program designed to gather and store information 
relating to background quality, discharger compliance 
and control plan effectiveness. 

The Water Quality Control Plans will be reviewed 
from time to time and revised as deemed necessary. 

Public Participaiion 

Participation by the public, organizations and in- 
dividuals, has been encouraged throughout the plan- 
ning process. The Porter-Cologne Act requires that 
"the Regional Boards shall not adopt any water quality 
control plan unless a public hearing is first held, 
. . . ".* In this planning program, more public par- 
ticipation was sought, not only to obtain input of in- 
formation from the public, but to prepare the way for 
smoother adoption proceedings. Early in the program, 
guidelines for public participation were established 
which called for at least four public meetings sched- 
uled at specific points in the planning process. The 
purpose of each meeting is described as follows: 

Meeting I. Introduction of the scope and purpose 
of the basin planning program; presentation of the 
planning schedule; introduction of the planning per- 
sonnel; description in general terms of the basic ele- 
ments of the plan; details on population and land use 

* Section 13244, California Waicr Code. 



130 



piiijcctions discussed; rhc public urged to express its 
\ lews. 

Mcctiiia; 2. I)ispla\' of beneficial uses and \\ater 
(luality objectives for public scrutiny and comment; 
beneficial uses and \\ater quality objectives not adopted 
at tiiis meeting but public concurrence w ith the thrust 
of the plan sougiit. 

Meeting 3. Presentation of the alternative plans 
M irh a discussion of the legal, policN' and institutional 
aspects; public expression sought as to acceptance and 
indication of preferred plan among the alternatives. 

Meeting 4. In the form of a Regional Board hear- 
ing; the final recommended plan presented with justi- 
fication for its selection; the public provided the op- 
portunity and encouraged to comment upon the rec- 
(imnicnded plan. 

I'edcral guidelines for public participation, developed 
as required by PL 92-500, are much the same as the 
state guidelines set forth above. 

During the planning period, meetings were held as 
rc(iuired by the guidelines, and in several basins ad- 
ditional meetings were held. The participation b>' the 
public is documented in the ancillary portions of the 
plan report. Public participation, for the most part, has 
been beneficial and gratifying. 

Basin Problems 

I'ollowing is a brief description of each of the sixteen 
basins and a general discussion of the major water 
(iualit\- and quantity problems in each basin. At the 
time of this writing, none of the water quality control 
plans have been adopted or approved by the Regional 
ami State Boards. Accordingly, it would be premature 
aiul perhaps misleading to describe the action portion 
(it these plans at this time. The plans are expected to be 
adopted and approved by the Regional and State 
Boards by December 1974. Individual plans should be 
consulted after adoption to obtain details on the recom- 
mended plan. 

The water quality class segments are particularly 
significant in view of the focus of attention that must 
be directed to them to conform to PL 92-500. Each 
water quality class segment is identified, and the na- 
ture and seriousness of the problem, as well as planned 
alleviation measures, is discussed. Thirty-one such seg- 
ments have been designated in the State. 

Basin lA, Klamath River Basin. The Klamath 
River, a relatively large Northern California river, 
rises in the Oregon plateau swamps and flows through 
the Northern California lava plateau region and 
mountainous area of Northwestern California to the 
sea. The Trinity River is the major tributary. Most 
of the 12.5 million acre-feet per year runoff from the 
basin originates in the mountain region. In Oregon, 
considerable use is made of the rather limited flow 
for irrigation causing some degradation in the quality 



of the water reaching California. Water supplies in 
the California lava plateau region are derived largch' 
from groundwater in rclativcl\' small amount (104,000 
acre-feet per year at present) for agriculture, munici- 
pal and industrial supplies. Regulation of the river and 
its tributaries in California is relatively minor with 
much of the runoft' flowing unregulated to the sea 
during the winter months: the onl>- significant regula- 
tion is that provided by Clair Engle Lake on the 
Trinity River from which about 900,000 acre-feet of 
w atcr per year are exported to the Sacramento \'alley. 
A much smaller river, the Smith, drains a 719 square 
mile area in the northwestern corner of the State. All 
rivers and streams in the basin support important 
fish resources. 

Water quality problems are not serious at the pres- 
ent time. Avian botulism is a problem in the Pacific 
Flyway haven of Tule Lake due to organic loading, 
shallow water and poor circulation. Algae growths 
occur in the impoundments in the lower flow regions 
above the mouth of the Trinity River. Population 
centers are few and small and have relied heaviK- 
upon individual waste disposal systems which arc 
generally not satisfactory. A major problem is the 
sediment developed by erosion in the forest areas, due 
in part to lumbering and construction. Tremendous 
quantities of silt are transported to the sea during 
high runoff periods. Another problem, sedimentation 
in the Trinit\' River channel downstream of Lew iston 
Dam is due to the decreased flows resulting from 
regulation and diversion to the Sacramento Valley and 
natural high erosion rates present within the watershed. 
There are no water qualit\- class segments in Basin 
lA. 

Basin JB, North Coastal Basin. The North Coastal 
Basin includes those drainages which originate on the 
western slopes of the Coastal Range and flow to the 
sea. The basin extends from the Klamath River drain- 
age basin on the north to the Marin-Sonoma area on 
the south. The basin area is rugged and mountainous, 
and sparsely populated except for the r^vo centers of 
population in the Eureka-Humboldt Bay and Santa 
Rosa areas. Agriculture in the basin area is limited to 
a few narrow valle\s and is relativel\' unimportant. 
Lumbering and paper industries and tourism are the 
economic bases in the Humboldt Bay area. Santa Rosa 
is a business city on the northern fringe of the urban 
San Francisco Bay area. 

Precipitation in the basin area is relatively heavy 
and seasonal, giving rise to considerable variation of 
flows in the rivers. Regulation of the flows is not 
extensive. Except for erosion, siltation and dairy and 
cattle confinement areas, the problems of water quality 
are due to municipal and industrial wastes discharges 
threatening shellfish utilization in Humboldt Bay. 
Water quality problems in other areas are related to 
poor land use practices including improper logging, 
road building and farming. 



131 



Biisin 2, Siiv Francisco Bay Basin. The San Fran- 
cisco Bay Basin includes the drainage area tributary 
to San Francisco Bay and west of the Sacramento-San 
Joaquin Delta as well as the watersheds of minor 
streams draining into the sea between the Alarin- 
Sonoma County line and Pescadero Point. The basin 
is primarily urban although intensive agriculture is 
practiced in the Napa, Petaluma, Sonoma and lower 
Santa Clara V^alleys and eastern Contra Costa County. 
Heavy industry is concentrated along the Bay from 
Richmond to the Pittsbury-Antioch area. 

The primary h\droIogic feature of the basin is the 
San Francisco Ba\' system. The inflow of large quanti- 
ties of fresh water from the Sacramento and San 
Joaquin Rivers into the northern portion of the Bay 
system form one of the world's major estuaries. In 
addition, there is considerable tidal exchange through 
the Golden Gate. The latter provides the primary 
means by which conservative pollutants are moved 
out of the Bay. 

The inflow of inadequately controlled and treated 
waste materials has been the cause of the principal 
water quality problems in the basin that exist at 
present. These problems tend to be most severe in the 
shallow extremities of the Bay system where disper- 
sion and dilution characteristics arc not sufficient to 
maintain water quality objectives with current waste 
loadings. Such areas include the South Bay, the Napa, 
Petaluma and Sonoma Rivers, and man\' of the shallow 
dead end sloughs around the Bay; all of these experi- 
ence low dissolved oxygen and high nutrient levels. 

Six of the State's 31 water quality class segments 
are located in Basin 2, namely: (1) South San Fran- 
cisco Bay south of Dumbarton Bridge, where dis- 
solved oxygen objectives are violated for substantial 
periods due to incompletely treated municipal waste- 
waters and urban runoff; (2) Richardson Ba\', where 
bacteriological objectives are not met during wet- 
weather overflow periods; (3) Livermore Valley, Ala- 
meda Creek', Arroyo Las Positas and Arroyo de le 
Laguna, where total dissolved solids in treated waste- 
waters exceed objectives for downstream groundwater 
recharge and reuse; (4) Napa River, Calistoga to San 
Pablo Bay, where low dissolved oxygen and high 
nutrient concentrations are often experienced; (5) 
Petaluma River, Pcnngrove to San Pablo Bay, where 
dissolved oxygen and nutrient problems occur; and 
(6) Tomales Bay, where coliform concentrations ex- 
ceed water quality objectives for shellfish. 

Other major water quality problems in the basin 
are high bacterial levels resulting from wet weather 
sewer bypassing and combined .sewer overflows and 
saline water intrusion due to overdrafting in the Niles 
Cone and northern Santa Clara Counr\- groundwater 
basins. 

Potential water quality problems are associated with 
cither increasing waste loads to those portions of the 



basins which cannot assimilate, dilute, disperse or 
otherwise neutralize pollutants to acceptable levels, or 
with the diversion of Delta waters from the Delta and 
its tributaries which may significantly modify the 
present hydraulic regime and physical-chemical char- 
acteristics of the estuarine portion of San Francisco 
Bay system. 

Basin 3, Central Coastal Basin. This basin extends 
along the coast from Pescadero Point to the V'entura 
County line south of Santa Barbara and inland to the 
ridge of the Coast Range. It contains a wide variety 
of land forms including Monterey Ba\', the Big Sur 
Coast, fertile Salinas \'alley, the enclosed desert Car- 
rizo Plain and alternate mountains, valleys and coastal 
plains in the southern portion. In general, rainfall is 
limited and seasonal. Streams, with the exception of 
those in the Salinas Valley, flow rather directly to the 
Pacific Ocean. Future imports of water are planned 
for the areas east of Monterey Bay and along the 
south coast from San Luis Obispo to Santa Barbara. 

Water quality problems in Basin 3 are varied. Short 
outfalls into shallow and poorly circulating ocean 
waters are causing problems along the north and south 
shores of Monterey Ba\' and at Santa Barbara. Agri- 
cultural drainage, nutrients and pesticides are problem 
sources in the Salinas River; septic tank system prob- 
lems exist in the San Lorenzo subbasin and at smaller 
communities along the coast such as Cambria; and salt 
balance and groundwater quality problems exist in the 
Lower Salinas \'alley, Hollister-Tres Pinos, Soda Lake 
and Carmel River areas due to extractions and return 
flows. Groundwater quality is not suitable in portions 
of the Santa Maria and Santa Ynez subbasins due in 
part to naturall>' occurring hard and high TDS waters 
and in part due to municipal wastewater disposal on 
land areas as well as irrigation return flows. TDS and 
nitrate concentrations are high in the latter case. There 
is one water qualit\- class segment in the basin; the 
low er portion of the Salinas River from the Spreckles 
gage to .Montcrc)- Bay. TDS, dissolved ox\gen, tur- 
bidity and nutrient water quality objectives are vio- 
lated. 

Basin 4A, Santa Clara Kii-cr Basin. The Santa Clara 
River Basin includes the drainage from the \'entura 
and Santa Clara Rivers, and their tributaries, and the 
Callegua.s-Conejo s\'stem of creeks and arroyos. It akso 
includes the off-shore islands of .Anacapa and San Nic- 
olas. Much of tiie basin is rugged, mountainous and 
undeveloped. The valleys and coastal plain around 
Oxnard are important agricultural areas and are be- 
ginning to urbanize due to o\crfl()w from nearby Los 
Angeles. Tiie basin contains about 40 miles of ocean 
shore line from Rincon Point on the nortii to the \'en- 
tura-Los .Angeles county line on tiie south. \ major 
portion of the basin area is contained in the Los Padres 
and .Angeles National Forests. 



132 



The major \\ ater problems in the Santa Clara River 
Basin are mineralization of groundwaters and dry 
weather flows and the overdraft in the Oxnard Plain. 
A4ineraIization is a result of localized recycling (mostly 
from irrigation practices), highly mineralized inflows 
and addition of salts as fertilizers. Boron deposits in 
the basin cause boron concentrations which often ex- 
ceed limits for irrigation. During wet weather flows, 
erosion and siltation arc problems in the streams. Bio- 
logic overproduction is a problem in Lake Casitas. 
Also, algae blooms in Castaic Lake have forced suspen- 
sion of its operation for short periods in 1973 as a 
part of the State Water Project but presently such al- 
gae blooms are controlled through chemical applica- 
tions. The Oxnard Plain overdraft, estimated at 40,000 
acre-feet per year, has lowered the groundwater level 
as much as 55 feet below sea le\el allowing sea water 
to intrude. Groundwater degradation due to waste- 
water discharges is relati\cl\- minor and is confined lo- 
cally. Agricultural return flows from tile drainage and 
the disposal of water softener regeneration brines from 
individual home systems are also problems in the basin. 
Water quality problems in ocean waters are minor. 

Bnsiii 4B, Los Angeles River Basin. This basin com- 
prises that portion of Los Angeles County which lies 
south of the ridge line of the San Gabriel Mountains 
and the western Santa Monica Alountains, and includes 
a small portion of the south corner of Ventura County. 
The planning area includes the off"shore islands of San 
Clcmentc, Santa Barbara and Santa Catalina. Excluding 
the islands, the basin is about 33 percent urban land, 
40 percent unusable land and 27 percent agricultural 
or vacant land. The unusable land is mountainous, too 
steep to build upon or lies in the flood plain of a stream. 
How ever, development is extensive in the coastal plain, 
San Fernando \'alle\", San Gabriel \'alle\- and adjoin- 
ing foothills. Considerable industrial development is 
centered around the harbor area and the Burbank- 
Glendale area. 

This basin has relied upon imports of water for more 
than 60 years from the Owens River, since 1941 from 
the Colorado River and for the past few years frofn 
the State Water Project. Although imports meet much 
of tiie demands for water, the local supplies from the 
ground and runoff from surface streams are important 
to the basin and must be protected. In general, facili- 
ties for water suppl\' and w astew ater collection, treat- 
ment and disposal have been adequate or have been 
provided as needed to take care of grow th areas. Tw o 
enormous wastewater systems, the City of Los Angeles 
system and the Los Angeles County system provide 
sewerage services for most of the basin. These systems 
include treatment plants ofi'ering less than secondary 
treatment and disposal through long, deep-water dif- 
fusers to the ocean. Sludge, some of which is digested, 
is also disposed of now through long outfalls into 
ocean waters. A portion of the wastewaters in both 



s\ stems is removed from the sewer at inland waste- 
water treatment plants for secondary- treatment and 
disposal b\' groundwater recharge, with the sludge 
being returned to the sew er. This relieves the h\drau- 
lic loading on the downstream sewers and provides 
water for replenishment of groundwaters. Well injec- 
tion is practiced along the coast to halt sea water in- 
trusion into overdrafted coastal plain groundwater ba- 
sins. Maintenance of low groundwater levels in the 
Los Angeles Coastal basin is intentional to increase the 
flow of water recharged in the .Montelieilow Foreba\' 
for increased system yield. 

A major problem in the basin is pollution in Domin- 
guez Channel and Los Angeles-Long Beach harbor. 
The completion of the Terminal Island Treatment 
Plant in 1975 to provide secondary treatment for large 
volumes of municipal and industrial wastewaters here- 
tofore receiving only priniar\- treatment or less, is ex- 
pected to halt the degradation of harbor waters efi^ec- 
tivelw Accumulations of organic matter from decades 
of discharge of municipal and industrial wastes add to 
the water quality problems in the harbor. 

There are other relatively minor water quality prob- 
lems in the basin. These are: (1) a "wave" of poor 
quality groundwater traveling northeasterly across the 
San Fernando \'alley due to well-pumping patterns in 
the valley; (2) high concentrations of nitrates in the 
groundwater in the La Crescenta area due to septic 
tank-leach field systems; and (3) an unacceptable sur- 
face pollution from septic tank-leach field systems in 
the Malibu Beach area. 

Basin 5 A, Sacramento River Basin. The Sacramento 
River Basin extends from the Oregon border and 
Goose Lake on the north and includes the American 
River and Cache Creek drainages on the south. The 
east and west boundaries arc tiie ridge lines of the 
Sierra Nevada Mountains and the Coastal Range and 
Klamath River drainage, respectively. The basin is one 
of water surplus, derived from rain and snowfall oc- 
curring mainly during the months between October 
and Ma\'. The principal river of the basin is the Sacra- 
mento. The rivers and creeks of the basin are highly 
regulated for flood control, hydroelectric power and 
water supply. About 900,000 acre-feet per year arc 
diverted from the Trinit\' River in Basin lA to the 
Sacramento River Basin. Extensive groundwater re- 
sources exist in the alluvial valley floors. The Goose 
Lake area is a closed basin. 

Generall\-, the quality of the waters in the basin is 
excellent. There are water quality problems, how'ever, 
caused mainl\- by local concentrations of used water. 
The greatest single cause of degradation of the surface 
waters in the basin is the return of waters used for ir- 
rigated agriculture. 

There are three water quality class segments identi- 
fied in the basin. Of these segments, two arc caused by 
drainage through the tailings from abandoned mines. 



133 



The first is Spring Creek, a tributary to the Sacra- 
mento River w ithin the Kesw ick Reservoir upstream of 
Redding, which is polluted by acid w aters and heavy 
metals primarily from copper mine drainage. The 
second is Little Grizzly Creek, a tributar\- to Indian 
Creek at Genessee which is in turn tributary to the 
North Fork, Feather River, which is polluted by acid 
drainage from Walker Mine. The third water quality 
segment is Clear Lake which is shallow and contains 
bottom deposits rich in nutrients. The problem is ex- 
cessive algae grow ths that cause nuisance conditions. 

Basin 5B, Sacravicnto-San ]oaqiiin Delta. The Delta 
basin is the hub of the Central \'alley drainage sys- 
tem. Rivers entering the Delta are the Sacramento from 
the north, the Cosunines, Mokelumne and Calaveras 
from the east and the San Joaquin from the south. An 
intricate set of channels conveys the water westward 
across the Delta for discliarge into San Francisco Bay. 
Interbasin exports by the Federal Central Valley Proj- 
ect and the State AVater Project originate in this basin 
by diversion of surplus unregulated inflows and by 
rediversion of portions of the regulated releases from 
upstream project reservoirs, as does the .Mokelumne 
River export by East Bay Municipal Utility District to 
its San Francisco Bay service area. The quality of the 
waters entering the Delta is generally good except for 
that entering from the San Joaquin River during low- 
flow periods which contains concentrations of dis- 
solved salts and nutrients derived from agricultural re- 
turn flows. Divcr.son from the Mokelumne River also 
results in poor qualit\' in its lower reaches during dry 
weather periods. Flow into the Delta is highl\- regu- 
lated b\' upstream facilities on the principal tributaries, 
thus afi'ecting salt water intrusion from San Francisco 
Ba>. 

The major w atcr quality problems in the Delta are 
twofold, namely: (a) maintenance of proper quality 
conditions within the Delta for municipal, industrial 
and agricultural supplies, for the very important fish 
and wildlife resources, and for recreation, and (b) 
maintenance of proper qualit\' conditions for export at 
the Trac)- Pumping Plant of the Federal Central Val- 
ley Project and the Delta Pumping Plant of the State 
Water Project in the southern part of the Delta. Water 
must be conve\cd across or around the Delta to the 
export pumps. A certain minimum rate of fresh water 
outflow frf)m the Delta is needed to prevent salt water 
intrusion from the Ba\' s\steni to preserve qualit\- for 
Western Delta uses and the environment for fish and 
wildlife. Delta outflow is also beneficial in flushing 
pollutants from the Ba\' s\stcm. Nutrients in the Delta 
water, originating mainly from agricultural return 
flow's, pose a potential algae problem in the Western 
Delta and Suisun Bay. 

Six water ijuality class segments ha\ c been identified 
in Basin 5B. These are: ( 1 ) the San Joaquin Ri\ cr 
from the Merced Count\- Line to Antiocii w here total 



dissolved solids and nutrient concentrations exceed 
objectives, and under certain local physical and chem- 
ical conditions, low dissolved oxygen levels occur; (2) 
Lower Sacramento River from the American River 
to Emmaton w here nitrogn concentrations due to agri- 
cultural, municipal and industrial wastewaters are 
greater than established objectives; {l) the .Mokel- 
umne River from Penn Mine to Highway 99 where 
mine drainage causes pH and heavy metals pollution; 
(4) Fourteen-Mile Slough, from the City of Stockton 
Northw est Treatment Plant to the San Joaquin River, 
w here low dissolved oxygen levels are experienced due 
to incomplete municipal wastewater treatment and 
sluggish flow; (5) Jackson Creek from the Jackson 
municipal plant outfall to Lake Amador where little 
dilution is aff"orded the inadequatel\' treated municipal 
wastewater resulting in dissolved oxygen problems; 
and (6) Old River, from the Tracy plant outfall to 
the Clifton Court Foreba\-, where nitrogen and coli- 
form concentrations exceed Delta objectives. 

Basin SC, San ]oaqtiin River Basin. This third 
Central \'alley basin lies south of the Delta Basin and 
encompasses the drainage of the San Joaijuin River. 
Major rivers rising in the Sierra Ne\ada and tributary 
to the San Joaquin in the valley floor are the Stanis- 
laus, Tuolumne, Merced, Chowchilla, and Fresno 
Rivers. The San Joaquin Ri\er also rises in the Sierra 
Xe\ada and flows to the valley before turning north 
dow n the \alley floor. The Friant-Kern Canal s\stem 
of the Federal Central \'alle\- Project exports water 
from .Millerton Lake, impounded 1)\ Friant Dam, 
south into Basin 5D to suppl\' water along the Canal 
extending almost to Bakersfield. The Hctch Hetchy 
system of the Cit)- and Count\- of San Francisco ex- 
ports water from the Tuolumne River to Basin 2. 
Water is imported from Basin .'iB bv the Federal 
Central X'alley Project. Natural runoff from the w est- 
crn side of the valle\' is almost nonexistent. 1 he basin 
is primaril\- agricultural with population centers 
oriented mainly to farm suppl\- and product handling. 
Recreational and second-home developments are in- 
creasing in number and extent in the foothill anil low er 
mountain regions, how ever. 

Water problems in the basin relate mainl\ to dis- 
solved salts and nutrients from agricultural return 
flows and effluent seepage which constitute the major 
portion of the dry weather flow in the San Joaquin 
Ri\cr and to the o\erdrafted condition in the ground- 
w atcr basins. Low flows resulting from upstream di- 
versions and regulation have virtuall\- eliminated 
salmon runs in the basin streams ami arc endangering 
the marsh lands necessary for maintaining wildlife. 
Salt balance is adverse because of insufficient ilrainage 
facilities to conve\- salts from irrigated land in the 
basin. Three water quality class segments arc identi- 
fied in this basin. These arc: (1) Woods Creek from 
Columbia to Don Pedro Rescrxoir due to inadequate 
ililution for the insufficiently treated wastewaters from 



134 



several small foothill communities causing dissolved 
oxygen and nitrogen problems; (2) Tuolumne River 
from Hughson outfall to Santa Fc A\enuc, .Modesto, 
where nitrogen concentrations exceed objectives due 
to incomplete treatment of industrial wastes at the 
Hughson Treatment Plant; and (3) Stanislaus River 
from Tulloch Reservoir to the San Joaquin River 
where coliform concentrations from an unidentified 
source have caused counts exceeding objectives to the 
extent that Casw cll State Park has been closed. 

Basin 5D, Tiilarc Lake Basin. This southernmost of 
the four Central Valley Basins is essentially a closed 
basin in that, except in the very wet years, there is 
no natural drainage from the basin. The basin is in 
the shape of a "U" rimmed by the Sierra Nevada on 
the east, Tehachapi Mountains on the south and the 
Coastal Range on the west. The north boundary is 
the low drainage divide between the watersheds of the 
San Joaquin River on the north and the Kings Ri\er 
on the south. 

Major surface streams are the Kings, Tule, Kaweah, 
and Kern Rivers. Water is imported via the California 
Aqueduct of the State Water Project and the Friant- 
Kem Canal and San Luis Unit of the Federal Central 
Valley Project. Service to the Federal San Luis serv- 
ice area in w estern Fresno and Kings Counties is from 
the joint federal-state facilities of the San Luis Division 
of the California Aqueduct. The basin economy is 
agriculture-oriented but there is a significant oil in- 
dustry and other manufacturing in the basin. Popula- 
tion centers are Fresno and Bakersficld and several 
cities of smaller populations. 

The major water problem in the basin is a demand 
for more water than can be supplied b\- existing 
sources. This has caused severe groundwater over- 
drafting and an adverse salt balance in this essentially 
closed basin. There are also problems of local degrada- 
tion of groundwaters due to land disposal of municipal 
and industrial wastes, naturall\" poor quality in the 
western and southern areas of the basin, high ground- 
water le\els near the valley trough and western areas 
caused by use of imported water as well as ground 
water for irrigation w ithout providing adequate drain- 
age, septic tank-leach system failures in the foothills 
areas, and oil-field, industrial, dairy and feedlot waste 
disposal practices. The w estern area high water table 
and overdraft situation in the basin is causing poor 
quality western water to flow eastward and degrade 
the waters in the aquifers there. 

A problem associated with overdraft is deep sub- 
sidence. As an aquifer is overdrafted, the decrease in 
water pressure allows the soil comprising the aquifer 
to settle and compact resulting in a general settling of 
overlying soils. Subsidence on the order of 25 feet 
has been experienced in portions of the basin since 
1935. The underground storage space lost because of 
subsidence is not usuall\- fulh' recovered upon re- 
plenishment w ith w ater. 



1 he major concern is that of salt balance. During 
the w ater qualit\' control planning study several alter- 
native plans for maintaining a favorable salt balance 
were considered. 

Basin 6 A, North Lahontan Basin. The North La- 
hontan Basin includes that portion of the State border- 
ing Nevada lying east of the Sierra Nevada and 
Warner Mountain Ranges and extending from the 
Oregon State Line to and including the Walker River 
Watershed near Bridgeport. The principal geographic 
features are the mountains and Lake Tahoe. The 
northern third of the basin is a narrow inter-mountain 
valley having no drainage outlet. Runoff, consisting 
mainly of snowmelt, is limited and seasonal, with the 
excess evaporating from the alkali lakes ^\•hich are dry 
much of the time. Economic activity is agriculture 
oriented. The middle third of the basin is a semi-arid, 
high-elevation plateau with scattered mountains, 
sparse settlement and limited areas supporting agri- 
culture. Logging is a major economic activitv although 
the region is becoming a popular second-home area. 
The lower third of the basin is a narrow, rugged area 
with drainage generally- eastward into Nevada. The 
Truckee River system, which includes Lake Tahoe, 
is the major hydrologic feature. The Carson and 
Walker Rivers, forming the southern watersheds in 
the basin, have headwater areas in California and are 
used for recreation, and fish and wildlife habitat. 
Tourism and second-home development are intensive 
in the Tahoe-Truckee area and has resulted in the 
major population center in the basin. 

The major problems in the basin are point and non- 
point sources of wastewater pollution in the Lake 
Tahoe-Truckee River system. Rigid objectives to pro- 
tect the Lake and downstream beneficial uses require 
that all point source wastes be given tertiary treatment 
or exported. The South Lake Tahoe s\stem, involving 
phosphorus and nitrogen removals, exports the 
treated wastewater out of the basin to protect the ex- 
ceptional clarity of Lake Tahoe. This system has been 
in operation for several \ears. A similar system for the 
communities around the north end of the Lake is 
under design. It will convey all municipal wastewaters 
to a central location near Martis Creek for tertiary 
treatment and disposal to land. The Truckee River 
has been designated a water quality class segment be- 
cause partially treated wastewaters cause the rigid 
nitrogen, chloride, coliform and dissolved solids objec- 
tives to be exceeded. Problems of insufficiently con- 
trolled nonpoint pollution from urban and nonurban 
runoff remain. Siltation along the Lake Tahoe shores 
is causing concern. Groundwater problems are rela- 
tively minor in the Tahoe-Truckee portion of the 
basin. 

Water qualit> problems in Surprise Valley are 
minor. The lakes are highly saline but sources of good 
quality w ater are obtained upstream and from ground- 
waters in the edge of the valley. Septic tank-leach 



135 



field problems that jeopardize groundwaters have 
been identified in the communities of Cedarvillc and 
Fort Bidweli. Similar septic tank-leach field problems 
were noted in Janesville, Do}'Ie, Sage Valley Flat, and 
the fringe areas of Susanville. The City of Susanvilie 
treatment plant has inadequate capacity partially due 
to infiltration in a poor collection system. The grow- 
ing enrichment of Honey Lake could result in its 
eutrophication and could contribute to avian botulism. 
F.agle Lake is naturally high alkaline. 

Water quality problems in the southern part of the 
basin arc minor except for mine drainage pollution in 
Leviathin Creek which eliminates fish and wildlife in 
that creek and degrades the East Fork Carson River. 
Pollution of Monitor Creek by an active mine has 
been stopped efi"ectivel\- by construction of control 
facilities. 

Basin 6B, South Lahontan Basin. Tiiis is the desert 
basin encompassing Inyo Count\ , most of .Mono and 
San Bernardino Counties and the southeast and north- 
east corners of Kern and Los .Angeles Counties, respec- 
tively. In general, rainfall occurs relatively infre- 
quently and limited water supplies for most of the area 
are obtained from groundw ater sources. Runoff, main- 
ly snow melt from the eastern slopes of the Sierra Ne- 
vada, provides a substantial water supply in the 0\\ ens 
\'allcv. .Much of this water is exported to the City of 
Los Angeles in a s\stem that has been in operation 
more than 60 years. The basin is characterized by an 
agriculture-oriented development in the Owens \'allc>- 
and several population centers located where water 
supplies are found such as Barstow, Mojave, Victor- 
viile, Lancaster and Palmdale. The basin economy re- 
lies upon a substantial mining industr\', military and 
space-industry installations and agriculture. Retirement 
communities are also becoming more numerous. Recre- 
ation is popular in tiie eastern Sierra and San Bernar- 
dino Mountains. 

Water quality problems in the northern part of the 
basin relate to improper treatment of municipal and 
domestic wastewaters. Alost of the larger communities 
are partially sew ered and have primary treatment fa- 
cilities and evaporation/percolation ponds for effluent 
disposal. Generally the individual s\stems function 
properly in the valley areas but a considerable pro- 
portion of failures have been experienced in the foot- 
hill and mountain areas. Poor quality groundwaters, 
caused locally by percolation of wastewaters from 
mining operations and more generally by down- 
gradient subsurface flow, arc prevalent in the Amar- 
gosa River area. Similar groundwater degradation oc- 
curs near Boron due to percolation of mine waters. 
Occurrences of overflow of the Lancaster oxidation 
ponds offer a potential public health hazard. 

At Barstow inadequatel>' treated municipal and in- 
dustrial wastewaters have created a "tail" of poor (jual- 
ity groundwater downstream of the discharge point 



causing significant quality deterioration in local do- 
mestic well supplies. 

Basin lA, West Colorado Riz-er Basin. This basin 
consists of the areas w hich arc tributar\- to the Salton 
Sea. The area northeast of the Sea is the southern end 
of the great California desert w hich is, like Basin 6B, 
sparseK' settled and receives little rainfall. The Coa- 
chella \'alley, which lies northwest of the Sea, and Im- 
perial \'alle\', w hich lies south and southeast of the 
Sea are semi-arid agricultural lands supported by wa- 
ter for irrigation b\' import from the Colorado Ri\er. 
The Whitewater River, which flows intermittently, 
drains the Coachella \'alley while the New and .\lamo 
Rivers flow northward from Mexico through the Im- 
perial X'alley. The Salton Sea is a "sink" area having 
a surface elevation well below sea level. The basin is 
important to the State and nation because of the value 
of the winter truck crops grown there. Population 
centers are generall\ small except grow th is notable in 
the Palm Springs area w here people seeking the desert 
climate are settling or visiting in significant numbers. 
The basin relies heavil\- upon imported w ater from the 
Colorado River to suppl\- its demands. Although the 
occurrence of groundwater in the basin is extensive 
much of it is unusable qualit\ . 

The major water quality problem in the basin is the 
iiigh and increasing salinit\' of the Salton Sea. The Sea 
is somew hat saltier than the oceans and is approaching 
the salinit\- in w hich fish can no longer survive. Uses 
of the Sea include recreation, fishery, wildlife and es- 
thetics. Water quality in the New and Alamo Rivers 
has been degraded b\' inadequately treated municipal 
discharges some of which originate in Mexico. Other 
problems arc: ( I ) the limited amount and increasing 
salinit)' of the Colorado River suppl\-; (2) nutrient 
contamination of the Salton Sea b\- inflows of the 
New, Alamo and Whitewater Rivers from agricul- 
tural, municipal and industrial wastewaters; and (3) 
overdraft of high quality groundwater in the Coa- 
chella Valley. Water quality class segments are: (1) 
the Salton Sea because of its high and increasing sa- 
linit_\'; (2) New River because of high oxygen de- 
mands resulting in low dissolved ox>'gen concentra- 
tion caused by untreated sewage discharged by the 
City of Mexicali; and (3) Alamo River becau.se of low 
dissolved oxygen concentrations and high bacterial 
counts caused by improperly treated municipal dis- 
charges. AVidespread use of pesticides in the basin 
poses a potential water quality problem. 

Basin IB, East Colorado River Basin. The East 
Colorado River Basin encompasses all areas in the State 
w hich lie in the Colorado Ri\er watershed. The basin 
is 30 to 40 miles wide and about 200 miles long. The 
river is the predominant feature of the basin; it pro- 
vides x\atcr suppl\' for municipalities and agriculture, 
recreation for basin inhabitants and many tourists, 
h\ droelectric pow er and water for export both within 



136 



California and Arizona. The land area in the basin is 
niainl\' desert w ith mountains and valle\s. Population 
centers are Blythe, supported by agriculture and tour- 
ism, and Needles, supported by tourism and transpor- 
tation industries. The resident population in the basin 
was 22,200 in 1970 but recreation draws an estimated 
500,000 visitors -each year. The river provides a signifi- 
cant fishery and \\ ildlife habitat. Two major water de- 
velopment projects have been completed within the 
basin; they arc Lake Havasu, formed b\' Parker Dam, 
and Imperial Reservoir formed by Imperial Dam. The 
former is the diversion point for the Colorado River 
Aqueduct system which supplies about 1.2 million 
acre-feet per year to Southern California. About 3.4 
million acre-feet of water for much of Basin 7A is 
diverted at Imperial Dam and conveyed by the All 
American Canal. Water for irrigation is also diverted 
to the Palo \^erde \'alley near Blythe. 

The major water quality problem in the basin is the 
high and increasing salinity of the Colorado River 
which has been described previously. Municipal water 
supplies for Bhthe, East Blythe Water District, 
Needles and AV'interhaven, from local groundwater 
basins, are of poor quality not meeting drinking water 
standards because of high TDS, and manganese. Fluo- 
ride concentrations are high in several locations. Septic 
tank-leach field systems are failing in Winterhaven, at 
a resort complex in the Havasu Landing area and in 
areas around Blythe. The Needles treatment plant is 
adequate except for infrequent peak flows but poor 
dispersion into the river causes a localized coliform 
problem. High salinity blowdown waters are dis- 
charged to the river by gas compression industries 
located near Topock and Bhthe. Agricultural return 
flows from Palo Verde and Bard Valleys add salinity, 
nutrients and pesticides to the river. 

Basiji 8, Santa Ana River Basin. This basin's wideh- 
varied physiography and development belies its size 
as it is one of the smallest basins. There are two dis- 
tinct subbasins drained by the Santa Ana River and a 
third drained by the San Jacinto River. The Upper 
Santa Ana Subbasin is rimmed by the San Gabriel and 
San Bernardino Mountains and a series of low granitic 
hills and eroded uplands know n as the San Timoteo 
Redlands. The valley is effectively blocked by the 
Santa Ana Mountains, except for the narrow Santa 
Ana Canyon through which the river passes. The 
Lower Santa Ana Subbasin is best characterized as a 
coastal plain. The Santa Ana River discharges through 
this subbasin into the Pacific Ocean near Newport 
Beach. The San Jacinto subbasin is adjacent to the 
upper subbasin and to the southeast of it. It is es- 
sentially a closed basin drained by the San Jacinto 
River which discharges into Lake Elsinore. Drainage 
from Lake Elsinore to the Santa Ana River occurs 
only rarely, through Temescal Wash. 

The Upper Santa Ana Subbasin is a significant agri- 
cultural area; however, population centers such as 



Riverside, San Bernardino and Redlands are rapidly 
encroaching onto valley farmlands. The Lower Santa 
Ana Subbasin is primarily urban with open areas along 
the ri\er and where steeper slopes occur. 

The Santa Ana River is ephemeral in the upper 
subbasin, with surface flows only in wet weather. 
There is, however, extensive alluvium in the valley 
w hich carries a considerable underground flow. This 
underground flow normally emerges upstream of 
Prado Dam at the upper end of the Santa Ana Can- 
yon. Below the dam, the river is perennial. The San 
Jacinto River is similarly ephemeral throughout most 
of its length. 

Data from 1970 indicated an applied water require- 
ment (demand in excess of direct precipitation) for 
the total basin of 1,135,000 acre-feet per year, of 
which only 451,000 acre-feet can be supplied by lo- 
cal initial-use sources. Of the remainder, 302,000 acre- 
feet were imported from the Colorado River system 
and the balance of the demand was met b\- reclaimed 
wastewater generated in the basin and obtained from 
the groundwater basin. The annual applied water re- 
quirement is expected to increase to 1,415,000 acre- 
feet b\- the >ear 2000. This situation will continue to 
aggravate an alread\' adverse salt balance. 

Surface water quality and quantity problems in the 
Upper Santa Ana Subbasin include: increasing con- 
centrations of coliform bacteria, nutrients and toxic 
wastes which threaten the important recreational 
beneficial use in the segment from Riverside to Prado 
Dam; presently high and increasing concentrations of 
TDS and nutrients at Prado Dam in waters which 
are used to recharge the Lower Santa Ana Subbasin, 
and; inadequate wastewater treatment and disposal 
practices in the Big Bear Lake and Baldwin Lake areas 
w hich cause violations of water quality objectives for 
mountain streams and lakes. The middle segment of 
the Santa Ana River from Riverside to Anaheim is 
classified as a water qualit\' class segment because con- 
centrations of salts, coliforms and nutrients, as well as 
turbidity, exceed adopted objectives. Major nonpoint 
source problems in the basin are agricultural return 
flow s and high nutrient and TDS concentrations due 
to percolation of wastewaters from dairies and feed- 
lots. 

In the San Jacinto subbasin, agriculture is the largest 
user of water. This use results in large consumptive 
losses and high concentrations of salt and nutrients 
which are carried by percolation to the groundwater. 
There are also local areas in the subbasin where the 
groundwater quality is naturally poor due to miner- 
alized aquifers and to isolation by faults. Tw ent\- per- 
cent of the applied water requirement of 137,700 
acre-feet in 1970 was met from local sources, 29 per- 
cent from Colorado River imports, 46 percent from 
reclaimed water and the remaining 5 percent from 
groundwater overdrafts. The amount of overdraft 



137 



varies with precipitation. Lake Elsinore, which re- 
ceives wet weather surface runoff, varies in salinit\- 
(TDS) from 1,000 to 36,000 mg/1 depending upon 
the amount of fresh water in storage. 

Basin 9, Sim Diego Basin. The San Diego Basin 
includes the southern corner of Orange County, a 
considerable portion of southwestern Riverside 
County and all of San Diego County west of the 
ridge line of the Peninsular Range about 50 miles 
from the ocean shore. The climate is semi-arid and 
typical of the Pacific coastal plain, i.e., warm, wet 
winters and cool summers. The average rainfall is 15 
inches per year. The basin can be characterized by 
three regions, a coastal plain area, a central mountain- 
valley area and an eastern mountain-valley area. There 
are eight principal stream systems or subbasins, the 
hydrology of which was treated individually in the 
study. Drainage is from east to west with discharge 
into the Ocean. The Pacific Ocean shoreline consists 
of beaches and lagoons with San Diego Bay, the largest 
of the lagoons, forming a substantial deep water 
harbor. Economic development consists of agricul- 
ture, ship building and maintenance, metal processing, 
electronics and sand and gravel mining. There is con- 
siderable military activity at Camp Pendleton and 
several naval installations centered mainly around San 
Diego. The basin is also a popular retirement area. The 
economic development is projected to increase with 
industry concentrating in the northern and southern 
portions and agriculture holding its own in the cen- 
tral portion of the basin. The basin population is e.\- 



pectcd to double the 1970 population by the year 
2000. 

The fundamental quantity/qualit\' problem in the 
basin is an inadequate local supply of water. Expan- 
sion of the already considerable import facilities will 
be needed. All local surface and groundwater supplies 
have been developed and limited reuse is practiced. 
Local supplies satisfied onl\' 28 percent of the demand 
in 1973. Water quality has been a problem due to the 
high TDS in the Colorado River water imported 
since 1947 and many poor quality local sources. Over- 
drafting in the coastal areas has caused some sea water 
intrusion. Surface streams are ephemeral but prob- 
lems of nutrients and eutrophication exist in the la- 
goons and in ponds formed by gravel pits in the al- 
luvium. The diversion of municipal and industrial 
wastewaters from San Diego Ba\- for treatment at the 
Point Loma Plant and ocean discliarge has abated a 
pollution problem in the Bay w ithout creating a meas- 
urable problem in the ocean. Although the Bay has 
recovered remarkably well in the few years since di- 
version, it is classified as a water quality segment be- 
cause of thermal discharges and nutrient concentra- 
tions, the latter being derived from existing bottom 
deposits and urban runoff. High nutrient and TDS 
concentrations are experienced in the Lower San Diego 
River to cause that stream to be classed also as a water 
quality segment. Salt balance in the basin is presently 
adverse, due mainly to the relatively high salinity of 
the imported water. There are local areas where 
groundwater quality is poor. 



138 



CHAPTER VI 

WATER SUPPLY AND SUPPLEMENTAL DEMANDS 



On the average, the total natural surface water 
supply of 7 1 million acre-feet in California is adequate 
to meet foreseeable demands. But natural stream run- 
off does not always occur at the time when it is needed 
nor in the right place. Most of the State's runoff is in 
the northern portion where about 75 percent occurs 
north of Sacramento while about 75 percent of the 
demand for irrigation and lurban water is south of 
Sacramento. Also, most of the rainfall and runoff oc- 
curs in the winter, while the peak demand for water 
supply occurs in the summer. Figure 27 shows the 



distribution of natural runoff among the 1 1 hydrologic 
study areas of California. 

California experiences a considerable amount of nat- 
ural regulation by which water from the wet season 
is held until the dry season. Winter snow in the high 
mountains of the Sierra Nevada and Cascade ranges 
and in the Klamath mountains gradually melts during 
the late spring and early summer to sustain dry season 
flows in many streams and rivers. The vast alluvial 
ground water basins also store percolating wet season 
rainfall and streamflow in underground reservoirs 
where it is available for pumping as required. 




NORTH COASTAL 

SAN FRANCISCO BAY 

CENTRAL COASTAL 

SOUTH COASTAL 
COLORADO DESERT 



SACRAMENTO BASIN 
SAN JOAQUIN BASIN 
DELTA-CENTRAL SIERRA 
TULARE BASIN 



NORTH LAHONTAN 
SOUTH LAHONTAN 



Figure 27. Distribution of Natural Runoff in California by Hydrologic Study Area 



139 



80 



40 



JFLOW FROM OREGON 1.4 



1 


COLORADO RIVER IMPORT 4.4b/ ] 


OTHER 10.0 






^ 




CO 




REMAINING CENTRAL 






< 


VALLEY 11.2 


z 




OC 




U- 




_J 




•a: 


SACRAMENTO 


o 




■21 


BASIN 22.4 


■JZ 




S 




U- 




Ll_ 




O 










ce 




_i 




<c 


NORTH 


=3 




h- 


COASTAL 


■ZL 


27.2 





TOTAL WATER SUPPLY - 76.6 



REMAINING WATER SUPPLIES 
27.2 c/ 



I- OUTFLOW TO NEVADA 1.2 
WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS 17.8( 



f 



SALINITY REPULSION 3.4e; 



1972 WATER USE (DEPLETIONS) 
27.0 



80 



PRESENT WATER USE 
AND COMMITMENTS 



UJ 
UJ 



2/ WATER RESOURCES BOARD BULLETIN No. 1, 1951 

^ CALIFORNIA SHARE ACCORDING TO SUPREME COURT DECREE IN ARIZONA v.s. CALIFORNIA, WHEN 

CENTRAL ARIZONA PROJECT BECOMES OPERATIONAL. 
^ A SIGNIFICANT PORTION IS UNAVAILABLE FOR OUT-OF-STREAM USES. 
i/ ESTIMATED NATURAL FLOW IN DESIGNATED REACHES OF THE SMITH, KLAMATH, TRINITY AND EEL RIVERS':' 
s/ 4,500 efs, EXCEPT 5 WEEKS AT 6,700 cfs IN THE SPRING. 



Figure 28. Total Surface Water Supply and Present Uses and Commitments 



140 



Figure 28 shows the average total water supply 
available and the present ^\ ater commitments for the 
1972 level of use including commitment of water for 
major in-stream uses. The long-term import supply of 
4.4 million acre-feet from the Colorado River is a sig- 
nificant addition to the natural supply, particularly 
since the southeastern portion of the State has prac- 
tically no natural surface supplies. 

The estimate of 1972 level water use (depletion) 
consists of the evapotranspiration (consumptive use) 
of applied water plus related consumptive losses and 
waste water discharges to the ocean or other saline 
water bodies such as the Salton Sea. It does not include 
potential!)' usable return flow or waste discharges in 
noncoastal areas of the State. 

The salinit)' repulsion estimate of 3.4 million arre- 
feet is based on 4,500 cfs of net Sacramento-San Joa- 
quin Delta outflow except 5 \\ ecks at 6,700 cfs in the 
spring for striped bass spaw ning which is a require- 
ment of State Water Resources Control Board Deci- 
sion 1379. The 4,500 cfs outflow is the current esti- 
mate of the amount necessary to meet the neomysis ^ 
requirement of not over 4,000 milligrams per liter 
chloride in the water at Chipps Island Strait. 

The wild and scenic riverflow commitment repre- 
sents the estimated full natural flow of the Eel River 
below Van Arsdale Dam, Klamath River below Iron 
Gate Dam, Trinity River below Lewiston Dam, and 
Smith River. The Eel River accounts for 5.8 million 
acre-feet of the 17.8 million acre-feet total commit- 
ment for wild and scenic riverflow. There is an addi- 
tional 2.2 million acre-feet of annual runoff from the 
reaches of these streams excluded from the Wild and 
Scenic Rivers system. 

The 1.2 million acre-foot outflow to Nevada repre- 
sents the flow to Nevada of the Truckee, Walker, and 
Carson Rivers from the portions of their drainage 
basins which are in California. 

Deducting current depletions, salinity repulsion, 
flow to Nevada, and the commitment of in-stream 
flow to wild and scenic rivers from the total supply 
of 76.6 million acre-feet leaves a remainder of 27.2 
million acre-feet. Theoretically, the 27.2 million acre- 
feet represents the surface supply available for regula- 
tion to meet increases in future water demands. In a 
practical sense, half is probably unavailable for out-of- 
stream use because the runoff occurs in remote areas, 
small coastal watersheds where regulatory reservoir 
storage sites are lacking, interior desert areas where 
much of the runoflr comes in flash floods, or because it 
occurs at infrequent intervals of short duration dur- 
ing large flood runoffs which are not physical!)' pos- 
sible to regulate or conserve. 



nportant estuary fish 



Available Water Supplies 

The measure of regulated water supp!\' used iierein 
is dependable _\yater supply. This is the amount of 
water which can be provided from the source to each 
water service area on a schedule matching the de- 
mands for water. The dependable suppl>' contains an 
allowance for conveyance loss, if any, in transporting 
the water from its original source to the users. 

Water supplies presented in this report for 1972 
are an estimate for that level of development and are 
not necessarily the actual deliveries in that year. The 
1972 water \'ear (October 1971 through September 
1972) was abnormal, being quite dry in all but the 
northern portion of the State. 

Local Surface Wafer Projecfs 

Surface water development in California has evolved 
over the last 200 )ears from a simple diversion of 
available stream flow at Mission San Diego to large 
and complex s\'stems. Dams have been built to con- 
serve and regulate the winter and spring runoff for 
use during the dry summer period. The stored waters 
have been conveyed by natural stream channels, ca- 
nals, tunnels, and pipelines, often over long distances, 
to areas of use. Hydroelectric pow er plants have been 
installed along the conveyance conduits as they drop 
from the mountains to the valley. Many of these water 
supply systems have been financed and constructed by 
local agencies to serve areas located within a single 
h\'drologic study area, both for municipal and indus- 
trial use and for agricultural purposes. It is these de- 
velopments by local agencies which are designated in 
this report as local surface water supplies. Water sup- 
ply projects of a local nature, but constructed by 
federal agencies are separately reported. 

In Table 27 local project water supplies are shown 
in two categories: (1) local surface water develop- 
ments and (2) imports b>' local water agencies. The 
first category denotes use of stream flow (including 
stored water) within the hydrologic study area; the 
second comprises water imported from outside the 
hydrologic area. 

Local surface supplies, together with imports by 
local agencies, account for about 11.8 million acre-feet 
of present water supplies. This is about 38 percent of 
the present total net water supply. 

Ground Wafer Safe Yield 

Safe ground w ater \ield is the measure of depend- 
able ground water supply used in this bulletin. It com- 
prises primar\' recharge to the underground storage 
aquifers from natural sources plus recharge from local 
surface reservoirs operated to augment natural stream 
channel percolation or to supply recharge basins. For 



141 



example, about 100,000 acre-feet of water in the Sa- 
linas Valley of the Central Coastal Hydrologic Study 
Area is supplied by ground water which is percolated 
from releases from Nacimiento and San Antonio Res- 
ervoirs. The Monterey County Flood Control and 
Water Conservation District stores winter season run- 
off in the two reservoirs for later release to the Salinas 
River when the stream channel has unused percolation 
capacity for recharging the ground water basin. State- 
wide, ground water supplies presently provide about 
5.2 million acre-feet of safe yield or about 17% of 
the present dependable \\ ater supplies. Some increases 
are projected, mosth' from future use of available ca- 
pacity of some northern California ground water 
basins. 

Pumping in excess of safe yield is causing an esti- 
mated 2.2 million acre-foot average annual with- 
drawal of ground water storage (net overdraft) 
throughout the State. This overdraft and the safe 
yield, together, comprise about 7.4 million acre-feet 
or about 24 percent of present net water use. An addi- 
tional 7.6 million acre-feet of annual ground water 
extraction constitutes reuse of water percolated from 
canals and distribution systems and from excess surf- 
ace applications. In total, ground ^\•ater pumping pro- 
vides about 40° o (15 million acre-feet per year) of 
the present applied water needs of the State. 

The full extent of the State's ground water resource 
is not completely known. While the areas of water- 
bearing underground strata have been generally de- 
lineated on a statewide basis, detailed knowledge of 
storage capacity and other characteristics has been 
limited primarily to the basins most heavily used 
where the need is the most immediate and where a 
considerable bod\' of factual data, such as well logs, is 
available for stud\-. Further, many investigations con- 
ducted before the 1950s were limited to depths be- 
low the surface considered to represent a limit to eco- 
nomic pumping, even though usable water may extend 
to much greater depths. In some cases, actual pump- 
ing depths are now in excess of original projections. 
As the need for greater use of the ground water re- 
source develops, so will the need for more definitive 
information on the underground reservoir character- 
istics. In most current investigations, this fact is rec- 
ognized, and analysis is carried to the base of fresh 
water. As basins are operated over greater ranges of 
capacity, more information will become available for 
evaluating the extent and usefulness of the resource. 
At present, estimates of storage capacity are generally 
on the conservative side, especially in the less devel- 
oped ground water areas. 

The Central Valley Projecf 

The Central \'alley Project (CVT) was conceived 
as a plan to overcome the natural maldistribution of 
water supply and demand in the Great Central X'alley 



of California. As early as the 1920s it was apparent 
that the natural water supply of the southern San 
Joaquin Valley was inadequate to meet the needs of 
this fertile area. 

The initial units of the Central Valley Project con- 
sisted of Friant and Shasta Dams and the Contr.i 
Costa, Delta-Mendota, Friant-Kern, and Madera Ca- 
nals. The first water deliveries for the Central \'alley 
Project were made from the Contra Costa Canal in 
1940. Current annual water deliveries, including that 
provided under water exchange contracts, amount to 
about 6 million acre-feet. (Actual 1972 deliveries were 
less because the dry year resulted in below average 
supplies at Alillerton Lake.) 

Major features of the Central \'alley Project are 
shown on Figure 19. Table 25 gives a listing of major 
reservoirs and canals which are built or under con- 
struction. In addition, there are two authorized 
projects. Marysville Reservoir on the Yuba River 
would increase conservation of the water in the Sac- 
ramento Basin; and the San Felipe Division would 
serve water to the South San Francisco Bay and to the 
Pajaro River \\atershed in the Central Coastal Hydro- 
logic Study Area. 

■ Total reservoir storage capacity in the Central Val- 
ley Project is now 10.1 million acre-feet, including the 
Central X'alley Project share of San Luis Reservoir. 

Table 25. Major Features of the Central Valley Project 





Capacity 
(1,000 acre-feet) 


First year of 
operation 


Storage reservoirs 


4.552 

2,448 

15 

241 

6 

24 

4 

150 

41 

1,010 

9 
2 
2.039 
56 
35 

13 

520 

2,326 

2.400 

(CFS) 
500 
3,500 
350 
4,600 
13,100 

1,200 
4,200 
2,300 


1944 


Clair Engle Lake (Trinity Dam) 

Lewiston Lake 

Whiskeytown Lake 


1960 
1963 
1963 
1963 


Keswick 


1948 
1966 


Black Butte' 


I%3 




1955 


Folsom Lake 


1955 


Lake Natoma (Nimbus) 


1955 




I%3 


San Lui<> -- - 


1967 




1966 




1966 




1966 




1944 






New Melones 


Vnder constr. 


Canals 


1961 




1973< 




1940 




1951 


San Luis' 


1967 




1944 




1949 











> Operated by the Corps of Engineers. 

'Operated by El Dorado Irrigation District. 

' Joint use with Slate Water Project; operated by State of Californii 

* Only first 26 miles complete out of a total of about 68 miles. 

i Operated by Contra Costa County Water District. 



142 



Completion of the Auburn and New Melones projects 
would increase the capacity to 14.8 million acre-feet. 
The total installed hydroelectric capacity of the CVP 
is about 1,250 megawatts, excluding the San Luis 
plant. This is about 3 percent of the State's total 
electric power capacity. Auburn and New Melones, as 
planned, will add 600 megawatts of new capacity, less 
the existing 26 megawatt Melones power plant which 
^^•ill be inundated. 

The estimated dependable water supply capabilit)' 
of the Central Valley Project upon the completion 
of Auburn and New Melones Reservoirs and with the 
Peripheral Canal \\ill be about 9.2 million acre-feet 
annually under full operation and including reuse of 
some return flo\\s. This yield assumes that Srate 
A\'ater Resources Control Board Decision 1379 re- 
iiuirements \\ill apply, except for relaxation in dry 



years. The supply includes 285,000 acre-feet from 
New Melones Reservoir (including downstream qual- 
ity and new fishery releases) and 318,000 acre-feet 
from Auburn Reservoir. Marysville Reservoir is not 
included but could add about 150,000 acre-feet to the 
Central V^iUey Project yield at the Delta. 

Included in the Central Valley Project water supply 
arc exchange and water rights supplies provided by 
the Central Valley Project under various agreements. 
Technically, these supplies would be considered as 
local water supplies; however, in keeping with con- 
ventional practice these deliveries were placed in the 
Central Valley Project category herein. The 1972 
Central Valley Project annual report shows that about 
2.6 million acre-feet of exchange and water rights 
water w as provided in that year. 




Friant Dam — a key unit of the Central Valley Project U.S. Bureau ol Reclamalion photo 



143 



Other Federal Wafer Deve/opmenfs 

This catcgor\- of water supply consists of water 
projects constructed by the Army Corps of Engineers 
or bv the Bureau of Reclamation, but which are not 
part of the Central Valley Project. Table 26 contains 
a list of the facilities included. 



Table 26. Other Federal Water Projects in Californi 




Storage reservoir 


Capacity 
(1.000 .^F) 


Watershed 


Hydrologic 
study 


Comple- 
date 


Clear Lake 

Upper Klamath Lake^.. 

Lake Mendocino 

Warm Springs 


527 
525= 

122 
281 

26 
240 
205 

252 

51 

50 

1.602 

m 

150 
90 

1,000 
150 
85 
570 

732' 
41 
30 

226 

28,537 

1,818 

648 

14 


Lost River 
Klamath River 

Russian River 
Russian River 

Salinas River 
Santa Maria River 
Santa Ynez River 

Ventura River 

Stony Creek 
Stony Creek 
Putah Creek 

Calaveras River 

Chowchilla River 
Fresno River 

Kings River 
Kaweah River 
Tule River 
Kern River 

Truckee River 
Truckee River 
Truckee River 
Truckee River 

Colorado River 
Colorado River 
Colorado River 
Colorado River 


XC 
NC 

SF 
SF 

CC 
CC 
CC 

SC 

SB 
SB 
SB 

DC 

SJ 
SJ 

IB 
TB 
TB 
TB 

XL 
XL 
XL 
XL 

CD 
CD 


1910 
1921 

I9S9 
U.C/l 

1942 




1958 


Cachuma 


1953 


Casitas 


1959 


East Park... 


1910 
1928 


Lake Berryessa 

New I logan 


1957 
1964 
U.C.J 


Hidden.. 

Pine Flat 


u.c..< 

1954 
1962 


Success 

Isabella 

LakeTahoc 

Boca .... 


1961 
1953 

1913 
1939 


Prosscr Creek 

Stampede 

Lake Mead'' . . 


1962 
1970 

1936 




1950 


Lake Havasu 

Senator Wash 


1938 
1966 



* In Modoc County. 
■• Outside California. 
" -Active Capacity. 
J Unde 



Water deliveries from the Colorado River to the 
Colorado Desert Hydrologic Study Area have been 
included in the other federal category. 

Included in the list on Table 26 are four federal 
reservoirs in the North Lahontan Hydrologic Study 
Area which regulate water supplies of the Truckee 
River watershed, but for use primarily in Nevada. 
Several more federal water supply projects have been 
authorized for construction in Northern California 
but their water supplv has not been included. These 
are: 



Reservoir 


Capacity 

(1,000 
acreleet) 


Watershed 


Hydrologic 
study area 


Butler,Valley 


460 
233' 
1,100 
900 
55 


Mad River 
Russian River 
Cottonwood Creek 
Cottonwood Creek 
Cache Creek 




Knights Valley 






Sacramento Basin 


Tehama 






Sacramento Basin 







California Sfaie Waier Project 

The California State \\'atcr Project is a s\stem of 
reservoirs and conveyance works w hich regulate water 
supplies from runoff in Northern California for use 
in Northern California, San Francisco Bay area, San 
Joaquin \'alley. Central Coast, and Southern Califor- 
nia. It also provides flood control, h\"droelectric power 
generation, water-oriented recreation, salinitx' control 
in the Delta in coordination with the federal Central 
\'alle\- Project, and enhancement of fisheries and wild- 
life habitat. 

The Project extends from reser\-oirs on the upper 
Feather River in Plumas Count\' to Lake Perris in 
Riverside C()unt\-, w ith branch aqueducts to the north 
and south San Francisco Bay areas, to the Central 
Coastal area and the northwest portion of metropolitan 
Southern California. AVatcr from Lake Perris is dis- 
tributed by agencies of the .Metropolitan \\'ater Dis- 
trict of Southern California throughout the South 
Coastal area to the vicinit\' of the .Mexican border. 
.Major physical facilities of the State Water Project, 
both completed and authorized, include 2.^ dams and 
reservoirs, 6 hydroelectric power plants, 22 pumping 
plants and 68.^ miles of conveyance facilities. 

Features of the State Water Project are shown in 
Figure 19, and are described in detail in Department 
of Water Resources Bulletin No. 1.^2-74, "The State 
Water Project in 1974". 

Facilities which comprise the State \\ater Project 
are: 

• Frenchman, Antelope, and Grizzly \'alley Dams 
and tile Grizzly \'alley Pipeline, for recreation 
and water ser\ice to the Upper Feather River 
area. 

• Oroville-Thermalito Facilities, the ke\' source of 
project water supply, also for power generation, 
flood control, and recreation. 

• Phase I of the North Bay Aqueduct, for delivery 
of w atcr to the north San Francisco Ba\' area. 

• 1 he South Ba\" .Aqueduct, for recreation, flood 
control, and w ater service to the South San Fran- 
cisco Ba\' area. 

• The California .Aqueduct, extending 444 miles 
from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to Lake 
Perris, for recreation, power generation, and wa- 
ter service to the w estern San Joaquin \'alle\' and 
high desert and southern coastal [ilain of South- 
ern California. 

• The West Branch of the California Aqueduct, in- 
cluding P\raniid and Castaic Lakes and a 1250 
megawatt pump storage pow er plant. The power 
plant was constructed by the Los .\ngeles De- 
partment of Water and Pow er. Lhis system pro- 
\ides recreation, power generation, and water 
ser\ice to the northern coastal plain of Southern 
California. 



144 



• Pliasc I of tlic Coastal Branch of the California 
Aqueduct for project water service initially to the 
Antelope Plain on the central-western periphery 
of the San Joaquin \'alley (and eventually to San 
Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties). 

• Storage and pumping-generating facilities at San 
Luis Reservoir m hich are utilized jointly with the 
federal Central Valley Project. 

The Department of Water Resources lias contracted 
to deliver state project water to 3 1 A\ater service agen- 
cies located in 8 of the State's 1 1 hydrologic study 
areas. Ma.xinium annual entitlements by the contrac- 
tors for the water supply amount to 4,230,000 acre- 
feet per year. In addition, the project has the capabil- 
ity to provide 45,500 acre-feet per year for recreation 
purposes associated with the project. Finally, convey- 
ances losses estimated at about 187,000 acre-feet per 
year are included in the net demand on the State Wa- 
ter Project. A tabulation of the entitlements to state 
project water within hydrologic study areas is shown 
below: 



Hydrologic Study An 



Basin: 

San Francisco Bay 

Central Coastal 

San Joaquin Basin 

Tulare Basin 

South Coastal 

South Lahontan 

Colorado Desert 

Total Entitlement of Contractors 

Recreation 

System Conveyances Losses (estimated) 

Total Project Water Requirements (rounded) 



Amount (a. 
feet per ye 



39.800 

255,000 

82,700 

5,700 

1,349,300 

2,204.400 

206,600 

86.500 



4,230,000 
45,500 
187,000 



The firm water yield of the conservation facilities 
of the State Water Project, when completed, will be 
4.46 million acre-feet per year. This estimate envisions 
completion of the North Bay Aqueduct and Coastal 
Branch, and installation of the necessary final pump 
units at the Delta and Edmonston Pumping Plants. It 
also envisions the construction of additional conserva- 
tion facilities as necessary to satisfy full contractual 




Wind Gap Pumping Plont — Californio Slate Water Projecl 



145 



entitlements. Curientl\-, the project yield with the 
Peripheral Canal assumed to be in operation is esti- 
mated at 3.4 million acre-feet per year, based on the 
project being operated in accordance \\ith State 
Water Resources Control Board Decision 1379 for 
outflow requirements in the Sacramento-San Joaquin 
Delta, except for relaxation in dry years. 

Waste Wafer Reclamation 

A considerable amount of municipal and industrial 
\\ aste water has been reclaimed and has been used for 
\ears at inland locations for irrigation, mainl\- of fod- 
der. In previous bulletins this water supply has usually 
been considered part of the reuse of net supplies and 
has not been identified separately. However, in this 
bulletin, the amounts of w aste water reclaimed delib- 
crateix' for a specific beneficial use have been included 
as an item of supply. The projected amounts in coastal 
hydrologic study areas include present amounts plus 
those new waste \\ater reclamation projects \\ hicii 
seem to be assured either by a start of construction or 
b\- a specific allocation of funds for construction. Un- 
til concerns regarding public health safety aspects of 
using reclaimed \\ater are resolved it is not possible 
to plan for significant increases in waste water rec- 



lamation for municipal use. In the inland hydrologic 
stud\' areas, present practices were assumed to con- 
tinue, and future w aste w ater reclamation \\ as assumed 
to be about the same percentage of total municipal 
and industrial applied water as it is today. Exceptions 
w ere made in the case of military and some industrial 
facilities w here waste water reclamation was projected 
at present levels. 

Desalting 

Desalination of brackisii drainage w ater and sea wa- 
ter is a potential source of w ater in some areas. The 
only source of desalted water regarded firm enough 
to include in the projected net water supplies is 16,000 
acre-feet per \ear from the Water Factory 21 installa- 
tion being constructed in Orange County. The San 
Diego Saline Test Facilit\' was producing about 500 
acre-feet per year in 1972; the plant ceased operation 
in 1973 and has been dismantled. 

Summary of Available Water Supplies 

Table 27 presents the summar\' of water supplies 
available in each of the eleven h\drologic study areas. 
The w ater suppl\- is presented in the eight suppl\' cate- 
gories just discussed. 



TABLE 27 

Summory of 1972 and Projected Water Supplies, Net Water Demands and Supplemental 

Demands by Hydrologic Study Areas 

(1,000 acre-feet per year) 





North Coastal 


San Francisc 


) Bay 


Cen 


ral Coastal 


South Coastal 


Sacramento Basin 


Delta-Central Sierra 


Items 


1972 


1990 


2020 


1972 


1990 


2020 


1972 


1990 


2020 


1972 


1990 


2020 


1972 


1990 


2020 


1972 


1990 


2020 


Dependable water supplies 

Local surface water developments 

Imports by local water agencies 


390 

2 

140 

430 

960 

940 
2 
20 

940 

2 
20 

940 
2 
20 

940 
2 
20 


390 

2 

160 

430 

980 

990 
20 
10 

990 
20 
10 

980 
20 
20 

980 
20 
20 


400 

2 

180 

430 

1,010 

1,040 
30 


1,030 
30 
10 

1,010 
20 
20 

1,000 
20 
30 


170 
700 
330 
80 
100 
130 
8 

1.520 

1,270 

9 

260 

1,270 

9 

260 

1,270 

9 

260 

1,270 

9 

260 


170 
700 
340 
140 
230 
230 
54 

1,860 

1,820 
80 
120 

1,780 
70 
150 

1,760 
70 
170 

1,660 
30 
230 


170 
700 
340 
270 
230 
260 
55 

2,030 

2,630 

600 



2.450 
480 
60 

2,310 
370 
90 

1,900 
120 
250 


54 

720 

55 

6 

830 

950 
140 
20 

950 
140 

20 

950 
140 
20 

950 
140 
20 


54 

750 

55 
87 
7 

950 

1,240 

290 



1,200 

250 



1,180 

230 



1,150 

200 




54 

750 

55 
87 
8 

950 

1,560 

610 



1,480 

530 



1,410 

460 



1,250 

300 




90 

1.720 

930 

20 
190 

57 



3,010 

3,080 
160 
90 

3,080 
160 
90 

3,080 
160 
90 

3,080 
160 
90 


90 
940 
930 

io 

2,340 
81 
16 

4,420 

3,770 



650 

3,700 



720 

3,640 


780 

3,390 



1,030 


90 
940 
930 

20 

2,340 

81 

16 

4,420 

5,200 

780 



4,720 

300 



4,480 
60 


3,460 



960 


2.480 

9 

1.190 

2,700 

200 

1 

11 

6,590 

5,780 

240 

1,050 

5,780 

240 

1,050 

5,780 

240 

1,050 

5,780 

240 

1,050 


2.610 

9 

1.360 

3,170 

190 

38 

13 

7,390 

7,610 
500 
280 

7,200 
360 
550 

6,800 
290 
880 

6,630 
210 

970 


2,790 

9 

1,390 

3,380 

190 

40 

18 

7,820 

9,030 

1,210 



8,240 
730 
310 

7,530 
530 
820 

7,080 

320 

1,060 


1,330 

630 
130 
110 

i 

2,2i6 

2,270 
120 
60 

2,270 
120 
60 

2,270 
120 
60 

2,270 
120 

60 


1,370 

610 
800 
120 

io 

2,9io 

3,110 
220 
20 

2,900 
120 

130 

2,700 
110 

320 

2.580 
80 
410 


1,420 
610 


Central Valley Project'... _ 

Other federal water developments' 


760 
120 




18 


Desalting 

Total dependable water supplies 

Aturnatke Future I 


2,930 
3,860 




930 







Murnative Future 11 


3,630 




710 




10 


Alternative Future 111 

Total net water demand 


3.360 
550 




120 


Alltrnatne Future 11' 

Total net water demand 


3,010 
280 




200 







* Facilities existing or under construction; amounts include water rights and exchange supplies in the Central Valley furnished from CVP facilities. 

* Facilities definitely planned for construction and additional conser\-3tion facilities authorized to meet contractual commitments. 

' Potentially available to certain portions of the hydrologic study area to meet additional water demands; usually not available toother areas of supplemental demand beca 
of a lack of physical facilities and/or institutional arrangements. 



146 



The supply for the State Water Project assumes 
that sucli ^\■orks as necessary to meet contractual de- 
ii\cries will be constructed. It should be noted that a 
significant portion of the present regulated water sup- 
pl\' is in a reserve status. This means that: (1) the de- 
mands for water in certain areas are not large enough 
to utilize all of the available regulated water suppl\-, 
( 2 ) the areas of need cannot be served with the con- 
\cyancc facilities available, or (3) no contractual ar- 
rangement exists for service to the area. The reserve 
suppl\- is only valid at face value in its designated serv- 
ice area. Even if the necessary physical and institu- 
tional transfer means existed, some quantity adjustment 
would be needed if use of the reserve supph- in an- 
orlicr service area is contemplated. The adjustment 
would include the effect of return flows and differing 
monthK- schedules of water demand. 



A summary of the statewide water supply and de- 
mand picture for each alternative future is shown in 
Figure 29. iMajor sources of water are indicated and 
compared to total net demands for water. The differ- 
ence betw een usable w ater suppl_\' and net \\ ater de- 
mand is the supplemental demand. About 90 percent 
of the estimated 1972 supplemental demand of 2,450,- 
000 acre-feet is met from ground w ater overdraft. The 
Colorado River suppl\- will decrease from about 5,- 
150,000 acre-feet currently to 4,400,000 acre-feet by 
1990, w hich is California's share of the Colorado River 
supply according to the Supreme Court allocation. 

The bottom category on the figure is labeled "Local 
Water Projects". It includes local agency and federal 
surface water developments, except for Colorado River 
and Central Valley Project sources. It also includes 
w aste water reclamation and desalting which are too 
small to show on the figure. 



TABLE 27— Continued 

ry of 1972 and Projected Water Supplies, Net Water Demands and Supplemental 
Demands by Hydrologic Study Areas — Continued 
(1,000 acre-feef per year) 





San J 


oaquin 


Basin 


Tulare Basin 


Xor 


h Laho 


n.an 


South Lahontan 


Colorado Desert 


State tota 


s 


Items 


1972 


1990 


2020 


1972 


1990 


2020 


1972 


1990 


2020 


1972 


1990 


2020 


1972 


1990 


2020 


1972 


1990 


2020 


Dependable water supplies 

Local surface water developments- 
Imports by local water'agencies-.. 
Ground water safe yield 


2,230 

520 

1,720 



9 

26 

4,510 

4,650 
250 
110 

4,650 
250 
110 

4,650 
250 
110 

4,650 
250 
110 


2,280 

520 

1,940 

48 

9 

38 

4,840 

5,510 

670 



5,350 

510 



5,120 

280 



4,960 
130 
10 


2,280 

520 

1,940 

48 

9 

62 

4,860 

6,280 

1,420 



5,710 

850 



5,320 

460 



5,030 

170 




2,220 

sio 

2,660 
240 
790 
45 

6,470 

7,300 

1,310 

480 

7,300 

1,310 

480 

7,300 

1,310 

480 

7,300 

1,310 

480 


2,220 

sio 

2,890 

240 

1,410 

59 

7,330 

9,200 

1,920 

50 

8,800 

1,500 

30 

8,290 

1,030 

70 

8,180 
920 
70 


2,220 

510 
2,890 

240 

1,410 

85 

7,360 

11,000 

3,640 



10,110 

2,750 



9,160 

1,800 



8,700 

1,340 




330 
11 
55 

6 
400 

430 
40 
10 

430 
40 
10 

430 
40 
10 

430 
40 
10 


330 
11 
90 

'9 
440 

450 
20 
10 

450 
20 
10 

450 
20 
10 

420 
20 
40 


330 
11 
110 

12 
460 

480 
20 


470 
10 


470 
10 


420 

40 


30 
120 

34 
7 

190 

280 
120 
30 

280 
120 
30 

280 
120 
30 

280 
120 
30 


40 
130 

220 
8 

400 

330 
3 
70 

330 
3 
70 

320 
3 
80 

300 

3 

100 


50 

130 

]] 
220 
10 

410 

510 

100 



430 
70 
50 

370 

30 
70 

290 
10 
130 


74 

3,950 
14 
7 

4,040 

4,070 
40 
10 

4.070 
40 
10 

4,070 
40 
10 

4,070 
40 
10 


85 

3,970 
85 
9 

4,150 

4,240 
90 


4,180 
30 


4,150 
20 
20 

4.140 
10 
20 


90 

3,970 
91 
12 

4,160 

4,430 

270 



4,300 

140 



4,290 

130 



4,210 
60 
10 


9,310 
2,450 
5,220 
7,290 
5,110 
1,160 
180 

30,700 

31,000 
2.450 
2,140 

31,000 
2,450 
2,140 

31,000 
2,450 
2,140 

31,000 
2,450 
2,140 


9,560 
1,660 
5,470 
8,930 
5,310 
4.420 
290 
16 
35,700 

38,300 
3.810 
1,200 

36,900 
2,880 
1,670 

35,400 
2,070 
2,330 

34,400 
1,620 
2,900 


9,810 
1.660 
5,560 
9.230 


Other federal water developments'. 


5,310 
4,460 




360 


Desalting 

Total dependable water supplies^ 

Jlurnalivr Future I 

Total net water demand 


16 

36,400 

46,000 
9,610 







Alternative Future 11 


42,600 




6,600 




430 


Alternative Future III 


39,700 








1,120 


Alternative Future IT 

Total net water demand 


36,400 
2,620 


Reserve suddIv' 









t Facilities existing or under construct 
' Facilities definitely planned lor cons 
' Potentially available to certain portic 
of a lack of physical facilities and/or 



n; amounts include water rights and exchange supplies in the Central Valley furnished from CVP facilities, 
jction and additional conservation facilities authorized to meet contractual commitments, 
s of the hydrologic study area to meet additional water demands; usually not available to other areas of supple 
istitutional arrangements. 



147 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE I 




20 



10 



CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT 



COLORADO RIVER 



GROUND WATER 



LOCAL WATER PROJECTS 



1972 



1990 



2020 



50 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE III 



_ USABLE WATER SUPPLY 




20 



10 



NET WATER DEMAND -^ 
STATE WATER PROJECT 



CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT 



COLORADO RIVER 



GROUND WATER 



LOCAL. WATER PROJECTS 




1972 



1990 



2020 



YEAR 



Figure 29. Statewide Water Demand and Usable Water Supply 



148 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE I 




2020 



1972 



1990 



2020 



YEAR 



Figure 29. (Continued) 



149 



EfFect of State Water Resources Control 
Board Decisions on Water Supply 

During the past four years, the State Water Re- 
sources Control Board has made several decisions in 
regard to water rights which will significantlx' affect 
the water supply outlook. 

Decision 1379 

Chief among these is Decision 1379 relating to 
water quality in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, 
issued in July 1971. The water qualit\' standards estab- 
lished for fish and wildlife require substantially higher 
fresh water outflows, including greater releases of 
stored water, than the amounts used in planning the 
State Water Project and the federal Central Valley 
Project. In making Decision 1379, the Board stated 
that its hearings would be reopened not later than 
July 1978 to receive further evidence relating to salin- 
ity control and fish and wildlife protection. 

Decision 1379 prescribes water quality standards at 
various locations in the Delta. Some are for protection 
of municipal and industrial supplies, some for agricul- 
ture, and some for fish and wildlife. The fishery stand- 
ards would normally be controlling. The amounts of 
water required to meet the standards are large. De- 
cision 1379 standards, without dry year relaxation, will 
result in a reduction in the combined water yields 
(critical dry period) of the Central Valley Project 
and State Water Project of about 1.8 million acre-feet 
per year. About 1.1 million acre-feet of this would 
be the responsibility of the Central \'alle\' Project 
and 0.7 million acre-feet that of the State Water Proj- 
ect, assuming that the responsibilit\' for increased out- 
flow \\()uld be shared b\' the 60-40 ratio used in nego- 
tiating the \et unsigned Coordinated Operation 
Agreement for the Central Valley Project and State 
Water Project. E.xecution of this agreement has been 
delayed pending completion of an Environmental Im- 
pact Statement on the agreement. 

There have been indications that the Board \\ould 
consider relaxation of some of the fishery criteria in 
dry years. For example, the guidelines given to the 
basin contractors working on the AVater Quality Con- 
trol Planning Program included consideration of a dry 
year rela.xation in fisheries flow in the Delta in formu- 
lating alternative water quality control plans. Esti- 
mates of water suppl\- presented in the previous sec- 
tion of this report are based on a relaxation of the 
criteria which results in an estimated reduction in 
combined water yield (dry period) of 0.6 million 
acre-feet. 

Decision 1400 

In Decision 1400 (April 1972) the State Water Re- 
sources Control Board decreed minimum lower 
American River flows for fishery and recreation pur- 



poses. Releases from Folsom Reservoir would provide 
1,250 cubic feet per second (cfs) for fisheries pur- 
poses during the cool season of the year and 1,500 cfs 
for recreation from mid-Ma\' to mid-October in all 
but dr\' years. These levels of flow were judged the 
minimum to provide a good in-stream fishery and rec- 
reation environment in the lower reaches of the 
American River where it flows through the Metro- 
politan Sacramento area. 

The previous fishery release requirement was based 
on an agreement with the Department of Fish and 
Game negotiated when Folsom Dam was built. Fishery 
releases amounted to about 234,000 acre-feet per year, 
250 cubic feet per second from January to mid-Sep- 
tember and 500 cubic feet per second the rest of the 
\ear. The increased requirement under Decision 1400, 
about 750,000 acre-feet per year, imposed a substantial 
reduction in the amount of firm water suppl\- avail- 
able for diversion at the head of Folsom South Canal. 

In this case, a physical engineering solution would 
be the Hood-Clay pump connection. Water released to 
flow down the American River into the Sacramento 
Ri\er would be diverted at a point just south of Sac- 
ramento and conveyed back to the Folsom-South 
Canal through a pumping plant and canal. The con- 
nection probably would not be needed until after year 
1990, when American River and Folsom South Canal 
service area demands will have built up and exceed 
the amount available for direct diversion from the 
.\nierican River. 

Decision 1422 

In Decision 1422, concerning the New .Melones 
Project on the Stanislaus River, the State Water Re- 
sources Control Board restricted conservation storage 
in the federal reservoir to such water as neccssarv to 
provide (a) for prior rights at existing iMelones Reser- 
voir, (b) for preservation and enhancement of down- 
stream fish and wildlife up to 98,000 acre-feet per 
_\ear, and (c) additional water to maintain dissolved 
ox\gen in the Stanislaus River and control of water 
quality in the lower San Joaquin River at X'ernalis. 
The storage restriction will be reconsidered by the 
Board when there is a demonstrated need for more 
water for downstream purposes or additional diver- 
sions and evidence that benefits therefrom would out- 
wcigh the damage above New Alelones Dam that 
would result from such storage. The storage limita- 
tion will preserve a popular "white water" area and 
protect some limestone caves and, possibly, some 
archaeological and historical sites. (Previousl>' con- 
structed headwater reservoirs contribute substantiall\ 
to the length of the "white water" rafting season.) 

The practical effect of the decision is to limit water 
suppl\- storage to about 30 percent of the New 
Alcloncs total capacity of 2,400,000 acre-feet. The firm 
water supplv would then be around 210,000 AF less 
than without the storage limit, with substantial loss 



150 



of electric power from the planned 300-megawatt 
power plant and much reduced reservoir "flat water" 
recreation. 

Supplemental Water Demands 

Supplemental water demands arc the difference be- 
tween net water demand and useable water supply in 
each hydrologic stud\- area. Useable water supply is 
defined as that portion of the dependable w ater supply 
that is useable in the area of need. .Man_\- of the study 
areas are quite large and \\ hile the total water supply 
appears adequate to meet projected water demands, 
local shortages may occur because the location of reg- 
ulated water supplies and conveyance systems do not 
permit adequate water service to ail places requiring 
water. 

Quantities of dependable w ater supplies not useable 
to satisf\' hydrologic stud\- area demands, as explained 
in the foregoing paragraphs, were classified as "reserve 
supplies". While there is a possibilit\- of using certain 
reserves from one h\drologic study area to offset the 
supplemental demands of another hydrologic study 
area, both institutional and physical modifications would 
be required. 

Present and projected supplemental water demands 
are given in Table 27. Under the 1972 level of devel- 
opment, the supplemental demand was 2,450,000 acre- 
feet per year. Assuming completion and delivery of 
water from facilities under construction and facilities 
required to conserve water to meet requirements under 
existing contracts, supplemental water demand in 1990 
could range from 1.6 to 3.fi million acre-feet per year. 
Under similar assumptions regarding additional sup- 
plies b\- 2020, tlie supplemental w ater demand in Cali- 



fornia is estimated to range from 2.6 to 9.6 million 
acre-feet per year for the alternative futures described 
earlier. 

About 2.2 million acre-feet of the supplemental de- 
mand shown at the 1972 level represents ground water 
overdraft (i.e., the net withdrawals from underground 
water storage in excess of the safe yields). This has 
resulted in lowering ground water tables in certain 
areas. The largest amount of overdraft is in Tulare 
Basin where an estimated 1.3 million acre-feet of 
ground w ater overdraft is shown for 1972. The Tulare 
Basin overdraft is less than the 1967 estimated over- 
draft of 1.8 million acre-feet which was reported in 
Bulletin No. 160-70. The reduction is due to deliveries 
of Central V^alley Project and State Water Project 
water along the west side of the San Joaquin V^alley. 
Figures 21 and 22 show^ this impact on ground water 
levels in the area. 

Table 28 is intended as an aid in comparing current 
projections of the need for new water supplies with 
former bulletins in the 160 series. Adjustments were 
made to the figures shown in previous bulletins to 
harmonize the major items of supply to those used in 
this report. For example. Bulletin No. 160-66 showed 
man\- proposed Central \'alley Project works, such as 
tlic San Felipe and the Eastside Divisions, as part of the 
suppl\' and onl\' a relatively small "Remaining Net Wa- 
ter Requirement" (see Table 7 of Bulletin No. 160-66). 
Bulletin No. 160-74 does not count these works as as- 
sured firm supplies. The harmonizing adjustments were 
made only for specific project sources which are dif- 
ferent from one report to another. No adjustment w as 
made when the changes consisted of refinements in 
the estimates of water supply capability. 



Table 28. Comparisons of Supple 



ntal Demand Between Bulletin No. 160-74 and Previous Bulletins 
(1,000 acre-feet) 





1990 


2020 




160-66 


160-70 


160-74 


160-66 


160-70 


160-74 


Hydrologic study area 


I 


11 


111 


IV 


I 


II 


III 


IV 





30 
80 



210 

100 



1,400 






80 



2211 



240 

90 

100 

1,060 

30 
60 
80 


20 

80 

290 



500 

220 

670 

1,920 

20 

90 


20 

70 

250 



360 

120 

510 

1,500 

20 

30 


20 

70 

230 



29U 

110 

280 

1,030 

20 

20 


20 
30 
200 



210 
80 
130 
920 

20 

lU 




340 

600 

1,S40 

300 

140 

400 

2,670 





180 


100 
710 
480 
940 

350 

180 

400 

1.920 

120 
60 
150 


30 
600 
610 

780 

1,210 

930 

1,420 

3,640 

20 
100 
270 


30 
480 
530 
300 

730 

710 

850 

2.750 

10 
70 
140 


20 
370 
460 

60 

530 

550 

460 

1,800 

10 
30 
130 


20 


San Francisco Bay. 


120 
300 









320 


Delta-Central Sierra 


280 




170 


Tulare Basin 


1,340 









10 




60 






State Totals 


1,820 


1,960 


3,810 


2,880 


2,070 


1,620 


6,170 


5,410 


9.610 


6,600 


4,420 


2,620 







nds above do not include an 
it is expected that these coi 



.vhicli will be needed t 



151 



Analysis of Central Valley Project and 
State Water Project Capability and Demands 

The Central \'alley Project and the California State 
Water Project both involve major transfers of water 
from areas of water surplus to areas of water defi- 
ciency. Since these two integrated projects account for 
much of the present water service and are expected 
to provide a greater share of the future water service, 
the capabilities of the two systems are significant in 
the analysis of California's water supplies. 



Project Wafer Supplies 

As indicated in the previous section on available wa- 
ter supplies, the capability of the Central \'alley Proj- 
ect to provide for the projected net demands com- 
puted for this report appears to be about 9.2 million 
acre-feet per year. This assumes completion of Auburn 
and New Melones Reservoirs and the Peripheral Canal 
in the Delta. 

The current sustained yield capability of the existing 
State W'ater Project conservation facilities, together 
with the Peripheral Canal, \\ ould be about 3.4 million 
acre-feet. About 1 million acre-feet of additional au- 
thorized conservation capability will be added to meet 
contractual demands plus conveyance losses of 4.46 
million acre-feet. 

The Peripheral Canal 

In 1959, California authorized, in the Burns-Porter 
Act, construction of physical works to transfer Sacra- 
mento River water through the Delta and concurrently 
to solve water qualit\' and fishery problems within the 
Delta. In 1964, the Peripheral Canal \\ as recommended 
as the best plan for the Delta. It would accomplish 
five objectives: 

(1) Protect and enhance the Delta fishery by re- 
storing downstream flows in Delta channels. 

(2) Provide ^\■ater quality control for the interior 
Delta uses by releasing ^\ ater from many out- 
lets. 

(3) Correct a deteriorating environmental condition 
by isolating project pumps from the Delta chan- 
nels. 

(4) Improve Delta recreation by providing new fa- 
cilities along the Canal and by improving Delta 
access. 

(5) Ensure the qualit\ of tlic water suppl\' needed 
by agriculture, industry, and millions of Caii- 
fornians w est and south of the Delta served by 
the State and federal projects. 

It is worth noting that two of the standards of De- 
cision 1379 cannot be met without the Peripiieral 
Canal or some other cross-Delta transfer facilitw These 



are the requirement for positive downstream flow in 
all principal Delta channels for fishery purposes, and 
the requirement for a predominance of San Joaquin 
River water in the southern and eastern Delta in fall 
months. 

.'Klthough the Peripheral Canal was planned as a 
joint federal-state undertaking, federal authorization to 
participate in its construction has not yet been ob- 
tained. With projected export, the canal is needed by 
1980 to protect the water quality of the State Water 
Project, Central \'alley Project, and the southwestern 
Delta in dry and critical years. In the event that there 
is not formal federal participation by congressional 
authorization or other means in time to meet a 1980 
operational date, the Department w ould have to pro- 
ceed alone with construction of a water conveyance 
facilit\' if it is to meet the needs of the SWP. A pro- 
gram of staged construction b\' the State that would 
meet the needs of both state and federal projects is a 
feasible course of action. 

Briefly, the first stage of such a plan w ould be a full- 
sized, full-length gravitN' flow canal with full-size chan- 
nel release facilities which would satisf\' the interim 
needs of the State Water Project and Central \'alley 
Project SNStems and of the Delta until about 1985. 
With the addition of a pumping plant and other de- 
ferred features in 1985, the capacity' and operating 
capability of the first-stage facility would be ex- 
panded to meet the increasing needs of the projects. 
Using this approach, federal financial participation 
would be feasible at any time. 

The State of California strongly supports federal 
authorization of the Peripheral Canal and financial par- 
ticipation in the construction of the canal. However, 
regardless of w hether or not such financial participa- 
tion is effective during the construction period of the 
canal, the Department of Water Resources will pro- 
ceed with construction of Stages 1 and 2. Should con- 
gressional authorization be delayed, the Department 
expects that the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation would 
pay an interim "wheeling charge" or other form of 
temporary compensation, for the convc\ance of fed- 
eral Central \'alley Project water through the canal. 



Water Demar^ds on the Central Valley Project 

The estimated 1972-level water demands and pro- 
jected further water demands in the Central \'aile\ 
Project service areas which are capable of being served 
1)\' the project works, either existing or under con- 
struction and within commitments to the scrxicc areas, 
are summarized in Table 29. Inherent in the tabic is 
the assumption tliat Folsom Soutli Canal w ill be com- 
pleted iiiti) San Joaquin County and tiiat New Mcloncs 
Reservoir w ill serve areas of need in the San Joaijuin 
Ihdroloijic Stud\' .Area. 



152 



Table 29. Net Water Demands on the Central Volley Project ' 
(1,000 ocrefeet) 





1972 


1990 


2020 




Alternative future 


Alternative future 


Hydrologic study area 


I 


11 


III 


IV 


I 


11 


III 


IV 


San Francisco Bay 

Sacramento Basin 

Delta-Central Siena 

San Joaquin Basin 

Tulare Basin 


60 
2,090 

90 
1,620 
2,180 
6,040 


100 
3,050 

840 
1,940 
2,840 
8,770 


90 
2,900 
730 
1,940 
2,850 
8,510 


90 
2,720 
570 
1.940 
2,820 
8,140 


80 
2,660 
520 
1.930 
2.810 
8,000 


270 
3,490 

900 
1.940 
3,040 
9,640 


210 
3,270 

910 
1,940 
3,040 
9,370 


180 
2,930 

910 
1,940 
3,040 
9,000 


110 
2,810 

800 
1,940 
3,020 


Total 


8,680 



' Up to authorized commitments upon facilities existing or under construction. 



Table 30 summarizes the additional water supply 
demands in the Central \'alley Project service areas 
that would occur under each alternative future. In ef- 
fect these additional demands represent that portion of 
the supplemental water demand that lies within or 



adjacent to the Central \'allcy Project service areas 
but exceeds the current service area commitments. Fig- 
ure 30 graphically depicts the water supply and de- 
mand picture of the Central \\illey Project. 



Possible Additional Demands on the Central Volley Project " 
(1,000 acre-feet) 



( 

Hydrologic study area 


1990 


2020 


Alternative future 


Alternative future 


I 


II 


III 


IV 


I 


II 


III 


IV 


San Francisco Bay 


50 
80 
400 
150 
670 
1,550 
2.900 


50 
80 
310 
110 
500 
1,290 
2.340 


40 
80 
230 
100 
280 
980 
1,710 


20 

80 
190 

80 ' 
120 
910 
1,400 


190 
110 

770 

760 

1,360 

2,690 

5,880 


180 
110 
580 
540 
800 
2.110 
4,320 


160 
110 
430 
380 
450 
1,410 
2,940 


70 
110 




280 




220 




170 




1,130 


Total 


1,980 







nitments upon facilities existing or under construction. 



New facilities which could provide additional water 
supplies to the Central Valley Project service areas to 



meet the additional requirements shown in Table 30 
are: 



1. San Felipe Division* 

2. Marysvillc Reservoir* 

3. West Sacramento Canalf-. 

4. Mid-Valley Canalf 

5. Kast Side Divisiont 

6. Allen Campt 

7. Cosumncs River Divisionf 



SF and CC 

SF, CC. SB. DC. SJ and TI 

SB. DC and SF 

SJ and TB 

SJ and TB 

SB 

DC 



153 



10 



PROJECTED SUPPLIES 




PROJECTED DEMANDS 
On Facilities Existing or Under 
Construction for Alternative 
Futures 



LU 5 



< 



CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT 



1972 



1990 



2020 



YEAR 



Figure 30. Projected Net Wofer Demonds and Dependable Water Supply — Centrol Valley Project 



154 



Water Demands on ihe Siafe Water Project 

Despite the slow-down in population grow tii and 
urban water use, demands for State Water Project 
service are building up at a fairly rapid pace now that 
the basic aqueduct system is complete. Additional im- 
petus to this build-up results from the fact that Colo- 
rado River supplies to the South Coastal area will be 
reduced when the Central Arizona Project begins to 
use some of Arizona's entitlement to Colorado River 
water. Another factor tending to increase State Water 
Project demands in Southern California is the better 
qualit\' of the Northern California water compared 
with the Colorado River w ater w hich has a relatively 
high content of dissolved salts. 

State Water Project demands in this report are based 
on assumed completion of the North Ba\' Aqueduct 
and Coastal Branch, as w ell as the necessary final pump 
units at the Delta and Edmonston Pumping Plants. 
Projected demands, including recreation water and 
conveyance losses, are as shown in Table 31. 

There is potential demand for additional State 
Water Project service either to areas now served by 



the project or to areas immediately adjacent to pres- 
ent service areas. Satisfaction of these demands would 
require additions to the present or authorized State 
Water Project. In developing the estimates of possible 
future demand shown in Table 32, a limit of 880,000 
acre-feet in additional service to Southern California 
was set. This is the estimated additional capacity in 
the tunnels through the Tehachapi Mountains. How- 
ever, enlargement of the Edmonston Pumping Plant 
and many sections of the California Aqueduct north 
of the Tehachapi would be required to convey that 
much additional water. Supplemental conservation fa- 
cilities would also be required to increase the water 
supplies of the project. 

Comparison of Supply and Demand 

Figure 3 1 shows a comparison of the State Water 
Project system supply and net demands for each of 
the four alternative projections. The demand lines for 
the first two alternative futures terminate when they 
reach the amount under contract. The supply line is 
the estimated capabilit\- of existing State Water Proj- 
ect conservation facilities. 



31. Net Water Demonds on the State Water Project Under Present Contracts 
(1,000 acre-feet) 





1972 


1990 


2020 








Alternat 


ve future 




Alternative future 


Maximum' 


Hydrologic study are.i 


I 


II 


III 


IV 


I 


II 


III 


IV 


entitlement 


San Francisco Bay 


130 



100 



10 

790 





1.030 


200 

90 

1,690 

40 

10 

1,410 

160 

80 

3.680 


200 

90 

1.620 

40 

10 

1.410 

150 

80 

3,600 


200 

90 

1,560 

40 

10 

1,410 

150 

80 

3,540 


200 

90 

1,310 

40 

10 

1,410 

130 

80 

3,270 


260 

90 

2.340 

40 

10 

1,410 

220 

90 

4,460 


260 

90 

2,340 

40 

10 

1,410 

220 

90 

4,460 


260 

90 

2,340 

40 

10 

1,410 

200 

90 

4,440 


240 

90 

1,370 

40 

10 

1,410 

110 

90 

3,360 


260 
90 




2.340 


Sacramento Basin 


40 




10 




1.410 




220 




90 


Total.. 


4,460 



Possible Demand: 
Addition to Pi 

(1,000 acre-feet) 



I the State Water Project i 
nt Contracts 





1990 


2020 




Alternative future 


Alternative future 


Hydrologic study area 


I 


II 


III 


IV 


I 


II 


III 


IV 


San Francisco Bay 

Central Coastal 

South Coastal 


10 
40 


370 

70 
490 


10 
20 


210 

10 
250 


10 

10 



60 



80 



10 


10 


20 


120 
100 
610 
40 
800 
80 
190 
1,940 


80 
90 

300 
30 

500 

50 

70 

1,120 


60 
70 
60 


240 
20 
70 

520 


20 
40 



San Joaquin Basin 

Tulare Basin 



80 


South Lahontan 

Colorado Desert 

Total.. 



20 
160 



155 



< 




SUPPLIES FROM EXISTING FACILITIES 



PROJECTED DEMANDS 
Under Existing Contracts for 
Alternative Futures 




1972 



STATE WATER PROJECT 



1990 



YEAR 



2020 



Figure 31. Projected Net Water Demands and Dependable Woter Supply — State Water Project 



156 



Summary of Regional Wafer Supply and Demand 

Throughout the text of this bulletin, "The Cali- 
fornia Water Plan — Outlook in 1974", most of the 
presentation has been given from the statewide view- 
point. Data on projected future growth, water de- 
mands, and water supply has been summarized in 
tabular form to show statewide total quantities and 
their distribution. 

The statewide picture is important for an overall as- 
sessment and serves to set the stage for identifying 
possible future problem areas and planning future ac- 
tions. However, it does not always reflect the local 
situation and problems. Most of the input data de- 
veloped during the course of study leading to this 
publication was first assembled by "planning subareas" 
or subdivisions of the hydrologic study areas. These 
planning subareas are delinated and named on the fol- 



lowing figures. While the scope of this bulletin does 
not permit publication of all the data for each plan- 
ning subarea, the information is available in backup 
computations. 

For convenience in assessing the water supply and 
demand outlook for each hydrologic study area, data 
are summarized for each area on Figures 32 through 
53. The concurrent projection of both a reserve water 
supply and a supplemental demand for water is an 
indication that surplus water supply is available to 
some planning subareas of a hydrologic study area 
while at the same time there is a deficiency of supply 
in others. The usable water supplies shown on the 
figures are based on the expectation that facilities 
under construction and others needed to meet con- 
tractual commitments will be completed and provide 
water. 



157 



12 










12 




IHHIJ^^^H 


■ 


■ 




I 








"^ 


1 


■ 




^ 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 1 


- 






- 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE II 


■ 


10 


- 




^ 




10 


- 






1 


1- 










Ui 








1 


lu 8 


- 




- 




£ 8 


- 




- 


J 


UL 










1 








^' -« 












tu 






:-~.^m 


tu 






^ 




Of 


^ 






"ii^^^H 


Of 










u 








ifsj|ri^H 


o 










■< 






HJ^H 


o 


- 




- 






— 




~ 


■ 


to 


^ 




^ 




z 


a. 




M 


V 


z 










o 








'MM 


o 


















"IB 


-• 4 


_ 




— 




d 4 


— 




- 


^ 


_j 




















2 


- 




- 




2 


- 




- 


J 


2 


- 




=- 




2 

n 


- 




- 


I 




1 




I 




H 


1972 

•1 o . 


1990 


2020 


U "- 
1972 

19 


1990 


2020 1 


12 




1 






i£ 




1 




Hi 




- 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE III 


- 






- 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE IV 


- 


H 


10 


: 




^ 




10 


_ 




_i 


I 


1- 










lU 








^^^^1 


lU Q 

lU O 


- 




- 




lu 8 
u. 


- 




- 


^H 


u. 










lU 








E^H 


DC 


- 




— 




Of 

U 


— 




■" 


^^^H 
^^^1 


O 










•< 








-'-^H 


r* f> 


_ 




_ 




u. 6 


— 




— 


''fl 


u. 










o 








^^H 


o 










%/> 








'/S 


to 


,. 




^ 




z 


— 




^ 


' -^^1 


z 










o 








~>'<^H 


o 


















r^^^^l 


J 4 


- 




- 




d 4 


- 




- 


^H 


_j 






























2 








^9^^l 


S 


- 




— 






— 




— 


'T^tB 


2 


- 




~" 




2 

Q 


~ 


NET WATER DEMAND —^ 


J 


1 


1 






USABLE WATER SUPPLY ^ 

1 




1972 


1990 


2020 


1972 


1990 


2020 1 



Figure 32. Net Woter Demonds ond Water Supply — North Coastal Hydrologic Study Area 



158 




PRESENT WATER SUPPLIES 

(1,000 AF/Yr.) 



LOCAL SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT 
IMPORTS BY LOCAL WATER AGENCIES 
GROUND WATER SAFE YIELD 
OTHER FEDERAL WATER DEVELOPMENT 
RESERVE SUPPLY 



140 
430 
-20 



USABLE WATER SUPPLY 
GROUND WATER OVERDRAFT 
TOTAL 





North Fork Ditch 
2,000 AFAR 



Trinity River Division - CVP 
900,000 AFAR 



Potter Valley Diversion 
170,000 AFAR 



ITEM 

(Quantities in 1,000s) 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 



nr 



12 



2020 1990 



POPULATION 
URBAN AREA (ACRES) 
M &I WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 
J^IGATED LAND (ACRES) 
REMAINING IRRIGABLE LAND (ACRES) 
IRRIGATION WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 
POWER PLANT COOLING (AFAR) 
FISH, WILDLIFE & RECREATION (AFAR) 
loTAL APPLIED WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 
TOTAL NET WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 
DEPENDABLE WATER SUPPLY (AFAR) 
SUPPLEMENTAL WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 



IDE 
[ SU 



180 
50 
93 

240 



580 

710 



323 

1,120 

940 

960 

2 



250 
60 
104 
240 



570 

720 



359 

1,180 

990 

980 

20 



390 
80 
126 

260 



540 

740 



362 

1,230 

1,040 

1,010 

30 



240 
60 
102 
240 



350 

80 

120 

260 



230 
60 
101 
240 



1,180 1.220 

990 1,030 

980 1,010 

20 30 



310 
70 
114 
250 



570 


540 


570 


560 


720 


740 


710 


730 














359 


362 


359 


362 



1,170 1.210 

980 1,010 

980 1,010 

20 20 



210 
50 
97 

240 



580 

710 



359 



230 
60 
100 
250 
560~ 
730 

362 



1.170 1.190 

980 1,000 

980 1,010 

20 20 



Figure 33. North Coastal Hydrologic Study Area 



159 



12 



10 



lu 8 
u. 



X 

o 
H 4 



, 

- ALTERNATIVE FUTURE I - 




12 



10 



ui 

Ul 

u. o 

lU 
Of 

u 

< 

z 
o 



T 



- ALTERNATIVE FUTURE II 



1972 



1990 



2020 



1972 



1990 



2020 



12 



10 - 



o 
J 4 



T 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 



1972 



1990 



2020 



12 



T 



- ALTERNATIVE FUTURE IV 



10 - 



Ul 

Ul 8 



u 

< 
u. 6 

o 



SUPPLEMENTAL DEMAND 
RESERVE SUPPLY 



/VET WATER DEMAND 




USABLE WATER SUPPLY- 
I 



1972 



1990 



2020 



Figure 34. Net Water Demands and Water Supply — San Francisco Bay Hydrologic Study Aree 



160 




Potter Valley Diversion 
170,000 AF/YR 



Putah South Canal 
52,000 AF/YR 




PRESENT WATER SUPPLIES 

(1,000 AF/Yr.) 

LOCAL SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT 
IMPORTS 8Y LOCAL WATER AGENCIES 
GROUND WATER SAFE YIELD 
CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT 
OTHER FEDERAL WATER DEVELOPMENT 
STATE WATER PROJECT 
WASTE WATER RECLAMATION 
RESERVE SUPPLY 

USABLE WATER SUPPLY 
GROUND WATER OVERDRAFT 



170 

700 

330 

80 

100 

130 

8 

-260 

t.260 



Cache Slough Conduit 
15,000 AF/YR 



Mokelumne Aqueduct 
230,000 AFAR 

Contra Costa Canal 
64,000 AFAR 

South Bay Aqueduct 
120,000 AFAR 

Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct 
240,000 AFAR 




MILES 
30 60 



90 



ITEM 

(Quantities in 1,000s) 



1972 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 



m. 



W 



im- 



2020 1990 



2020 



1990 



2020 



1990 



2020 



POPULATION 

URBAN AREA (ACRES) 

M & I WATER DEMAND (AF/YR) 

JRRIGATED LAND (ACRES) 
REMAINING IRRIGABLE LAND (ACRES) 
IRRIGATION WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 
POWER PLANT COOLING (AF/YR) 

..RSH . WILDLIFE & RECREATION (AFAR) 
TOTAL APPLIED WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 
TOTAL NET WATER DEMAND (AF/YR) 
DEPENDABLE WATER SUPPLY (AFAR) 
SUPPLEMENTAL WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 



4,630 

485 

990 

110 

590 

250 

5 

24 

1,250 

1,270 

1,520 

9 



5,940 

600 

1,480 

130 

490 

290 

10 

37 

1,810 

1,820 

1,860 

80 



8,670 

810 

2,240 

150 

330 

330 



46 

2,620 

2,630 

2,030 

600 



5,800 

580 

1,460 

120 

510 

280 

10 

37 

1,770 

1,780 

1,860 

70 



7,920 

750 

2,070 

140 

380 

320 



46 

2,440 

2,450 

2,030 

480 



5,680 7,350 

570 690 

1,430 1,940 

120 140 



520 

290 

10 

37 



420 

310 



46 



1,750 2,300 

1,760 2,310 

1,860 2.030 

70 370 



5,270 

530 

1.340 

120 

550 

280 

10 

37 

1.660 

1,660 

1,860 

30 



5,700 
540 

1,570 

120 , 

540 

280 



1,890 

1,900 

2,030 

120 



Figure 35. San Francisco Bay Hydrologic Study Area 



161 



12 






















I 






12 




1 








- 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 1 








- 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE II 






10 


- 








10 


- 






^^ 




- 








1- 


- 




-■ 


H 










lU 








lu 8 


- 








S 8 


- 




-^^H 


II. 










lU 






^^H 


UJ 


_ 








oe 


■» 




^^^^^H 


Of 










u 






^^^^^H 


u 










< 






^^^^H 


o 


- 










- 




;■ 


*/> 


^ 








z 


^ 








z 










o 










o 




















-• 4 


_ 








:J 4 


_ 








_i 




















^^s 


- 








s 


- 








^H> 


- 








2 

Q 




/VET WATER DEMAND — ^ 










1 


USABLE WATER SUPPLY — ^ 

1 




1 o 


1990 


2020 


1972 

TO . 


1990 


2020 


IZ 




I 






Lc 




1 








- 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE III 








- 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE IV 






10 


: 








10 

1- 


^ 


" SUPPLEMENTAL DEMAND 






1- 










UJ 










*" a 

lU 


- 








lu 8 
u. 


- 








u. 










lU 










UJ 


,^ 








oe 


^ 








oe 










u 










u 










< 










< 6 


_ 








u. 6 


— 








li. 

o 










o 










</> 


^ 








z 


^ 








z 










o 










o 




















J 4 


- 








d 4 


- 








-1 




















1 


- 








z 


- 








2 


- 








2 


- 








Q 




1 






Q 




1 






1972 


1990 


2020 


1972 


1990 


2020 M 



Figure 36. Net Water Demands and Water Supply — Centrol Coastal Hydrologic Study Area 



162 




PRESENT WATER SUPPLIES 

{1,000 AF/Yr.) 



LOCAL SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT 
GROUND WATER SAFE YIELD 
OTHER FEDERAL WATER DEVELOPMENT 
WASTE WATER RECLAMATION 
RESERVE SUPPLY 

USABLE WATER SUPPLY 
GROUND WATER OVERDRAFT 



810 
t40 



ITEM 

(Quantities in 1,000s) 



1972 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 



nr 



rz 



1990 



2020 



1990 



2020 



1990 



2020 1990 



2020 



POPULATION 

URBAN AREA (ACRES) 

M & I WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 

IRRIGATED LAND (ACRES) 

REMAINING IRRIGABLE LAND (ACRES) 

IRRIGATION WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 

POWER PLANT COOLING (AFAR) 

FISH , WILDLIFE 8> RECREATION (AFAR) 

TOTAL APPLIED WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 

TOTAL NET WATER DEMAND(AFAR) 

DEPENDABLE WATER SUPPLY(AFAR) 

SUPPLEMENTAL WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 



840 

140 

181 

420 

1,070 

1,030 



2 

1,210- 

950 

830 

140 



1,370 
200 
308 
500 
960 

1,240 

3 

1,550 

1,240 
950 
290 



2,430 
300 
569 
530 
880 

1,310 



6 

1,890 

1,560 
950 
610 



1,340 
200 
300 
480 



980 

1,200 



3^ 

1,500 

1,200 

950 

250 



2,200 
290 
516 
520 



1,290 2,030 

200 270 

289 473 

480 520 



980 

1,190 



3 



900 

1,240 



6 



890 

1,270 



6^_^ 

1,790 ' 1,480 1,720 

1,480 1,180 1,410 

950 950 950 

530 230 460 



1,130 
170 
252 
480 



1,370 
190 
318 
510 



990 950 

1,200 1,220 



3 6 



1,460 1,540 

1,150 1,250 

950 950 

200 300 



Figure 37. Central Coastal Hydrologic Study Area 



163 



r 


i 


■ 


jjijHmm^ 


■ 


■ 


ph 




■ 


H 






ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 1 




■ 


f 


- ALTERNATIVE FUTURE II 




1 




10 


- 








10 


- 




■1 


1- 

Ui 
lU 

u. 

Ill 
ct 
u 

< 

o 

(/) 

z 
o 
Ij 


8 
6 
4 


^-^ 


niET WATER DEMAND y 




1 


»- 

lU « 

11. *> 

uJ 
oe. 
U 

< 

«/) 

z 
o 

d 4 

1 


-_^^SS5^-^ 


1^^ 


1 


USABLE WATER SUPPLY-^ 




1 


2 

Q 


- 


1 






2 

Q 


1 




1 




1972 
1 '5 


1990 


2020 


1972 1990 


2020 




IZ 




1 






Ic 


I 










- 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE III 








- ALTERNATIVE FUTURE IV 








10 


- 








10 


, SUPPLEMENTAL DEMAND 






»- 

UJ 
UJ 

u. 
Ili 
oe 
O 

■< 
u. 
o 
l/> 

z 
o 
_l 
-1 

2 


8 
6 
4 


< 


^^^^Sis— 






111 8 
u. 

lU 
Q£ 
U 

< 

u. 6 

o 

</> 

z 
o 

d 4 


R^ RESERVE SUPPLY 


i 


1 






2 


: 








2 


~ 













1 







19 


1 






72 


1990 


20 


20 


72 1990 


20 


20 



Figure 38. Net Water Demands and Water Supply — South Coastal Hydrologic Study Area 



164 



LOCAL SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT 

IMPORTS BY LOCAL WATER AGENCIES 

GROUND WATER SAFE YIELD 

OTHER FEDERAL WATER DEVELOPMENT 

STATE WATER PROJECT 

WASTE WATER RECLAMATION 

RESERVE SUPPLY 

USABLE WATER SUPPLY 
GROUND WATER OVERDRAFT 




PRESENT WATER SUPPLIES 

(1,000 AF/Yr.) 



1,720 

930 



2,9 20 
160 



California Aqueduct (East Branch) 
21,000 AF/YR 



Colorado River Aqueduct 
1,205,000 AF/YR 



(Qu 



ITEM 

lies in 1,000s) 



1972 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 



m 



TZ 



Tw«r 



2020 



1990 



2020 



1990 



2020 



1990 



2020 



POPULATION 
URBAN AREA (ACRES) 
M&l WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 
jWIGATED LAND (ACRES) 
REMAINING IRRIGABLE LAND^(ACRES) 
IRRIGATION WATER DEMAND (AF/YR) 
POWER PLANT COOLING (AFAR) 
RSH, WILDLIFE & RECREATION (AFAR) 
TOTAL APPLIED WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 
TOTAL NET WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 
DEPENDABLE WATER SUPPLY (AFAR) 
SUPPLEMENTAL WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 



11,240 

1,340 

2,370 

390 

1,000 

920 

18 

6 

3,320 

3,030 

3,010 

160 



1 4,620 

1.570 

3,130 

290 

870 

730 

30 

\9 

3,900 

3,770 

4,420 





22,510 

1,870 

4,830 

220 

640 

530 

80 

23 

5,470 

5,200 

4,420 

780 



14,260 

1,550 

3,050 

290 

890 

720 

30 

19 

3,820 

3,700 

4,420 

i 



20,300 

1,820 

4,360 

220 

680 

510 

40 

23 

4,940 

4,720 

4,420 

300 



13,930 

1,530 

2,980 

290 

910 

720 

30 

19 

3,750 

3,640 

4,420 





19,140 

1,780 I 

4,120 

220 

730 

520 



23 

4,660 

4,480 

4,420 

60 



12,510 

1,480 

2,670 

300 

950 

750 

30 

19 

3,470 

3,390 

4,420 





13,790 

1,520 

2,980 

220_ 

940 

520 



23 

3,520 

3,460 

4,420 





Figure 39. South Coastal Hydroiogic Study Area 



165 



12 



1 

- ALTERNATIVE FUTURE I - 



10 - 



lu 8 
u. 

lU 

u 
1 

O 
«/> 

z 
o 

H 4 




1972 1990 



2020 



12 



T 



- ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 



10 - 



lU 
DC 
U 

•< 

u. 6 

O 

«/> 

z 
o 

d 4 

2 



1972 



/VET WATER DEMAND- 




>X USABLE WATER SUPPLY 



1990 



2020 



12 



10 - 



8 - 



lU _ 

oe 
u 

-< 

UL 

O 



6 - 



T 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE III - 




1972 



1990 



2020 



12 



10 - r.- 



ui 8 — 
u. 

lU 
Of 

U 

< 

u. 6 
o 
«/> 






2 - 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE IV 

SUPPLEMENTAL DEMAND 
r\^RESERVE SUPPLY 



:972 




^^ 



1990 



2020 



i 



Figure 40. Net Water Demands and Water Supply — Sacramento Basin Hydrologic Study Area 



166 




PRESENT WATER SUPPLIES 

(1,000 AF/Yr.) 



LOCAL SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT 
IMPORTS BY LOCAL WATER AGENCIES 
GROUND WATER SAFE YIELD 
CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT 
OTHER FEDERAL WATER DEVELOPMENT 
STATE WATER PROJECT 
WASTE WATER RECLAMATION 
RESERVE SUPPLY 

USABLE WATER SUPPLY 
GROUND WATER OVERDRAFT 

TOTAL 



Moon Lake Diversion 
11,000 AF/YR. 



1.190 

2.700 

200 



Little Truckee River Diversion 
7,000 AF/YR. 

Echo Lake Diversion 
2,000 AF/YR. 



Camino Conduit 
20,000 AF/YR. 



Folsom Lake Diversion 
1,000 AFAR. 























ITEM 


1972 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 


I 






n 


m 




K 1 


(Quantities in 1,000s) 


1990 


2020 


1990 


2020 


1990 


2020 


1990 


2020 


POPULATION 


1.210 


1.700 


2.600 


1.670 


2.400 


1.630 


2.230 


1.470 


1.620 


URBAN AREA (ACRES) 


215 


260 


350 


250 


330 


250 


300 


230 


230 


M & 1 WATER DEMAND (AF/YR) 


470 


700 


1.040 


687 


968 


674 


908 


621 


702 


IRRIGATED LAND (ACRES) 


1.520 


1,950 


2.250 


1.850 


2.060 


1.740 


1.890 


1.680 


1,760 


REMAINING IRRIGABLE LAND (ACRES) 


2.730 


2,250 


1.870 


2.360 


2.080 


2.470 


2.280 


2.550 


2.470 


IRRIGATION WATER DEMAND (AF/YR) 


6,020 


7.940 


9,080 


7,540 


8.350 


7.050 


7.540 


6.960 


7.410 


POWER PLANT COOLING (AF/YR) 





50 


140 





60 





50 








FISH, WILDLIFE & RECREATION (AF/YR) 


125 


170 


174 


170 


174 


170 


174 


170 


174 


TOTAL APPLIED WATER DEMAND (AF/YR) 


6.610 


8,860 


10,400 


8,400 


9,550 


7,900 


8.670 


7,750 


8.290 


TOTAL NET WATER DEMAND (AF/YR) 


5.780 


7.610 


9.030 


7.200 


8.240 


6.800 


7.630 


6.630 


7.080 


DEPENDABLE WATER SUPPLY (AF/YR) 


6.590 


7.390 


7.820 


7.390 


7.820 


7.390 


7,820 


7.390 


7320 


SUPPLEMENTAL WATER DEMAND (AF/YR) 


240 


500 


1.210 


360 


730 


290 


530 


210 


320 



Figure 41. Sacramento Basin Hydrologic Study Area 



167 





■ 


■■■ 


I 


{^■■■■^H 


■ 


m 


LZ 




I 






^^ 




1 




1 




^ 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 1 


- 






- 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE II 


- 


1 


10 


- 




- 




10 


- 




- 


J 




- 




- 




h- 


- 




-■ 


t- 










UJ 








lu 8 


- 




- 




lU Q 

II. ° 

111 


— 




;■ 


UJ 


_ 




^ 




oc 


^ 






0£ 










u 






^^^^^^^1 


U 










< 






^^^^H 


1 

O 


- 




- 






- 




m 


«« 


^ ^ 




^ 




z 


^ 






z 
o 










o 






i^^i 


H 4 


_ 




«* 




d 4 


— 


NET WATER DEMAND — ^ 


- 




_j 






W 














2 






r 




S 




_— ■ 






2 


r^ 




- 




2 




J SABLE WATER SUPPLY—^ 


- 









1 











1 






















1972 
1 o , 


1990 


2020 


1972 

19 , 


1990 


2020 


IZ 




1 






Lt. 




1 








- 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE III 


- 






- 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE IV 


- 




10 


- 




- 




10 


- 


~ SUPPLEMENTAL DEMAND 


- 




t- 










lU 




" .i3 RESERVE SUPPLY 






*" a 

111 o 


- 




- 




lu 8 
u. 


- 




- 




u. 










lU 










lU 


^ 




^ 




Q£ 


«• 




.mm 




oe 










u 










u 










< 










^ 6 


_ 




_ 




u. 6 


— 




— 




u. 
o 










o 

I/I 










t/> 


^ 




^ 




z 


■^ 




^ 




z 










o 










o 




















J 4 


— 




- 




:! 4 


— 




- 




_j 




















z 






— - 




1 










2 


^ 








2 


^ 




J^ 




..^c**---— 


- 




- 




- 






- 




- 




Q 




1 










1 






1972 


1990 


2020 


u 
1972 


1990 


2020 



Figure 42. Net Water Demands and Water Supply — Delta-Central Sierra H/drotogic Study Area 



168 




PRESENT WATER SUPPLIES 

(1,000 AF/Yr.) 



LOCAL SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT 

GROUND WATER SAFE YIELD 
CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT 
OTHER FEDERAL WATER DEVELOPMENT 
WASTE WATER RECLAMATION 

RESERVE SUPPLY 

USABLE WATER SUPPLY 
GROUND WATER OVERDRAFT 



1,330 


630 


130 


110 


8 


-60 


2,150 


120 



Folsom Lake Diversion 
1,000 AF/YR 



109,000 AFAR 
Putah South Canal 
52,000 AFAR 



Mokelumne Aqueduct 
230,000 AFAR 

Contra Costa Canal 
64,000 AFAR 




South Bay Aqueduct California Aqueduct 
120,000 AFAR 910,000 AFAR 



ITEM 




ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 


(Quantities in 1,000s) 


1972 


I 




II 


m 






IZ 


1990 


2020 


1990 


2020 


1990 


2020 


1990 


2020 


POPULATION 


470 


760 


1,730 


730 


1,550 


710 


1,420 


640 


930 


URBAN AREA (ACRES) 


75 


110 


230 


no 


210 


110 


190 


100 


120 


M &I WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 


173 


251 


537 


247 


490 


239 


451 


219 


323 


IRRIGATED LAND (ACRES) 


800 


990 


1,130 


930 


1,060 


880 


980 


850 


920 


REMAINING IRRIGABLE LAND (ACRES) 


900 


670 


410 


1 730 


500 


780 


600 


820 


730 


IRRIGATION WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 


2,470 


3,220 


3,700 


! 3,010 


3,540 


2,810 


3,250 


2,710 


3,020 


POWER PLANT COOLING (AFAR) 


20 


100 


150 


75 


100 


50 


110 


40 


70 


, FISH, WILDLIFE & RECREATION (AFAR) 


6 


7 


9 


7 


9 


7 


9 


7 


9 


TOTAL APPLIED WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 


2,670 


3,570 


4,400 


3,340 


4,140 


3,110 


3,820 


2,970 


3,420 


TOTAL NET WATER DEMAND (AFAR) -= 


2,270 


3,110 


3,860 


2,900 


3,630 


2,700 


3,360 


2,580 


3,010 


DEPENDABLE WATER SUPPLY (AFAR) 


2,210 


2,910 


2,930 


2,910 


2,930 


2,910 


2,930 


2,910 


2,930 


SUPPLEMENTAL WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 


120 


220 


930 


120 


710 


110 


550 


80 


280 



Figure 43. Delta-Central Sierra Hydrologic Study Area 



169 



12 



10 - 



lu 8 



o 
o 

l/> 

z 
o 



T 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 



1972 



1990 



2020 



12 



10 - 



UJ n 
U. o 

lU 

ae 
U 

< 

u. 6 
o 



T 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 



/VET WATER DEMAND- 



USABLE WATER SUPPLY 



J -' 



1972 



1990 



2020 



12 



10 



1 

- ALTERNATIVE FUTURE III - 



z 
o 
J 4 







1972 



1990 



2020 



12 



10 



lu 8 



T 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE IV 



SUPPLEMENTAL DEMAND 



RESERVE SUPPLY 



1972 



1990 



2020 



Figure 44. Net Water Demands and Water Supply — San Joaquin Hydrologic Study Area 



170 



^€^ 




1 


1 


PRESENT WATER SUPPLIES 

(1,000 AF/Yr.) 




LOCAL SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT 
GROUND WATER SAFE YIELD 
CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT 
STATE WATER PROJECT 
WASTE WATER RECLAMATION 
RESERVE SUPPLY 


2,230 

520 

1,720 

9 

26 

-no 


■11 




■ 


^1 


USABLE WATER SUPPLY 
GROUND WATER OVERDRAFT 




4,400 
250 


H Delta Mendota Canal i^^^ 
I^H 2,319,000 AFAR ^^vX 




f 


Ir^ 


TOTAL 






4,650 






i 




L 


^ 




H California Aqueduct p,,,,^ ^ 
B 910,000 AF/YR "^-^^X ^ 






r 


\ °^ 


MILES 
30 60 


90 
1 


1 ^ 

Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct "-n^^ 

240,000 AF/YR ^^ 




^ tv 


v^''^" 


UPLANDS ,-^^. 










if 


^-^\ SIEHR< 

f VALLEY \ 
>\EAST SIDE V / 






- 






T 


V 


^^ Friant - Kern Canal 
1,193,000 AFAR 


\ 

5 


1 


California Aqueduct ^ 
^^^^^ 1,749,000 AFAR 




V 


*«^ Delta Mendota Canal 
Mendota Pool 
142,000 AFAR 




J 


1 




1972 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 


ITEM 

(Quantities In 1,000s) 


I 




n m 




rc 


1«6 


20X 


1990 2020 1990 


2020 


1990 


2020 


POPULATION 


440 


650 


1,140 


640 1,010 620 


940 


560 


660 


URBAN AREA (ACRES) 


55 


80 


130 


80 120 80 


110 


70 


90 


M &I WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 


192 


295 


548 


287 485 


279 


451 


249 


307 


IRraCATED LAND (ACRES) 


1,350 


1,690 


1,920 


1,610 1,690 


1,530 


1,580 


1,480 


1,490 


REMAINING IRRIGABLE LAND (ACRES) 


1,160 


790 


510 


870 750 : 950 


870 


1,010 


980 


IRRIGATION WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 


5,450 


6,620 


7,320 


6,390 6,600 6,040 


6,180 


5,750 


5,750 


POWER PLANT COOLING (AFAR) 








140 


70 1 











RSH, WILDLIFE & RECREATION (AFAR) 


91 


94 


95 


94 95 94 


?:• 


94 


95 


TOTAL APPLIED WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 


5,730 


7,010 


8,100 


6,770 7,250 6,410 


6,730 


6,090 


6,150 


TOTAL NET WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 


4,650 


5,510 


6,280 


5,350 5,710 5,120 


5,320 


4,960 


5,030 


DEPENDABLE WATER SUPPLY (AFAR) 
SUPPLEMENTAL WATER DEMAND (AFAR^ 


4,510 
250 


4,840 
670 


4,860 
1,420 


4,840 4,860 4,840 
510 850 280 


4,860 
460 


4,840 
130 


4,860 
170 



Figure 45. San Joaquin Hydrologic Study Area 



171 



12 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE I 




-! 4 - 



2 - 



1972 1990 



12 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE II 



_ NET WATER DEMAND 



2 - 




2020 



1972 1990 



2020 



12 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE III 



10 - 




1972 1990 



2020 



12 



10 - 



2 - 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE IV 

SUPPLEMENTAL DEMAND 
RESERVE SUPPLY 




1972 1990 



2020 



Figure 46. Net Water Demands and Water Supply — Tulare Basin Hydrologic Study Area 



172 




POPULATION 

URBAN AREA (ACRES) 

M & I WATER DEMAND (AF/YR) 

IRRIGATED LAND (ACRES) 

REMAINING IRRIGABLE LAND (ACRES) 

IRRIGATION WATER DEMAND (AFAR 

POWER PLANT COOLING (AFAR) 

FISH, WILDLIFE & RECREATION (AFAR) 

TOTAL APPLIED WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 

TOTAL NET WATER DEMAND(AFAR) 

DEPENDABLE WATER SUPPLY(AFAR 

SUPPLEMENTAL WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 



Figure 47. Tulare Basin Hydrologic Study Ar 



173 



12 



10 



1 

- ALTERNATIVE FUTURE I - 



uj 8 



u 

o 



12 



10 



T 



- ALTERNATIVE FUTURE II 



S 8 



Of 

u 

< 

u- 6 
o 



o 

d 4 



1972 



1990 



2020 



1972 



1990 



2020 



12 



10 



T 



- ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 



o 

11 4 



12 



10 



lu 8 
u. 

u 

< 

u. 6 
o 

z 
o 



T 



- ALTERNATIVE FUTURE IV 



SUPPLEMENTAL DEMAND 



1972 



1990 



2020 



1972 



- NET WATER DEMAND 
USABLE WATER SUPPLY 



-T— 



IX. 



1990 



2020 



Figure 48. Net Water Demands and Water Supply — North Lahonlan Hydrologic Study Area 



174 



PRESENT WATER SUPPLIES 

(1,000 AF/Yr.) 



LOCAL SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT 
IMPORTS BY LOCAL WATER AGENCIES 
GROUND WATER SAFE YIELD 
WASTE WATER RECLAMATION 
RESERVE SUPPLY 

USABLE WATER SUPPLY 
GROUND WATER OVERDRAFT 




(Qu 



ITEM 

Ttities in 1,000s) 



1972 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 



HL 



EC 



2020 



2020 



1990 



2020 1990 



POPULATION 

URBAN AREA (ACRES) 

M & I WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 

IRRI GATED LAND (ACRES) 

REMAINING IRRIGABLE LAND (ACRES) 

IRRIGATION WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 

POWER PLANT COOLING (AFAR) 

FISH, W ILDLIFE & RECREATION (AF AR) 

TOTAL APPLIED WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 

TOTAL NET WATER DEMAND(AFAR) 

DEPENDABLE WATER SUPPLY(AFAR) 

SUPPLEMENTAL WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 



40 
20 
23 
140 



70 
40 
40 
140 



70 
40 

40 
140 



470 

420 



AL 

454 

430 

400 

40 



460 

430 



479 

450 

440 

20 



460 

430 



13 



507 

480 

460 

20 



460 

430 



11 



100 

50 

59 

140 

460 

430 



13 



479 
450 

440 
20 



498 

470 

460 

10 



70 
40 
39 
140 



90 
40 
54 
140 



60 
30 
32 
130 



460 

430 



11 



460 

430 



13 



470 

400 



11 



478 

450 

440 

20 



493 

470 

460 

10 



441 

420 

440 

20 



60 
30 
35 
130 



470 
400 



13 

444 

420 

460 





Figure 49. North Lohontan Hydrologic Stud/ Area 



175 





■ 


■■■ 


I 




■ 


■1 


IZ 




1 






" 








5 




- 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 1 








— 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE II 


- 


1 


10 


- 








10 


— 






9 


K 










Ul 






gg^ 


ui 8 

IL. 


- 








UI « 

II. 8 


- 






H 


lU 










lU 








9 


oe 










U 








"^H 


o 










< 








,^H 


; 6 


- 








u- 6 
o 


- 






'fl 


o 










</> 








-.JH 


tA 


^ 








z 


^ 






'- ^^^1 


z 










o 








^^1 


o 


















^-^^^1 


^ 4 


_ 








5 4 


. 






mS 


J ^ 


















^^H 


^k1 










2 








<^S 




~ 










^ 






r^H 


1 2 


- 








2 


- 




- 




■ 


- 


— 1 ■"■■*' 








- 




^ 




1'^ 


1990 


2020 


1972 
1? 


1990 


2020 1 


12 




I 






Ic. 




1 








- 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE UI 








- 


ALTERNATIVE FUTURE IV 






10 


- 








10 


- 










- 








H 


- 






i;--- 


h" 










UI 










>" ft 
III B 

u. 


^ 








lu 8 
II. 

IM 


■" 


SUPPLEMENTAL DEMAND 






UJ 


^ 








ac 


BM 








oc 










U 










u 










< 










^ 6 


_ 








u. 6 


^ 








II. 

o 










o 




' 






v» 


^ 








z 


— 






i^^^^H 


z 










o 








^^^^^1 


o 


















^^^^H 


J 4 


- 




H 




iJ 4 


- 








_j 




















S 


- 








s 


- 


/VET WATER DEMAND-^ 




1 


2 


- 








2 


7 


1 USABL E WA TER SUPPL Y \ 


i 


1 


A 




1 ■ 






n 


;;*-» 


r 




fl 


1972 


1990 


2020 


u — 
1972 


1990 


2020 1 



Figure SO. Net Water Demands and Water Supply — South Lahontan Hydrologic Study Area 



176 



PRESENT WATER SUPPLIES 




(1,000 AF/Yr.) 




LOCAL SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT 


30 


GROUND WATER SAFE YIELD 


120 


State water project 


34 


WASTE WATER RECLAMATION 


7 


I RESERVE SUPPLY 


-30 


USABLE WATER SUPPLY 


160 


GROUND WATER OVERDRAFT 
TOTAL 


120 
280 




MILES 
30 60 



90 



California Aqueduct 
(West Branch) 
83,000 AF/YR 



Los Angeles Aqueduct 
510,000 AF/YR 



California Aqueduct 

(Contractor turnout) 

1,000 AF/YR 



Californio Aqueduct (East Branch) 
21,000 AFAR 



ITEM 

(Quonrities in 1,000s) 




ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 


1972 


I 






a 


nr 






lY 


1990 


2020 


1990 


2020 


1990 


2020 


1990 


2020 


POPULATION 


240 


410 


1,040 


370 


870 


370 


820 


290 


380 


URBAN AREA (ACRES) 


65 


90 


170 


80 


150 


80 


150 


70 


80 


M &I WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 


89 


154 


387 


139 


326 


136 


306 


108 


143 


IRRIGATED LAND (ACRES) 


80 


80 


70 


80 


70 


80 


70 


80 


70 


REMAINING IRRIGABLE LAND (ACRES) 


2,400 


2,380 


2,330 


2390 


2,340 


2,390 


2,340 


2,400 


2,400 


IRRIGATION WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 


310 


300 


250 


300 


250 


300 


250 


300 


250 


POWER PLANT COOLING (AFAR) 





10 


100 


10 


50 


10 











FISH, WILDLIFE & RECREATION (AFAR) 


4 


16 


22 


16 


22 


16 


22 


16 


22 


TOTAL APPLIED WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 


399 


478 


762 


463 


651 


460 


581 


422 


418 


TOTAL NET WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 


280 


330 


510 


330 


430 


320 


370 


300 


290 


DEPENDABLE WATER SUPPLY (AFAR) 


190 


400 


410 


400 


410 


400 


410 


400 


410 


SUPPLEMENTAL WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 


120 


3 


100 


3 


70 


3 


30 


3 


10 



Figure 51. South Lahontan Hydrologic Stud/ Area 



177 



12 



10 



lu 8 



u 
o 

«/> 

z 
o 

H 4 



T 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE I 



1972 



1990 



2020 



12 



10 - 



lU 

U 

< 

u- 6 
o 



ALTERNATIVE FUTURE II 



_ /VET WATER DEMAND 



A 



USABLE WATER SUPPLY 



IZ 



1972 1990 



2020 



12 



- ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 



10 - 



X 

o 

J 4 



1972 



1990 



2020 



12 



T 



- ALTERNATIVE FUTURE IV 



10 - 



I- 
ui 

ui 8 
u. 

lU 
Of 

U 

< 

u. 6 
o 



SUPPLEMENTAL DEMAND 



1972 



1990 



2020 



Figure 52. Nef Water Demands and Wafer Supply — Colorado Desert Hydrologic Study Area 



178 



PRESENT WATER SUPPLIES 

(1,000 AF/Yr.) 


GROUND WATER SAFE YIELD 

OTHER FEDERAL WATER DEVELOPMENT 

STATE WATER PROJECT 

WASTE WATER RECLAMATION 

RESERVE SUPPLY 

USABLE WATER SUPPLY 
GROUND WATER OVERDRAFT 

TOTAL 


74 

3.950 

14 

7 
-10 

4,030 
40 


4,070 




v 



^Hli^~" MILES 




















■^ 30 60 90 


















mm 




ITEM 

(Quantities in 1,000s) 




ALTERNATIVE FUTURE 1 


1972 


I 




n 


m 






TSL 


1990 


2020 


1990 


2020 


1990 


2020 


1990 


2020 


POPULATION 


230 


350 


650 


330 


580 


330 


540 


300 


400 


URBAN AREA (ACRES) 


65 


80 


130 


80 


120 


80 


no 


70 


90 


M &I WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 


99 


148 


275 


142 


246 


139 


230 


126 


173 


IRRIGATED LAND (ACRES) 


630 


630 


650 


630 


630 


630 


630 


630 


630 


REMAINING IRRIGABLE LAND (ACRES) 


800 


790 


640 


790 


660 


790 


770 


800 


780 


IRRIGATION WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 


3,220 


3,320 


3,320 


3,320 


3,320 


3,320 


3,320 


3,320 


3,320 


POWER PLANT COOLING (AFAR) 





130 


250 


70 


130 


40 


130 


40 


80 


FISH, WILDLIFE & RECREATION (AFAR) 


20 


22 


26 


22 


26 


22 


26 


22 


26 


TOTAL APPLIED WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 


3,340 


3,620 


3,880 


3,560 


3,730 


3,530 


3,710 


3,510 


3,600 


TOTAL NET WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 


4,070 


4,240 


4,430 


4,180 


4,300 


4,150 


4,290 


4,140 


4,210 


DEPENDABLE WATER SUPPLY (AFAR) 


4,040 


4,150 


4,160 


4,150 


4,160 


4.150 


4,160 


4,150 


4,160 


SUPPLEMENTAL WATER DEMAND (AFAR) 


40 


90 


270 


30 


140 


20 


130 


10 


60 



Figure 53. Colorado Desert Hydrologic Study Area 



179 



180 



APPENDIX 
WORKSHOPS FOR BULLETIN NO. 160-74 



181 



APPENDIX 

WORKSHOPS FOR BULLETIN NO. 160-74 



As part of the Department of Water Resources' co- 
ordinated statewide planning program, a series of 
public workshops was held in January and February 
of 1974. The purpose was to give various interested 
groups an opportunity to express themselves on Cali- 
fornia's future and the related water issues and water 
management concepts that might be highlighted in this 
bulletin. 

The workshops were responsive to requests of sev- 
eral organizations for an opportunity to participate in 
planning the report. They were held on Saturdays in 
Sacramento, Los Angeles, Oakland, Fresno, and Red- 
ding. Seventy-six persons attended the five sessions 
representing more than 50 different organizations. 
Close to 100 suggestions were received for considera- 
tion in the bulletin. 

The workshops were conducted in an informal 
manner and ever\one attending was given an op- 
portunity to speak. Written comments were also re- 
ceived. All comments and suggestions were reviewed 
by those writing this report, and to the extent pos- 
sible, the subject matter is discussed in the bulletin. 

Following is a summary of the suggestions received 
at the workshop sessions and from written communica- 
tions. The suggestions have been arranged in eleven 
categories. Numbers following each suggestion are 
the page(s) in the report on which there is some dis- 
cussion that relates to the suggestion. 

Alternative Futures and Water 
Development Needs 

1. Adopt the concept of "alternative futures" in 
making projections. (Page 45) 

2. The "most likely" population projections should 
not be the only criteria, use alternative popula- 
tion projections including the E-0 (no growth) 
schedule. (Page 46) 

3. Carefully review and analyze carrying capacity 
(at county level) and desires for population 
growth. 

4. An alternative to population dispersal should be 
vertical growth. (Page 6?) 

5. Agricultural production projections should be 
based on current shortages and worldwide factors 
of supply and demand. (Page 51) 

6. Summarize the California agricultural profile 
study, the national agricultural market study and 
the crop market outlook. (Pages 49-55) 

7. Take a close look at the agricultural water supply 
and demand situation and determine what effect 
alternative actions of other agencies might have. 
(Pages 146-49) 



8. Direct more attention to irrigation water and its 
use and our need to place more land under irriga- 
tion. (Pages 69-72) 

9. Consider the additional water supply that may be 
needed to meet demands presented by SWRCB 
Decisions 1379, 1400, 1422, and 1290. (Page 150) 

10. Take a careful look at projected water needs for 
the State Water Project. (Pages 155-156) 

11. Emphasize what would happen if no water supply 
imports were available and how it would affect 
agricultural productivity and the Central Valley 
economy. (Page 42) 

12. Water shortages should be emphasized and con- 
struction of new water facilities in local areas 
should not be ignored, particularly in some of the 
developing counties in the North. (Page 151 and 
Table 27) 

13. Discuss the growth inducing aspects of water de- 
velopment. Do water projects encourage growth 
or are they the result of growth? (Page 46) 

14. Refer back to previous projections and determine 
the impact that those projections had on current 
conditions. 

15. Attention should be given to offstream storage in 
the southern San Joaquin Valley. (Pages 95-96) 

16. The Department should take the lead in floodplain 
management planning. (Pages 122-124) 



Alternative Means of Water Supply 
and Water Management 

17. Include a discussion of the problems, or lack of 
problems, associated with alternative sources of 
water such as waste water reclamation, increased 
efficiency, and desalination so that decisions as 
to the development of new water supplies can be 
made intelligently. (Pages 40-42, 104-110, 117) 

18. Look into all possibilities for reclaiming and re- 
using both agricultural waste water and M&I waste 
water. The Department should take a strong po- 
sition on waste water reclamation, recognizing also 
the amounts of energy required, and public health's 
concern with heavy metals and stable organics 
Pages 42, 104-110) 

19. Discuss the effect of various water conservation 
measures such as canal lining, metering, trickle ir- 
rigation, and use of native plants for landscaping. 
(Pages 71, 118) 

20. Discuss the possibilities of joint operation of the 
CVP and SWP and how the efforts of federal 
agencies and the State are being coordinated. 
(Page 119) 



183 



21. Examine methods of increasing overall efficiency 
of agricultural \\ ater use including \vorking with 
farmers for ways to conserve agricultural water. 
(Pages 40, 71, 117-118) 

22. Prepare an inventory of technological changes that 
are expected to occur. 

23. Consider the feasibility of desalting units taking 
into account their requirement for energy. (Pages 
110-113) 

24. State agencies should step in and provide assist- 
ance for demineralization to help solve local prob- 
lems. (Page 112) 

25. Advance techniques of water management for ad- 
ditional water suppl\' development should be en- 
couraged, improved, and developed. (Pages 117- 
124) 

26. The report should take a positive view of total 
comprehensive \\ ater management and include an 
assessment of the impact of total water manage- 
ment. (Page 117) 

27. Consider the amount of water to be saved by bet- 
ter watershed management, forest practices, im- 
proved ground cover, and sno\\-zone management. 

28. Recognize the possibility that the Central Arizona 
Project will be abandoned and that the water used 
by California will remain available. 

29. The State should set priorities on allocation of use 
of water and there should be payment for that 
allocation. (Page 42) 

30. Investigate and evaluate claims that there is a long- 
term surplus of developed water in California. 
(Pages 146-147) 

31. Analyze contracts for water by C\'P to determine 
if the\' need to be fulfilled, and explain differences 
between contracts and projections. (Pages 152- 
154) 

32. The bulletin should take into account delayed or 
blocked water projects of recent years. (Pages 
18,94) 

33. Consider alternative management plans for dams 
which block mainstem streams such as Trinity, 
Friant, and New Don Pedro. (Page 38) 

34. Consider reducing surface \\ater applications in 
areas having drainage problems. 

35. Discuss the potential water management plans be- 
ing developed for north coastal water resources. 
(Page 120) 

36. No proposal should be made to divert water from 
the Los Angeles Aqueduct to future urban areas 
in the South Lahontan area. (Page 38) 

37. In studying feasible alternatives, look into geother- 
mal water potential. (Page 113) 

38. Alternative sources of water should be considered 
that reflect need to conserve energy. 

Ground Water 

39. More attention should be given to the use of Sac- 



ramento Valley ground water resources. (Page 

102) 

40. There should be some attention to coordination of 
ground water and surface water bet^veen the Cen- 
tral \'alle\- Project and the State Water Project. 
(Page 119) 

41. Information is needed on the impact of using 
ground \\ ater, both benefits and detriments, and on 
how ground water use integrates with surface sup- 
ply. (Pages 119-120) 

42. The State should consider management of ground 
water pumping. (Pages 36, 97) 

43. Discuss the "borrow-replacement" approach to 
conjunctive ground water use. (Pages 96-97) 

44. The bulletin should provide some specific data on 
rising ground water areas, and give a full account- 
ing of the water balance. (Pages 97-99) 

45. The bulletin should highlight the overdraft situa- 
tion in the San Joaquin Valley. (Pages 2, 98) 

Power Planis and Thermal Energy 

46. Projected needs for electrical energy should be 
reviewed. (Page 59) 

47. Plan for a low growth increase in energy needs. 
(Page 59) 

48. The use of energ\- to move water around the 
.State should be questioned. (Page 58) 

49. Quantify new demands for \\ ater for all forms of 
energy, including new oil refineries and oil shale 
conversion. 

50. Consider the power plant siting problem and eval- 
uate the impact of competition for water if power 
plants are located inland. (Pages 32, 60-61) 

51. Recognize that additional water conservation proj- 
ects w ill be needed to meet cooling water demands 
for inland power plants. (Pages 31, 60, 74) 

52. Consider the feasibility of new hydroelectric proj- 
ects. (Page 86) 

53. Pay special attention to potential power and water 
available from geothermal sources. (Pages 87, 
113) 

54. More effort should be spent on research into pos- 
sible use of heat rejected bv thermal power plants. 
(Page 74) 

SWRCB Activities and Water Quality 

55. Consider water quality as well as water quantity. 
(Pages 35, 65, 82, 109,124-1 38) 

56. Encourage the federal agencies to recognize re- 
quirements as imposed by SWRCB Decision 1379. 
(Pages 14, 150) 

57. Discuss who will pa\- the additional cost brought 
about by SWRCB Decisions 1379 and 1400. (Page 

58. Explore in depth the possible effect on water sup- 
plies and agricultural production brought about 



184 



hv tlic proposed guidelines being prepared bv 
SWRCB. 

59. Include more information on w ater quality, show- 
ing coordination of acti\ities between DWR stud- 
ies and SWRCB studies. (Pages 20, 126) 

60. Drainage should be given a higher priority than it 
has in the past since the State is the only agency 
that can take the leadership in providing an over- 
all solution to the drainage problems in the San 
Joaquin Valley. (Pages 38, 108) 

Recreafion 

61. Consider recreation as an integral part of water 
development including consideration of single- 
purpose reservoirs for recreation. (Pages 61, 75) 

62. Stress the recreational use and benefits of San Joa- 
quin east side reservoirs and the downstream 
reaches of those rivers. (Pages 80-81) 

Pricing Policies and Cosf Sharing 

63. Determine the demand for w ater if agencies priced 
water to reflect the actual cost. (Page 40) 

64. Discuss the effect of eliminating declining block 
rate water pricing structures and predict water 
demand on this basis. (Page 40) 

65. Take a more realistic approach and identify all 
water project beneficiaries. (Page 34) 

66. Consider pricing policies for charging for all water 
project accomplishments. (Page 34) 

Land Use Planning and Environmenfal Impact 

67. Land use planning should precede water use plan- 
ning but take careful cognizance of the potential 
availability or nonavailability of water. (Pages 
24-29) 

68. The bulletin should consider the interface between 
water resource planning and land use planning 
since the two types of planning need to be co- 
ordinated at this interface. (Pages 24-29) 

69. Indicate the trade-offs required under various pat- 
terns of land use. 

70. Give an example of what w ould happen in a basin 
if the State controlled some of the resources and 
land use. 

71. Consider planning urban areas on marginal lands 
and preserving the agricultural land from urban 
encroachment. (Page 27) 

72. Show the effects of water project construction on 
local employment and economy. 

73. Long-term plans should include not only water 
needs but the impacts upon the people from wh'^re 
the water is taken and where it is used. (Page 42) 

74. The importance of water to a community should 
be emphasized. (Pages 40, 65, 80) 

75. Incorporate the "Environmental Goals and Poli- 
cies" in the report. (Page 27) 



76. Set specific goals and criteria for fish, wildlife, and 
recreation, and plan toward them. (Pages 75-79) 

77. Obtain the public views in the south coastal area 
toward growtii, bringing in more water, and pol- 
lution. (Page 183) 

78. Environmental considerations should be part of 
long-range plans and be given more emphasis. Wa- 
ter must be made a\'ailable for recreation, environ- 
mental use and to improve the quality of life. 
(Pages 14-19, 80-81) 

79. Water resource planning should provide for en- 
vironmental protection and economic-social con- 
siderations, be flexible to allow for de\elopment of 
alternative water sources, and be done in the con- 
text of overall state land use planning. (Page 45) 

80. Reappraise the wild river law to determine if it is 
realistic in the energy shortage era. 

81. Take into account the wild river acts and do not 
plan w ater development on these rivers or on the 
Yuba, Stanislaus, and Russian Rivers. (Pages 16, 
96, 121, 141) 

82. The Department should prepare an environmental 
impact statement as part of this bulletin. 

National Wafer Commission Report 

83. Summarize the ways in which the California 
Water Plan conform with the National Water 
Commission recommendations. (Pages 11-13) 

84. Recognize the conclusions of the NWC report 
and speak to their recommendations and what 
would happen if we follow them. (Pages 11-13) 

85. The NWC report was damaging to water develop- 
ment and we should look at our water problems 
from the western viewpoint. (Pages 11-13) 

Presentation of Data and Study Results 

86. Continue factual presentation of data but hold 
down on philosophy and rhetoric. 

87. Emphasize factual matters as well as planning 
philosophy. (Page 146) 

88. Write the document for understanding by the lay- 
man. The report should have broad distribution 
and be advertised to let its availability be known. 
(See Summary Report) 

89. Assumptions used in the report should be discussed 
in a prominent position. (Pages 45-66, 88-90) 

90. More data should be presented by counties and 
by watershed. 

91. References should be included as to where ad- 
ditional information can be found. (See Foot- 
notes) 

92. Do not discard items from previous bulletins be- 
cause of a change in planning emphasis. 

93. The State should provide uniform periodic land 
use maps, particularly in developing agricultural 
areas. (Page 56 and Plate 2) 



185 



94. Explain the large discrepancy in the amount of ir- Miscellaneous 

rigated acreage in California reported by D\VR m/- j i ui • ^ iLir 

and that of the Census Bureau. ^^- Consideration should be given to hnanc.al help for 

95. The "breathing room" has increased since Bui- ^^^ mountain counties in solving their problem, 
letin 160-70 and the analysis in 1960-74 should 98. Discuss the effects of mixing Northern and South- 
support this. (Page 155) crn California water and the effect of northern 

96. The "breathing spell" philosophy used in Bulletin water on southern ground water basins. (Pages 
160-70 led to an incorrect conclusion that was par- ^' 9^) 

ticularly damaging in the San Joaquin-Tulare 99. Define what is meant bv "water demand". (Pages 
Basin. (Page 155) 67, 88) 



A86787— 950 9-74 3,500 

186 



~7t^ 



^^V^jtDl4^ ^V ^O^^'-f- 



AN BiB: 
;-Cl GRECO 






D£C8 REC'O 




fffc 15 



TH(S BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST bate 



THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
STAMPED BELOW 



BqOKS REQUESTED BY ANOTHER BORROWER 
^^P^ECIjrO IMMEDIATE RECALL 



^ 



E* 



JAN 5 2006 
Physical Sciences Ubrar^ 

DEC 2 b m7 
PSL 



LIBRARY, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, DAVIS 



D4613-1 (5/02)M 




1175 00660 8668