(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "California water plan update : draft"

Caufornia 
JtkFER Plan 
Update 



Volume 2 




November 1|993__— ii- 

DRAFT 



Draft 
Bulletin 160-93 



CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN UPDATE 



Volume II 
November 1993 



Draft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 

VOLUME II CONTENTS 

Summary of Volume II 1 

Water Supply 2 

Water Demand 11 

Urban Water Demand; Agricultural Water Demand; Environmental Water Demand; 
Demand Reduction — Water Conservation 

California Water Balance 23 

Local Water Supply Issues 26 

Public Involvement 28 

North Coast Region 29 

Population; Land Use 

Water Supply 30 

Supply with Existing Facilities; Supplies with Additional Facilities 
Water Use 36 

Urban Water Use; Agricultural Water Use; Environmental Water Use; Other Water Use 
Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 47 

Water Balance .• 50 

San Francisco Bay Region 53 

Population; Land Use 

Water Supply 54 

Supply with Existing Facilities; Supplies with Additional Facilities and Water 
Management Programs 

Water Use 64 

Urban Water Use: Agricultural Water Use; Environmental Water Use; Other Water 
Demand 

Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 73 

Legislation and Litigation; Local Issues 

Water Balance 75 

Central Coast Region 77 

Population; Land Use 

Water Supply 80 

Supply with Existing Facilities; Supply with Additional Facilities and Water 
Management Programs 

Water Use 86 

Urban Water Use; Agricultural Water Use; Environmental Water Use; Other Water Use 

Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 96 

Legislation and Litigation; Regional Issues; Local Issues 

Water Balance 98 



ui 



Draft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 

VOLUME n CONTENTS 

South Coast Region 101 

Population; Land Use 

Water Supply 104 

Supply with Existing Facilities and Water Supply Management Programs; Supply with 
Additional Facilities and Water Management Programs 

Water Use 112 

Urban Water Use; Agricultural Water Use; Environmental Water Use; Other Water 
Demand 

Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 122 

Legislation and Litigation; Local Issues 

Water Balance 124 

Sacramento River Region 127 

Population; Land Use 

Water Supply 128 

Supply with Existing Facilities; Supply with Additional Facilities and Water 
Management Programs 

Water Use 137 

Urban Water Use; Agricultural Water Use; Environmental Water Use; Other Water Use 

Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 152 

Legislation and Litigation; Regional Issues; Local Issues 

Water Balance 158 

San Joaquin River Region .^ 161 

Population; Land Use 

Water Supply 163 

Supply with Existing Facilities; Supply with Additional Facilities and Water 
Management Programs 

Water Use 171 

Urban Water Use; Agricultural Water Use; Environmental Water Use; Other Water Use 

Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 1 84 

Legislation and Litigation; Regional Issues 

Water Balance 188 

T\ilare Lake Region 193 

Population; Land Use 

Water Supply 196 

Supply with Existing Facilities; Supply with Level I Water Management Programs 

Water Use 204 

Urban Water Use; Agricultural Water Use; Environmental Water Use; Other Water Use 

Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 216 

Contracts and Agreements; Regional Issues; Local Issues 

Water Balance 221 



IV 



Draft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 

VOLUME n CONTENTS 

« 

North Lahontan Region 225 

Population; Land Use 

Water Supply 228 

Supply with Existing Facilities; Supply with Additional Facilities and Water 
Management Programs 

Water Use 233 

Urban Water Use; Agricultural Water Use; Environmental Water Use; Other Water Use 

Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 242 

Legislation and Litigation; Regional Issues 

Water Balance 245 

South Lahontan Region 249 

Population; Land Use 

Water Supply 253 

Supply with Existing Facilities; Supply with Additional Facilities and Water 
Management Programs 

Water Use 256 

Urban Water Use; Agricultural Water Use; Environmental Water Use; Other Water Use 

Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 266 

Legislation and Litigation 

Water Balance 270 

Colorado River Region 273 

Population; Land Use 

Water Supply 277 

Supply with Existing Facilities; Supply with Additional Facilities and Water 
Management Programs 

Water Use 281 

Urban Water Use; Agricultural Water Use; Environmental Water Use; Other Water Use 

Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 294 

Legislation and Litigation; Contracts and Agreements 

Water Balance 301 

Appendix C Planning Subarea and Land Ownership Maps 303 

Appendix D Hydroelectric Resources of California 325 

FIGURES 

Figure S-1 . Ten Hydrologic Regions in California 3 

Figure NC-1 . North Coast Region 

Land Use, Imports, Exports, and Water Supplies 31 

Figure NC-2. North Coast Region 

Water Supply Sources (Average Conditions) 1990 level 33 

Figure NC-3. North Coast Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 level 37 

Figure NC-4. North Coast Region 

Applied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 level 38 



Draft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 

VOLUME II CONTENTS 

Figure NC-5. North Coast Region 

1990 Acreage, ETAW, and Applied Water for Major Crops 40 

Figure NC-6. North Coast Region 

Water Recreation Areas 46 

Figure SF-1. San Francisco Bay Region 

Land Use, Imports, Exports, and Water Supplies 55 

Figure SF-2. San Francisco Bay Region 

Water Supply Sources (Average Conditions) 1990 level 56 

Figure SF-3. San Francisco Bay Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 level 65 

Figure SF-4. San Francisco Bay Region 

Applied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 level 66 

Figure SF-5. 1990 San Francisco Bay Region 

Acreage, ETAW, and Applied Water for Major Crops 69 

Figure SF-6. San Francisco Bay Region 

Water Recreation Areas 72 

Figure CC-1. Central Coast Region 

Land Use, Imports, Exports, and Water Supplies 79 

Figure CC-2. Central Coast Region 

Water Supply Sources (Average Conditions) 1990 level 81 

Figure CC-3. Central Coast Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 level 87 

Figure CC-4. Central Coast Region 

Applied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 level 88 

Figure CC-5. 1990 Central Coast Region 

Acreage, ETAW, and Applied Water for Major Crops 90 

Figure CC-6. Central Coast Region 

Water Recreation Areas 94 

Figure SC-1 . Land Use, South Coast Region 103 

Figure SC-2. South Coast Region 

Water Supply Sources (Average Conditions) 1990 level 104 

Figure SC-3. South Coast Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 level 113 

Figure SC-4. South Coast Region 

Applied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 level 115 

Figure SC-5. South Coast Region 

Acreage, ETAW, and Applied Water for Major Crops 117 

Figure SC-6. South Coast Region 

Water Recreation Areas 121 

Figure SR-1. Sacramento River Region 

Land Use, Imports, Exports, and Water Supplies 129 

Figure SR-2. Sacramento River Region 

Water Supply Sources (Average Conditions) 1990 level 130 

Figure SR-3. Sacramento River Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 level 138 



VI 



Draft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 

VOLUME n CONTENTS 

Figure SR-4. Sacramento River Region 

Applied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 level 139 

Figure SR-5. 1990 Sacramento River Region 

Acreage, ETAW, and Applied Water for Major Crops 143 

Figure SR-6. Sacramento River Region 

Water Recreation Areas 150 

Figure SJ-1 . San Joaquin River Region 

Land Use, Imports, Exports, and Water Supplies 164 

Figure SJ-2. San Joaquin River Region 

Water Supply Sources (Average Conditions) 1990 167 

Figure SJ-3. San Joaquin River Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 Level 172 

Figure SJ-4. San Joaquin River Region 

Applied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 Level 173 

Figure SJ-5. 1990 San Joaquin River Region 

Acreage, ETAW, and Applied Water for Major Crops 177 

Figure SJ-6. San Joaquin River Region 

Water Recreation Areas 183 

Figure TL-1. Tulare Lake Region 

Land Use, Imports, Exports, and Water Supplies 195 

Figure TL-2. Tulare Lake Region 

Water Supply Sources (Average Conditions) 1990 level 198 

Figure TL-3. Tulare Lake Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 level 205 

Figure TL-4. Tulare Lake Region 

Applied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 level 208 

Figure TL-5. 1990 Tulare Lake Region 

Acreage, ETAW, and Applied Water for Major Crops 210 

Figure TL-6. Tulare Lake Region 

Water Recreation Areas 217 

Figure NL-1. North Lahontan Region 

Land Use, Imports, Exports, and Water Supplies 227 

Figure NL-2. North Lahontan Region 

Water Supply Sources (Average Conditions) 1990 Level 228 

Figure NL-3. North Lahontan Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 Level 233 

Figure NL-4. North Lahontan Region 

Applied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 Level 234 

Figure NL-5. North Lahontan Region 

1990 Acreage, ETAW, and Applied Water for Major Crops 237 

Figure NL-6. North Lahontan Region 

Water Recreation Areas 241 

Figure SL-1. South Lahontan Region 

Land Use, Imports, Exports, and Water Supplies 252 

Figure SL-2. South Lahontan Region 

Water Supply Sources (Average Conditions) 1990 Level 253 



VII 



Draft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 

VOLUME n CONTENTS 

Figure SL-3. South Lahontan Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 Level 257 

Figure SL-4. South Lahontan Region 

Applied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 Level 259 

Figure SL-5. South Lahontan Region 

1990 Acreage, ETAW, and Applied Water for Major Crops 262 

Figure SL-6. South Lahontan Region 

Water Recreation Areas 265 

Figure CR-1 . Colorado River Region 

Land Use, Imports, Exports, and Water Supplies 276 

Figure CR-2. Colorado River Region 

Water Supply Sources (Average Conditions) 1990 Level 277 

Figure CR-3. Colorado River Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 Level 282 

Figure CR-4. Colorado River Region 

Total Applied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 1990 Level 284 

Figure CR-5. Colorado River Region 

1990 Acreage, ETAW, and Applied Water for Major Crops 288 

Figure CR-6. Colorado River Region 

Water Recreation Areas 293 

SIDEBARS 

California's Water Supply Availability 1 

Definition of Terms 12 

TABLES 

Tkble S— 1. California Water Supply with Existing Facilities and Programs 4 

Tkble S— 2, Level I Demand Management Options 4 

Tkble S— 3. Level I Water Supply Management Options 5 

Tkble S— 4. California Water Supply with Level I Water Management Options 6 

Tkble S-5. State Water Project Supplies 8 

Tkble S— 6. Net Ground Water Use by Hydrologic Region 9 

Tkble S— 7. Ground Water Overdraft by Hydrologic Region 10 

Tkble S-8. Waste Water Recycling — Annual Fresh Water Displaced 11 

Tkble S-9. California Water Demand 13 

Tkble S— 10. Population Projections By Hydrologic Region 14 

Tkble S-11. California Urban Water Demand 15 

Tkble S— 12. California Crop and Irrigated Acreage by Hydrologic Region 

1990 (Normalized) 17 

Tkble S— 13. California Crop and Irrigated Acreage 

by Hydrologic Region 2020 (Forecasted) 18 

Tkble S-14. California Agricultural Water Demand 19 

Tkble S— 15. California Environmental Water Needs 21 

Tkble S— 16. Annual Applied Water and Depletion Reductions 

Due to Conservation from 1990 to 2020 oy Hydrologic Region 23 

Tkble S-17. California Water Balance 25 

Tkble NC-1. Population Projections 30 

Tkble NC-2. Major Reservoirs 32 



vui 



Draft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 

VOLUME II CONTENTS 

Tkble NC-3. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities and Programs 34 

Tkble NC-4. Water Supplies with Level I Water Management Programs 36 

Tkble NC-5. Urban Water Demand 39 

Tkble NC— 6. Irrigated Crop Acreage 41 

Tkble NC-7. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop 41 

Tkble NC-8. Agricultural Water Demand 42 

Tkble NC-9. Environmental Instream Water Needs 43 

Tkble NC-10. Wetlands Water Needs 44 

Tkble NC-11. Tbtal Water Demands 47 

Tkble NC-12. Water Balance 52 

Tkble SF-1. Population Projections 54 

Tkble SF-2. Major Reservoirs 57 

Tkble SF— 3. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities and Programs 58 

Tkble SF-4. Water Supplies with Level I Water Management Programs 62 

Tkble SF-5. Urban Water Demand 67 

Tkble SF-6. Irrigated Crop Acreage 68 

Tkble SF-7. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop 68 

Tkble SF-8. Agricultural Water Demand 70 

Tkble SF-9. Wetlands Water Needs 70 

Tkble SF-10. Environmental Instream Water Needs 71 

Tkble SF-11. Tbtal Water Demands 73 

Tkble SF-12. Water Balance 76 

Tkble CC-1. Population Projections 78 

Tkble CC-2. Major Reservoirs 82 

Tkble CC-3. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities and Programs 82 

Tkble CC-4. Water Supplies with Level I Water Management Programs 85 

Tkble CC-5. Urban Water Demand 89 

Tkble CC-6. Irrigated Crop Acreage 91 

Tkble CC-7. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop 91 

Tkble CC-8. Agricultural Water Demand 92 

Tkble CC-9. Environmental Instream Water Needs 93 

Tkble CC-10. Total Water Demands 95 

Tkble CC-11. Water Balance 100 

Tkble SC-1. Population Projections 102 

Tkble SC-2. Major Reservoirs 106 

Tkble SC-3. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities and Programs 108 

Tkble SC-4. Water Supplies with Level I Water Management Programs 112 

Tkble SC-5. Urban Water Demand 114 

Tkble SC-6. Irrigated Crop Acreage 118 

Tkble SC-7. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop 118 

Tkble SC-8. Agricultural Water Demand 119 

Tkble SC-9. Wetlands Water Needs 120 

Tkble SC-10. Total Water Demands 122 

Tkble SC-11. Water Balance 125 

Tkble SR-1. Population Projections 128 

Tkble SR-2. Major Reservoirs 131 

Tkble SR-3. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities and Programs 134 



IX 



Draft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 

VOLUME II CONTENTS 

Tkble SR-4. Water Supplies with Level I Water Management Programs 137 

Tkble SR-5. Urban Water Demand 141 

Tkble SR-6. Irrigated Crop Acreage 142 

Tkble SR-7. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop 144 

Tkble SR-8. Agricultural Water Demand 145 

Tkble SR-9. Environmental Instream Water Needs 147 

Tkble SR-10. Wetlands Water Needs 148 

Tkble SR-11. Total Water Demands 152 

Table SR-12. Water Balance 160 

Tkble SJ-1. Population Projections 162 

Tkble SJ-2. Major Reservoirs 165 

Tkble SJ— 3. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities and Programs 169 

Tkble SJ-4. Water Supplies with Additional Level I Water Management Programs 170 

Tkble SJ-5. Urban Water Demand 174 

Tkble SJ-6. Irrigated Crop Acreage 175 

Tkble SJ-7. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop 176 

Tkble SJ-8. Agricultural Water Demand 178 

Tkble SJ-9. Wetlands Water Needs 180 

Tkble SJ- 10. Environmental Instream Water Needs 181 

Tkble SJ-11. Total Water Demands 184 

Tkble SJ-12. Water Balance 190 

Tkble TL— 1. Population Projections 194 

Tkble TL-2. Major Reservoirs 196 

Tkble TL— 3. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities and Programs 197 

Tkble TL— 4. Water Supplies with Level I Water Management Programs 203 

Tkble TL-5. Urban Water Demand : 206 

Tkble TL-6. Irrigated Crop Acreage 209 

Tkble TL-7. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop 209 

Tkble TL-8. Agricultural Water Demand 212 

Tkble TL-9. Wetlands Water Needs 214 

Table TL-10. Total Water Demands 216 

Tkble TL-11. Water Balance 223 

Tkble NL-1. Population Projections 226 

Tkble NL-2. Major Reservoirs 229 

Tkble NL-3. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities and Programs 231 

Tkble NL— 4. Water Supplies with Additional Facilities and Programs 232 

Tkble NL-5. Urban Water Demand 235 

Tkble NL— 6. Irrigated Crop Acreage 236 

Tkble NL-7. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop 236 

Tkble NL-8. Agricultural Water Demand 236 

Tkble NL-9. Wetlands Water Needs 239 

Tkble NL-10. Total Water Demands 242 

Tkble NL-11. Water Balance 247 

Tkble SL-1. Population Projections 250 

Tkble SL-2. Major Reservoirs 254 

Tkble SL-3. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities and Programs 255 

Tkble SL— 4. Water Supplies with Level I Water Management Programs 256 



Draft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 

VOLUME II CONTENTS 

Tkble SL-5. Urban Water Demand 260 

Tkble SL— 6. Irrigated Crop Acreage 261 

Tkble SL-7. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop 261 

Tkble SL-8. Agricultural Water Demand 263 

Tkble SL-9. Environmental Instream Water Needs 264 

Tkble SL-10. Total Water Demands 266 

Tkble SL-11. Water Balance 272 

Tkble CR-1. Population Projections 274 

Tkble CR-2. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities and Programs 278 

Tkble CR-3. Water Supplies with Level I Water Management Programs 281 

Tkble CR-4. Urban Water Demand 283 

Tkble CR-5. Irrigated Crop Acreage 285 

Tkble CR-6. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop 286 

Tkble CR-7. Agricultural Water Demand 287 

Tkble CR-8. Wetlands Water Needs 291 

Tkble CR-9. Total Water Demands 292 

Tkble CR-10. Water Balance 302 

* * * 



XI 



Draft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 



Xll 



Draft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 



SUMMARY OF VOLUME II 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Summary of Volume U 

SUMMARY OF VOLUME II 

Bulletin 160-93 is organized into two volumes. Volume I discusses statewide issues; presents an 
overview of current and future water management activities while detailing statewide water supplies and 
water demands; and updates various elements of California's statewide water planning. Volume II ex- 
amines current water demands and available supplies in each of the State's ten major hydrologic regions; 
discusses regional and local water-related issues; and details DWR's 30-year projections of supplies and 
demands for each region. 

To best illustrate overall demand and supply availability, two water supply and demand scenarios, an 
average year and a drought year, are presented for the 1 990 level of development and for projections to 
^ 2020. Shortages shown under average conditions are chronic shortages indicating the need for additional 
long-term water management measures. Shortages shown under drought conditions can be met by both 
long-term and short-term measures, depending on the frequency and severity of the shortage and water 
service reliability requirements. 

Regional water balances present 1990 level and future water demands to 2020 and compare them 
with supplies from existing facilities and with future demand management and water supply management 
options. Future water management options are presented in two levels to better reflect the status of in- 
vestigations required to implement them. 

O Level I options are those that have undergone extensive investigation and environ- 
mental analyses and are judged to have a higher likelihood of being implemented 
by 2020. 

O Level II options are those that could fill the remaining gap shown in the balance 
between supply and urban, agricultural, and environmental water demands. These 
options require more extensive investigation and alternative analyses. 



California's Water Supply Availability 

Average year supply: the average annual supply of a water development system over a long 
period. For this report, the SWP and CVP average year supply is the average annual delivery ca- 
pability of the projects over a 70-year study period (1922-91). For a local project, it is the annu- 
al average deliveries of the project during 1984-1986 period. For dedicated natural flow, it is the 
long-term average natural flow for wild and scenic rivers or it is environmental flow as required 
for an average year under specific agreements, water rights, court decisions, and congressional 
directives. 

Drought year supply: the average annual supply of a water development system during a 
defined drought period. For this report, the drought period is the average of water years 1 990 
and 1991 . For dedicated natural flow, it is the average of water years 1990 and 1991 for wild and 
scenic rivers or it is environmental flows as required under specific agreements, water rights, 
court decisions, and congressional directives. 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Summary of Volume II 

This chapter summarizes regional water supplies and demands for the 1 990 level of development and 
for projections to the year 2020. At the end of this chapter is the California Water Balance and a brief 
overview of local water supply issues. The remaining chapters of Volume II discuss water demands, wa- 
ter supplies, and water management issues related to each of the ten major hydrologic regions of the State 
(Figure 1). Appendix C presents regional planning subarea and land ownership maps and Appendix D 
lists hydroelectric facilities of the State by region. 

Water Supply 

Since the last water plan update in 1987, California Water: Looking to the Future, Bulletin 160-87, 
evolving environmental policies have introduced considerable uncertainty about much of the State's wa- 
ter supply. For example, the winter run chinook salmon and the Delta smelt, having experienced substan- 
tial population declines, were listed under the State and federal Endangered Species Acts, imposing re- 
strictions on Delta exports, and the Central Valley Project Improvement Act (P.L. 102-575) was passed 
in 1992, reallocating over a million acre-feet of CVP supplies for fish and wildlife. 

These actions affect the export capability from California's most important water supply hub, the 
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, while also imposing restrictions on upstream diverters. The Delta is the 
source from which two-thirds of the State's population and millions of acres of agricultural land receive 
part or all of their supplies. Other events, such as the State Water Resources Control Board's Bay/Delta 
Proceedings, and the federal Environmental Protection Agency's promise to promulgate Bay /Delta stan- 
dards of its own, suggest even more stringent requirements could be imposed. Table S-1 shows Califor- 
nia water supplies, with existing facilities and water management programs for the 1990 level of develop- 
ment and projections to 2020. 

Califomians are finding that existing water management systems are no longer able to provide suffi- 
ciently reliable water service to users. In most areas of the State, as a result of 1987-92 drought, water 
conservation and rationing became mandatory for urban users, many agricultural areas had surface water 
supplies drastically curtailed, and environmental resources were strained. Until a Delta solution that 
meets the needs of urban, agricultural, and environmental interests is identified, there likely will be water 
supply shortages in dry and average years. 

While the six-year drought stretched California's developed supplies to their limits, innovative water 
management actions, water transfers, water supply interconnections, and changes in project operations to 
benefit fish and wildlife all helped to reduce the harmful effects of the prolonged drought. Today, water 
managers are looking into a wide variety of demand management and supply augmentation programs to 
supplement, improve, and make better use of existing resources. The following sections summarize re- 
sults from regional and statewide analyses of water supplies and the water supply benefits of water man- 
agement programs under Level I options. Tables S-2 and S-3 list the major water management programs 
included in Level I analyses and described in more detail in Chapter 1 1 of Volume I. The contribution of 
these programs to future regional water supplies is included in Table S-4, which shows water supplies for 
the 1990 level of development and compares them to projected supplies in 2020, with Level I water man- 
agement programs in place. Note that Delta supplies are assumed to be operated under SWRCB D-1485 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Summary of Volume 11 



DO. 



•laKIYOU 



NC 



ITRINITY, 



TEHAMA 



Borre 




MOOOC 



LAsaCN 

NL 



PUiMA« 



aiCRRA 



OOUMA 



LAKE 






>¥ 



Legend 

NC North Coast 

SF San Francisco Bay 

CC Central Coast 

SC South Coast 

SR Sacramento River 

SJ San Joaquin River 

TL Tulare Lake 

NL North Lahontan 

SL South Lahontan 

CR Colorado River 



>YOU) 



Iw^^^z 



.^ 



^OHTRW'i 9AM 

''VOAOUIH 



TOULUMNE 



SAWTA 

01 



^ 



:sj 



MERCEO 

MAOERA 



FRE8N0 



iNYO 



3KTEREY 



CC 



TULARE 



KINOe 



TL 



SL 



N 



•AN 
LUIS 

oeispo 



9ANTA 

BARBARA 



KERN 



VENTURA 



Loe 



SAN BCRNARPINO 



SC 



^ r 




CR 



RIVERSIDE 



IITERIAL 



Figure S-1. Ten Hydrologic Regions in California 



OCTOBER 1992 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Summary of Volume II 



criteria; and, that some areas receiving Delta supplies are already impacted by reduced export capability 
as a result of recent actions to protect aquatic species. 



Table S-1. California Water Supply with Existing Facilities and Programs 

(Decision 1485 Operating Criteria without Endangered Species Action for Deita Supplies) 

(miiiions of acre-feet) 



Supply 


1990 






2020 




Change 




Supplies 

Surface: 


Average 


Drought 




Average 


Drought 


Average Drough 


Local 


10.1 


8.2 




10.3 


8.4 


0.2 


0.2 


Imports by local agencies'* 


1.0 


0.7 


f 


1.0 


0.7 


0.0 


0.C 


Colorado River 


5.2 


5.1 


1 


4.4 


4.4 


-0.8 


-0.7 


CVP 


7.5 


5.0 


1 


7.9 


5.1 


0.4 


0.1 


Other federal 


1.2 


0.8 


'j 


1.2 


0.8 


0.0 


O.C 


swpi 


2.8 


2.2 


^1 


3.4 


2.1 


0.6 


-0.1 


Reclaimed 


0.2 


0.2 


J 


0.2 


0.2 


0.0 


0.C 


Ground Water 


7.5 


12.2 


1 


8.3 


12.9 


0.8 


0./ 


Ground Water Overdraft 


1.0 


1.0 




0.7 


0.7 


-0.3 


-0.C 


Dedicated Natural Flow 


27.2 


15.1 




27.8 


15.6 


0.6 


0.5 


Total Supplies 


63.7 


50.5 




65.2 


50.9 


1.5 1 


0.4 



^ 1990 SWP supplies are normalized and do not reflect additional supplies needed to offset reduction of supplies from the Mono and 
Owens basins to the South Coast hydrologic region. 



Table S-2. Level I Demand Management Options 



Programs 


Appiied Water 
Reduction 
(I.OOOAF) 


Net Water Demand 
Reduction 
(1,000AF) 

Average Drought 


Economic 
Unit Cost 
($/AF)i 


Comments 


Long-term Demand 
Management: 












Urban Water 
Conservation 


1,300 


900 


900 


315-390 


Urban BMPs 


Ag. Water Conserva- 
tion 


1,700 


300 


300 


Not 
Available 


EWMPs and increased ir- 
rigation efficiency 


Land Retirement 


130 


130 


130 


60 


Retirement of land with 
drainage problems in west 
San Joaquin Valley. Cost is 
at the Delta. 


Short-term Demand 
Management: 












Demand Reduction 


1,300 





1,000 


Not 
Available 


Drought year supply 


Land Fallowing/ 
Drought Water Bank 


800 





800 


125 


Drought year supply. Cost 
is at the Delta. 



'' Economic costs include capital and OMP&R costs discounted over a 50 year period at 6 percent discount rate. These 
costs do not include applicable transportation and treatment costs. 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Summary of Volume n 



Table S-3. Level I Water Supply Management Options 



Programs 



Type 



Capacity 
(1,000 AF) 



Annual Supply 
(1,000 AF) 



Average 



Economic 
Unit Cost 
Drought ($/AF)' 



Comments 



Statewide Water Management: 

Long-term Delta Delta Water 

Solution Management Program 



200 400 Not Under study by Bay/Delta 

Available Oversight Council. Water 

supply benefit is elimination 
of carriage water under 
D-1485. 



"Interim" South Delta 
Water Management 
Program 


South Delta 
Improvement 




66 


95 


60 


Rnal draft is scheduled to 
be released in late 1993 


Los Banos Grandes 
Reservoir ^ 


Offstream Storage 


1,7303 


250-300 


260 


260 


Schedule now coincides 
with BDOC process 


Kern Water Bank 2 


Ground Water Storage 


3,0003 


44 


430 


140 


Schedule now coinckjes 
with BDOC process 


Coastal Branch- 
Phase II (Santa Ynez 
Extension) 


SWP Conveyance 
Facility 


57 


N/A6 


N/A 


630-1,110 


Notice of Determination was 
filed in July 1992. 
Construction is scheduled 
to begin in late 1993. 


American River Rood 
Control * 


Rood Control Storage 


5453 


" 






Feasibility report and envi- 
ronmental documentation 
completed in 1991. 


Local Water Management: 














Waste Water Recycling 


Reclamation 


800 


450 


450 


125-840 


Fresh water displaced 


Ground Water 
Reclamation 


Reclamation 


200 


100 


100 


350-900 


Primarily in South Coast 


El Dorado County Wa- 
ter Agency Water Pro- 
gram 


Diversion from South 
Fork American R. 




24 


235 


280 


Certified final Programmatic 
EIR identifying prefen-ed al- 
temative; water rights hear- 
ings,new CVP contract fol- 
lowing EIR/EIS preparation 


Los Vaqueros 
Reservoir- Contra 
Costa Water 
District 


Offstream Storage 
Emergency Supply 


100 


N/A 


N/A 


320-950 


T&E species, inundation of 
ag. land. Costs vary with 
different operation scenar- 
ios. 


EBMUD 


Conjunctive Use and 
Other Options 




N/A 


20-70 


370-1,830 


Investigating 6 altematives; 
Draft EIR/EIS released in 
Dec. 1992 


New Los Padres 
Reservoir - MPWMD 


Enlarging existing 
reservoir 


24 


22 


18 


410 


T&E species, steelhead fish- 
ery in Carmel River 


Domenigoni Valley 
Reservoir - MWDSC 


Offstream storage of 

SWP and Colorado 

River water, drought 

year supply 


800 





264 


410 


Rnal EIR certified. 


Inland Feeder- 
MWDSC 


Conveyance Facilities 


— 


— 


— 


— 




San Felipe Extension 
-PVWA 


CVP Conveyance 
Facility 




N/A 


N/A5 


140 


Capital costs only. Convey 
18,000 AF annually. 



^ Economic costs include capital and OMP&R costs discounted over a 50 year period at 6 percent discount rate. These costs do not include applicable transportation and 

treatment costs. 
^ These programs are only feasible If a Delta water management program is Implemented. 
3 Reservoir capacity. 

* Folsom Lake flood control reservation would return to original 0.4 MAP 
5 Yield of this project is in part or fully comes from tfie CVR 
B NA: Not Applicable 



BuUetin 160-93 Administrative Draft » Summary of Volume n 

Table S-4. California Water Supply with Level I Water Management Options 

(Decision 1485 Operating Criteria without Endangered Species Actions for Delta Supplies) 

(millions of acre-feet)2 



Supply 


1990 




2020 




Change 




Supplies 

Surface: 


Average 


Drought 


Average 


Drought 


Average Droug 


Local 


10.1 


8.2 


10.3 


8.4 


0.2 





Imports by local agencies^ 


1.0 


0.7 


1.0 


1.0 


0.0 





Colorado River 


5.2 


5.1 


4.4 


4.4 


-0.8 


-0 


CVP 


7.5 


5.0 


7.9 


5.1 


0.4 





Other federal 


1.2 


0.8 


1.2 


0.8 


0.0 





swpi 


2.8 


2.2 


4.1 


3.0 


1.3 





Reclaimed 


0.2 


0.2 


0.7 


0.7 


0.5 





Ground water 


7.5 


12.2 


7.8 


12.8 


0.3 





Ground water overdraft 


1.0 


1.0 


0.5 


0.5 


-0.5 


-0 


Dedicated Natural Flow 


27.2 


15.1 


27.8 


15.6 


0.6 


0, 


Total 


63.7 


50.5 


65.7 


52.3 


2.0 


1. 



1 1990 SWP supplies are normalized and do not reflect additional supplies needed to offset reduction of supplies from the Mono and 
Owens basins to the South Coast hydrologic region. 

Local surface water development includes direct stream diversions as well as supplies in local stor- 
age facilities. Local agencies are finding it difficult to undertake new water projects to meet their needs 
where supply shortfalls exist or are projected to occur in the future, as a result of economic, environmen- 
tal, and regulatory obstacles. Thus, some water agencies are advocating or implementing incentive pro- 
grams for water conservation to reduce demand where such programs are cost effective. Implementation 
of urban Best Management Practices and agricultural Efficient Water Management Practices will reduce 
demands in the future, and reductions caused by these practices were incorporated into water demand 
forecasts to 2020. (See the Demand Reduction section in this chapter.) However, these practices only 
partially improve water service reliability. Local water agencies must continue to plan for water demand 
management and supply augmentation actions to increase water service reliability and meet future needs. 

Ongoing local water supply programs include The Metropolitan Water District of Southern Califor- 
nia's Domenigoni Valley Reservoir, East Bay Municipal Utility District's water management program. El 
Dorado County Water Agency's water program, and Monterey Peninsula Water Management District's 
New Los Padres Reservoir. By 2020, additional local water management programs could improve local 
annual supplies by about 40,000 and 350,000 AF for average and drought years, respectively. 

Local Imported Supplies. Court order restrictions on diversion from the Mono Basin and Owens 
Valley have reduced the amount of water the City of Los Angeles can receive. These restrictions have 
brought into question the reliability of Mono-Owens supply for the South Coast Region. 

Colorado River supplies to the south Coast Region for urban and agricultural uses could eventually 
decline from about 5.0 MAP to California's allocated supply of 4.4 MAP annually as a result of Arizona 
and Nevada taking more of their allocated supplies. With those states using less than their apportionment 
of water, their unused supply of Colorado River water was made available to meet California's require- 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Summary of Volume II 

ments. Southern California was spared from severe rationing during most of the 1987-92 drought pri- 
marily as a result of the 600,000 AF annually of Arizona and Nevada's unused Colorado River water that 
was made available to The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. Even with this supply, 
however, much of Southern California experienced significant rationing in 1991 . Supplemental Colorado 
River water cannot be counted on to meet needs in the future as Arizona and Nevada continue to use 
more of their allocated share of Colorado River water. 

Central Valley Project yield will remain about the same as present. The USBR is required by the 
CVPIA to find replacement sources for 800,000 AF of water recently allocated to environmental uses. 
Additional supplies needed for future CVP conveyance facilities, such as the San Felipe extension, will 
probably come from reallocation of already contracted CVP supplies. 

State Water Project supply studies were conducted to evaluate the delivery capability of the Project 
(1) with existing facilities and (2) with Level I water management programs under SWRCB D-1485 op- 
erating criteria (see Table S-5). SWP supplies for the 1990 level were 2.8 MAF and 2.2 MAF for aver- 
age and drought years, respectively. SWP 1990 average supply is normalized and does not reflect addi- 
tional supply needed to offset reduction of Mono-Owens supplies to South Coast Region. Additional 
Level I programs include the South Delta Water Management Program, long-term Delta water manage- 
ment programs, the Kern Water Bank (including local elements), Los Banos Grandes, and the Coastal 
Branch (the Coastal Branch is a conveyance facility). With the Level I programs, SWP supplies can in- 
crease to about 4.1 MAF and 3.0 MAF in average and drought years by the year 2020. 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Summary of Volume n 



Table S-5. State Water Project Supplies 
(millions of acre -feet) 



l-evel of 
Develop- 
ment 



SWP Delivery Capability'' 



Witti Existing Facilities 
Average Drought 



Witli Level I Water Management 
Programs^ 



Average 



Drougtit 



SWP Delta 
Export 
Demand 



1990 
2000 
2010 
2020 



2.8 
3.3 
3.4 
3.4 



2.2 
2.1 
2.1 
2.1 



3.6 
4.0 
4.1 



2.6 
3.0 
3.0 



3.0 
3.7 
4.2 
4.2 



1 Assumes D-1485. SWP capability with Level I water management programs is uncertain until solutions to complex Delta problems 
are implemented and future actions to protect aquatic species are identified. Includes conveyance losses. 

^Level I programs includes South Delta Water Management programs, long-term Delta water management programs, the Kem Wa- 
ter Bank and Local Elements, and Los Bancs Grandes Facilities. 

Note: Feather River Sen/ice area supplies are not included. FRSA average and drought supplies are 927,000 and 729,000 AF re- 
spectively. 



California's ground water resources played a vital role in helping the State through the 1987-92 
drought. Recent studies by DWR indicate that many of the San Joaquin Valley's ground water aquifers 
substantially recovered from the 1976-77 drought during the late 70s and early 80s when surface runoff 
and Delta exports were above average. Conjunctive use operations, which helped make this possible, 
will continue to be refined and made more effective in the future. The 1990 level average annual net 
ground water use in California is about 8.5 MAF, including 1.0 MAF of ground water overdraft. During 
droughts, ground water use is increased significantly to offset reduction in surface water, as shown in 
Table S-6. Annual ground water overdraft has been reduced by about half since 1980, when ground wa- 
ter overdraft was last studied (see Table S-7). This reduction has mainly occurred in the San Joaquin 
Valley and is due to the benefits of imported supplies to the San Joaquin River and Tulare Lake regions 
and construction and operation of Hidden and Buchanan dams, which provide controlled releases and 
opportunities for greater ground water recharge during the 1970s and 80s. 

The overdraft amounts shown in Table S-7 do not include an estimated 200,000 AF of overdraft re- 
sulting from possible degradation of ground water qucdity in basins in the trough of the San Joaquin 
Valley. There is a west-to-east ground water gradient in this valley from Merced County to Kem 
County. Poor quality ground water moves eastward along this gradient, displacing good quality ground 
water in the trough of the basin. The total dissolved solids in the west side of the valley generally range 
from 2,000 to 7,000 milligrams per liter, the eastside basin TDS from 300 to 700 milligrams per liter. 
This displacement of good quality ground water should be investigated for overdraft estimates because 
degraded ground water cannot be economically put to use. However, the amount is difficult to ascertain 
and no water quality monitoring data are available to verify the calculations. 

In the short term, those areas of California that rely on Delta exports for all or a portion of their sur- 
face water supplies face great uncertainty in terms of water supply reliability due to the uncertain out- 
come of a number of actions being undertaken to protect aquatic species in the Delta. For example, in 
1993, an above normal runoff year, environmental restrictions limited CVP deliveries to 50 percent of 
contracted supply for federal water service contractors from Tracy to Kettleman City. Because ground 
water is used to replace much of the shortfall in surface water supplies, limitations on Delta exports will 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Summary of Volume 11 



exacerbate ground water overdraft in the San Joaquin River and Tulare Lake regions, and in other regions 
receiving a portion of their supplies from the Delta. 

Table S-6. Net Ground Water Use by Hydrologic Region 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Region 



1990 



2020 with Existing 
Facilities & Programs^ 

Average Drought Average Drought 



2020 with Additional 
Facilities & Programs^ 

Average Drought 



North Coast 


260 


280 


300 


320 


290 


310 


San Francisco Bay 


100 


130 


160 


170 


110 


140 


Central Coast 


940 


1,020 


1,000 


1,110 


910 


1,050 


South Coast 


1,110 


1,320 


1,610 


1,610 


1,540 


1,610 


Sacramento River 


2,510 


2,880 


2,530 


3,080 


2.510 


3,080 


San Joaquin 


1,280 


2,340 


1,070 


2,280 


1,050 


2,270 


Tulare Lake 


1,730 


4,550 


1,660 


4,410 


1,320 


4,230 


North Lahontan 


120 


150 


150 


170 


150 


170 


South Lahontan 


300 


330 


330 


340 


310 


340 


Colorado River 


160 


160 


150 


150 


100 


100 



Statewide 



8,510 13,160 



8,960 13,640 



8,290 13,300 



^ Assumes SWRCB D-1485 operating criteria for surface water supplies from tlie 
species have made supplies from the Delta more uncertain; which will increase 
San Joaquin Valley. 



Delta. Recent actions to protect aquatic 
ground water overdraft in portions of the 



Bulletiii 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Summary of Volume II 



Table S-7. Ground Water Overdraft by Hydrologic Region 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



2020^ 



Region 



1980 


1990 


with Existing 
Facilities & 
Programs 


with Additional 
Facilities & 
Programs 


























230 


250 


249 


249 


110 


20 








120 


30 


33 


33 


420 


210 








990 


340 


280 


55 














100 


70 


71 


71 


60 


80 


67 


60 



North Coast 
San Francisco Bay 
Central Coast 
South Coast 
Sacramento River 
San Joaquin 
Tulare Lake 
North Lahontan 
South Lahontan 
Colorado River 



Statewide 



2,030 



1,000 



700 



468 



^ Assumes SWRCB 0-1485 operating criteria for surface water supplies from the Delta. Recent actions to protect aquatic 
species have made supplies from the Delta more uncertain; which will increase ground water overdraft in portions of the 
San Joaquin Valley. 



Water reclamation programs such as waste water recycling, reclamation of contaminated ground 
water, ocean water desalting, and desalting agricultural drainage water were evaluated (see Volume I, 
Chapter 11 for a detailed discussion of these problems). Projected water recycling is based on evaluation 
of water recycling data presented in Water Recycling 2000, a September 1991 report by the State Water 
Conservation Coalition Reclamation/Reuse Task Force and the Bay-Delta Reclamation Subwork Group 
and information provided by local water and sanitation districts. Table S-8 shows the estimated water 
recycling contribution (annual fresh water displaced) to water supply by hydrologic region. 



10 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Summary of Volume II 

Table S-8. Waste Water Recycling — Annual Fresh Water Displaced 

(thousands acre-feet) 



Region 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 


1990-2020 
Change 


NC 


12 


15 


18 


21 




9 


SF 


32 


43 


53 


70 




38 


CC 


6 


37 


44 


50 




44 


SC 


76 


234 


296 


357 




281 


SR 


9 


9 


9 


9 







SJ 


24 


27 


35 


41 




17 


TL 


63 


74 


92 


111 




48 


NL 


8 


8 


8 


8 







SL 


2 


2 


2 


4 




2 


CR 


3 


4 


4 


5 




2 


Total 


235 


453 


561 


676 




441 



Ground water reclamation programs could be implemented to recover degraded ground water. Cur- 
rently, most ground water reclamation programs in the planning process are in Southern California. The 
supply benefit of ground water reclamation by year 2000 is projected at about 90,000 AF and is included 
with ground water supplies. 

Water Demand 

Extensive evaluation and analyses of water demand were conducted for this water plan update. 
These analyses recognize the water demands of all beneficial uses: urban, agricultural, environmental, 
and other uses including water based recreation, and power generation. Water based recreation is dis- 
cussed more extensively in Volume I, Chapter 9. Table S-9 summarizes statewide estimated water de- 
mands for each category of use. 



11 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Summary of Volume II 



Definition of Terms 

O Applied water: The amount of water from any source needed to meet the demand of 
the user. It is the quantity of water delivered to any of the following locations: 

□ the intake to a city water system or factory. 

□ the farm headgate. 

Q a marsh or wetland, either directly or by incidental drainage flows; this is water for 
wildlife areas. 

□ For existing instream use, applied water demand is the portion of the stream flow 
dedicated to instream use or reserved under the federal or State Wild and Scenic 
Rivers acts or the flow needed to meet salinity standards in the Sacramento -San 
Joaquin Delta under SWRCB standards. 

O Evapotranspiration: The quantity of water transpired (given off) and evaporated from 
plant tissues and surrounding soil surfaces. Quantitatively, it is expressed in terms of 
volume of water per unit acre of depth of water during a specified period of time. Ab- 
breviation: ET 

O Evapotranspiration of appiied water: The portion of the total evapotranspiration 
which is provided by irrigation. Abbreviation: ETAW. 

O Irrecoverable losses: The water lost to a salt sink or water lost by evaporation or 
evapotranspiration from conveyance facilities or drainage canals. 

O Net water demand: The amount of water needed in a water sen/ice area to meet all 
the water service requirements. It is the sum of evapotranspiration of applied water in 
an area, the irrecoverable losses from the distribution system, and the outflow leaving 
the service area, including treated municipal outflow. 

O Depletion: The water consumed within a service area and no longer available as a 
source of water supply. For agriculture and wetlands it is ETAW pluS irrecoverable 
losses. For urban areas it is the exterior ETAW, sewage effluent that flows to a salt 
sink, and incidental ET losses. For instream needs it is the dedicated flow that pro- 
ceeds to a salt sink. 

O Average year demand: The demand for water under average weather conditions for 
a defined level of development. 

O Drought year demand: The demand for water during a drought period for a defined 
level of development. It is the sum of average year demand and water needed for any 
additional irrigation of farms and landscapes due to the lack of precipitation or in- 
crease in evapotranspiration during drought. 

O Normalized demand: The result of adjusting actual water use in a given year to ac- 
count for unusual events such as dry weather conditions, government interventions 
for agriculture, rationing programs, etc. 



12 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Summary of Volume H 



Table S-9. California Water Demand 

(millions of acre -feet) 



Category of Use 



1990 
average drought 



2020 
average drought 



1990-2020 Change 
average drought 



Urban 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 
Agricultural 
Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 
Environmental 
Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 
Other 1 
Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 




28.6 
28.2 
24.4 

0.5 
1.8 

1.3 



16.4 
16.1 
12.7 

0.5 
1.7 
1.3 



12.6 

10.5 

8.5 

28.9 

25.1 
22.9 

29.5 
29.0 
24.7 

0.7 
1.8 
1.3 



13.1 

11.0 

8.9 

30.4 
26.3 
24.2 

17.3 
16.9 
13.0 

0.5 
1.5 
1.1 



4.8 


5.0 


3.8 


4.0 


2.8 


2.9 


2.0 " 


-2.4 


1.9 


-2.1 


■1.5 


-1.6 


0.9 


0.9 


0.8 


0.8 


0.3 

■ 


0.3 


0.2 


0.0 


0.0 


-0.2 


0.0 


-0.2 


3.8 


3.5 


2.7 


2.5 


1.6 


1.4 



Total 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



67.9 
63.7 
55.8 



57.8 
53.2 
45.8 



71.7 
66.4 
57.4 



61.3 
55.7 
47.2 



1 Other includes conveyance losses, recreation uses, and energy production. 

Urban Water Demand 

Urban water demands are primarily based on statewide population projections which show an in- 
crease of almost 19 million people from 1990 to 2020, from roughly 30 million to 49 million people. 
About half the projected population increase will happen in the South Coast Region. Population projec- 
tions for the California Water Plan are based on the Department of Finance baseline series. The DOF 
population estimates are taken from the 1990 census as the base year. Table S-10 shows projections of 
population by hydrologic region. 



-^' 



13 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Summary of Volume n 



Table S-10. Population Projections By Hydrologic Region 

(millions) 



Hydrologic Regions 



1990 



2020 



1990-2020 Change 



North Coast 
San Francisco 
Central Coast 
South Coast 
Sacramento River 
San Joaquin River 
Tulare Lake 
North Lahontan 
South Lahontan 
Colorado River 



0.6 


0.9 


5.5 


6.9 


1.3 


2.0 


16.2 


25.3 


2.2 


4.1 


1.4 


3.2 


1.6 


3.5 


0.1 


0.1 


0.6 


1.9 


0.5 


1.0 



0.3 
1.4 
0.7 
9.1 
1.9 
1.8 
1.9 
0.0 
1.3 
0.5 



Total 



30.0 



48.9 



18.9 



Urban annual net water demand could increase from 6.7 MAF in 1990 to 10.5 MAF by 2020, after 
accounting for implementation of conservation measures that are projected to reduce urban annual net 
water demand by about 0.9 MAF. Urban water demand projections are based on: (1) population projec- 
tions; and (2) unit urban water use values, considering probable effects of future water conservation mea- 
sures, and trends such as increases in multi-family housing and greater growth in warmer inland areas of 
the State. Table S-11 shows urban water demand projections by hydrologic region. A comprehensive 
analysis of unit urban water use is presented in Volume I, Chapter 6. 



14 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Summary of Volume 11 



Table S-11. California Urban Water Demand 

(millions of acre-feet) 



Hydrologic Regions 



1990 
average drought 



2020 
average drougtit 



1990-2020 Change 
average drought 



North Coast 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



0.2 
0.2 
0.1 



0.2 
0.2 
0.1 



0.2 
0.2 

0.1 



0.2 
0.2 
0.1 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



San Francisco 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



1.2 
1.2 
1.1 



1.3 
1,3 
1.2 



1.4 
1.4 
1.3 



1.5 
1.5 
1.5 



0.2 
0.2 
0.2 



0.2 
0.2 
0.3 



Central Coast 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



0.3 
0.2 
0.2 



0.3 
0.2 
0.2 



0.4 
0.3 
0.3 



0.4 
0.4 
0.3 



0.1 
0.1 
0.1 



0.1 
0.2 
0.1 



South Coast 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



3.9 
3.5 
3.3 



4.0 
3.6 
3.5 



6.0 
5.3 
4.8 



6.2 
5.5 
5.0 



2.1 
1.8 
1.5 



2.2 
1.9 
1.5 



Sacramento Rh^er 

Applied Water 
Net Water 

Depletion 



0.7 
0.7 
0.2 



0.8 
0.8 
0.3 



1.2 
1.2 
0.4 



1.3 
1.3 
0.4 



0.5 
0.5 
0.2 



0.5 
0.5 
0.1 



San Joaquin River 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



0.5 
0.4 
0.2 



0.5 
0.4 
0.2 



1.0 
0.7 

0.4 



1.1 
0.8 
0.4 



0.5 
0.3 

0.2 



0.6 
0.4 
0.2 



Tulare i-alce 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



0.5 
0.2 
0.2 



0.5 
0.2 
0.2 



1.1 
0.5 
0.4 



1.1 
0.5 
0.4 



0.6 
0.3 
0.2 



0.3 
0.2 



North l.jihontan 

Applied Water (1) 
Net Water (1) 
Depletion (1) 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.1 
0.1 
0.0 



0.1 
0.1 
0.0 



0.1 
0.1 
0.0 



0.1 
0.1 
0.0 



South l-ahontan 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



0.2 
0.1 
0.1 



0.2 
0.1 
0.1 



0.6 
0.4 
0.4 



0.6 
0.4 
0.4 



0.4 
0.3 
0.3 



0.4 
0.3 
0.3 



15 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Summary of Volume II 



Table S-11. California Urban Water Demand (continued) 

(millions of acre -feet) 



IHydrologic Regions 



1990 
average drought 



2020 
average drought 



1990-2020 Change 
average drought 



Colorado Rh^er 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



0.3 


0.3 


0.6 


0.6 


0.3 


0.3 


0.2 


0.2 


0.4 


0.4 


0.2 


0.2 


0.2 


0^ 


0.4 


0.4 


0.2 


0^; 


7.8 


8.1 


12.6 


13.1 


4.8 


5.0 


6.7 


7.0 


10.5 


11.0 


3.8 


4.0 


5.7 


6.0 


8.5 


8.9 


2.9 


2.9 



Total 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



(1) North Lahontan 1990 urban applied and net water demand is 0.04 MAF and the depletion is 0.001 MAR 

Agricultural Water Demand 

To compute agricultural water demand, the California Water Plan integrates the results of three fore- 
casting methods used to project irrigated agricultural acreage and crop type: 

O Review of local crop acreage trends along with the availability of water and impacts of 

urban encroachment; 

O Crop Market Outlook; and 

O Central Valley Production Model. 

Every five to seven years since 1948, DWR has surveyed agricultural land use to help assess the 
locations and amounts of irrigated crops. Acreages of crops grown are estimated on a yearly basis, using 
the annual crop data produced by county Agricultural Commissioners, adjusted on the basis of DWR land 
use surveys, and estimates of urban expansion onto irrigated agricultural land. 

The Crop Market Outlook is based on the expert opinion of bankers, farm advisors, commodity mar- 
keting specialists, and others regarding trends in factors which affect crop production in California. Sev- 
eral factors are evaluated, but the four primary ones are: (1) the current and future demand for food and 
fiber by the world's consumers; (2) the shares of the national and international markets for agricultural 
productions that are met by California's farmers and livestock producers; (3) technical factors, such as 
crop yields, pasture carrying capacities, and livestock feed conversion ratios; and (4) competing output 
from dryland (non-irrigated) acres in other states. The results determine the projected future potential 
California production of various crops. 

The Central Valley Production model is an economic model which accounts for crop production costs 
in different areas of the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys in conjunction with the effect of overall pro- 
duction levels on the market prices for California crops. This helps to estimate how the total California 
production will be distributed among counties. 

Some crop shifts are expected to happen as growers move from low value and high water use crops 
to high value and low water use crops. Alfalfa and pasture lands are projected to decrease by about 



16 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Summary of Volume II 



330,000 acres mostly in the San Joaquin and Tulare Lake regions. Crop acreages expected to increase 
include vegetables, vineyard, and nuts (almonds and pistachios). 

The 1990 level (base year) crop acreage and crop types are based on agricultural land use surveys 
which have been normalized to take into account the impact of the 1 987-92 drought, government set 
aside programs, and other annual crop acreage fluctuations. Tables S-12 and S-13 show the 1990 and 
2020 level California crop and irrigated acreage by hydrologic region, respectively. Projections of agri- 
cultural water needs are based on: (1) agricultural acreage forecasts, (2) crop type forecasts, (3) crop unit 
applied water and unit evapotranspiration of applied water values (in acre-feet for each crop acre), and 
(4) estimates of future water conservation. 



Table S-12. California Crop and Irrigated Acreage by Hydrologic Regioni 

1990 
(normalized, in thousands of acres) 



Irrigated Crop 


NC 


SF 


CC 


SC 


SR 


SJ 


TL 


NL 


SL 


CR 


Total 


Grain 


82 


2 


28 


11 


303 


182 


297 


6 


1 


76 


988 


Rice 














494 


21 


1 


1 








517 


Cotton 

















178 


1,029 








37 


1,244 


Sugar Beets 


2 





5 





75 


64 


35 








35 


216 


Com 


1 


1 


3 


5 


104 


181 


100 








8 


403 


Other Field 


3 


1 


16 


4 


155 


121 


135 





1 


55 


491 


Alfalfa 


53 





27 


10 


141 


226 


345 


43 


34 


255 


1,134 


Pasture 


121 


5 


20 


20 


357 


228 


44 


110 


19 


31 


955 


Tomatoes 








14 


9 


120 


89 


107 








13 


352 


Other Truck 


21 


10 


321 


87 


55 


133 


204 


1 


2 


190 


1,024 


Almonds/ 
Pistachios 














101 


245 


164 











510 


Other Decidu- 
ous 


7 


6 


20 


3 


205 


147 


177 





4 


1 


570 


Citrus/Olives 








18 


164 


18 


9 


181 








29 


419 


Grapes 


36 


36 


56 


6 


17 


184 


393 








20 


748 


Total Crop 
Areai 


326 


61 


528 


319 


2,145 


2,008 


3,212 


161 


61 


750 


9,571 


Double Crops 








98 


30 


44 


53 


65 








102 


392 


irrigated l^nd 
Area 


326 


61 


430 


289 


2,101 


1,955 


3,147 


161 


61 


648 


9,179 



Total crop area is the land area plus the amount of land with multiple crops. 



17 



Bulletm 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Summary of Volume n 



Table S-13. California Crop and Irrigated Acreage 

by Hydrologic Region 2020 (Forecasted) 

(thousands of acres) 



Irrigated Crop 


NO 


SF 


CO 


SO 


SR 


SJ 


TL 


NL 


SL 


OR 


Total 


Grain 


72 


2 


23 


1 


295 


179 


258 


9 





80 


920 


Rice 














482 


15 





1 








498 


Cotton 

















178 


949 








67 


1,194 


Sugar Beets 


10 





5 





72 


45 


25 








40 


197 


Com 


1 





6 


2 


115 


183 


98 


1 





3 


409 


Other Field 


3 


1 


15 


1 


158 


122 


130 





1 


26 


456 


Alfalfa 


65 





24 


6 


152 


156 


240 


53 


26 


226 


947 


Pasture 


122 


4 


15 


6 


320 


171 


22 


106 


19 


30 


815 


Tomatoes 








15 


4 


132 


88 


85 








14 


339 


Other Truck 


28 


11 


347 


43 


65 


201 


350 


2 


1 


203 


1,250 


Almonds/ 
Pistachios 














125 


263 


173 











561 


Other 
Deciduous 


7 


6 


19 


3 


217 


151 


178 





2 


1 


584 


Citrus/Olives 








16 


116 


29 


11 


190 








30 


392 


Vineyard 


38 


40 


81 


3 


24 


189 


363 








15 


753 


Total Crop Area 


346 


64 


566 


185 


2,186 


1,952 


3,061 


171 


49 


735 


9,315 


Double Crops 








137 


12 


72 


68 


90 








123 


501 


irrigated Land 
Area 


346 


64 


429 


173 


2,114 


1,884 


2,971 , 


171 


49 


612 


8,814 



Agricultural water needs were evaluated by determining crop types and acreages for each region. 
Current projections indicate that irrigated agricultural acreage will decline by about 365,000 acres be- 
tween 1990 and 2020, from 9.2 million acres to about 8.8 million acres. This decline represents a 
700,000 acre reduction from a peak in 1980. 

For the State as a whole, agricultural annual net water demand will decrease by about 1 .9 MAF, 
from 27 MAF in 1990 to 25.1 MAF in 2020. Many of agriculture's unit applied water values have de- 
creased during the past decade. Part of this decrease is due to improvements in irrigation efficiency and 
increased emphasis on water conservation since the 1976-77 drought. Table S-14 shows the 1990 level 
and projections of agricultural water demands by hydrologic region. For a comprehensive analysis of 
agricultural water use, refer to Volume I, Chapter 7. 



18 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Summary of Volume 11 



Table S-14. California Agricultural Water Demand 
(millions of acre -feet) 



Hydrologic Regions 



1990 
average drought 



2020 
average drought 



1990-2020 Change 
average drought 



North Coast 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



0.8 
0.7 
0.6 



0.9 
0.8 
0.6 



0.9 
0.8 
0.6 



1.0 
0.8 
0.7 



0.1 
0.1 
0.0 



0.1 
0.0 
0.1 



San Francisco 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



0.1 
0.1 
0.1 



0.1 
0.1 
0.1 



0.1 
0.1 

0.1 



0.1 
0.1 
0.1 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



Central Coast 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 




1.2 
1.0 
1.0 



1.2 
0.9 
0.9 



1.2 
1.0 
1.0 



0.1 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



South Coast 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



0.7 
0.6 
0.6 



0.8 
0.7 
0.7 



0.4 
0.4 
0.4 



0.4 
0.4 
0.4 



-0.3 
-0.2 
-0.2 



-0.4 
-0.3 
-0.3 



Sacramento Rh^er 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



7.8 
6.8 

5.5 



8.6 
7.3 
6.1 



7.6 
6.5 

5.4 



8.3 
7.0 
6.1 



-0.2 
-0.3 
-0.1 



-0.3 

-0.3 

0.0 



San Joaquin River 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 




6.8 
6.2 
5.1 



5.7 
5.2 
4.4 



6.1 
5.6 
4.7 



-0.6 
-0.6 
-0.3 



-0.7 
-0.6 
-0.4 



Tulare Lalce 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



9.6 
7.9 
7.9 



9.8 
8.1 
8.1 



8.8 

7.3 
7.3 



9.0 
7.5 
7.4 



-0.8 
-0.6 
-0.6 



-0.8 
-0.6 

-0.7 



North Lahontan 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 




0.6 
0.5 
0.4 



0.5 
0.5 
0.4 



0,6 
0.5 
0.4 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



South Lahontan 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 




0.3 
0.2 
0.2 



0.3 
0.2 
0.2 



0.0 
-0.1 
-0.1 



0.0 
-0.1 
-0.1 



19 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Summary of Volume TL 



Table S-14. California Agricultural Water Demand (continued) 

(millions of acre -feet) 



Hydrologic Regions 



1990 2020 1990-2020 Change 

average drought average drought average drought 



Colorado River 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



3.7 
3.4 
3.4 



3.7 
3.4 
3.4 



3.4 
3.2 

3.2 



3.4 
3.2 
3.2 



-0.3 
-0.2 
-0.2 



-0.3 
-0.2 



Total 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



30.9 32.8 28.9 30.4 -2.0 

27.0 28.4 25.1 26.3 -1.9 

24.4 25.8 22.9 24.2 -1.5 




Environmental Water Demand 

Estimates of environmental water demand are based on water needs of managed fresh water wetlands 
(and Suisun Marsh), environmental instream flow needs. Delta outflow, and wild and scenic rivers. Wet- 
lands water needs were tabulated from investigation of existing public and private wildlife refuges and 
inclusion of additional wetlands water demand required by the CVP Improvement Act of 1992. Envi- 
ronmental instream flow needs were compiled by reviewing existing fishery agreements, water rights, 
and court decisions pertaining to water needs of aquatic resources of the stream. Additional flows in the 
Trinity River, required by the CVPIA, are also included in the environmental instream demand. Environ- 
mental water needs in drought years are considerably lower than in average years, reflecting the variabil- 
ity of the natural flows of rivers and lower fishery flow requirements such as in D-1485 for the Bay /Del- 
ta during drought. Table S-15 summarizes environmental water demands by hydrologic region. A more 
comprehensive discussion of environmental water demands is presented in Volume I, Chapter 8. 



20 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Summary of Volume n 



Table S-15. California Environmental Water Needs 

(millions of acre-feet) 



Hydrologic Regions 



average 



1990 2020 

drought average drought 



1990-2020 Change 
average drought 



North Coast 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



19.2 


9.0 


19.1 


8.9 


19.1 


8.9 



19.4 
19.2 
19.2 



9.2 
9.0 
9.0 



0.2 
0.1 
0.1 



0.2 
0.1 
0.1 



San Francisco 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



4.8 
4.8 
4.8 



3.3 
3.3 
3.3 



4.8 
4.8 
4.8 



3.3 
3.3 
3.3 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 

0.0 



Central Coast 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



o.cf 

0.0 
0.0 



South Coast 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



Sacramento River 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



3.9 
3.7 
0.2 



3.5 
3.3 
0.2 



4.4 
4.2 
0.2 



4.0 
3.9 
0.2 



0.5 
0.5 
0.0 



0.5 
0.6 
0.0 



San Joaquin River 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



0.6 
0.5 
0.2 



0.5 
0,4 
0.2 



0.7 
0.6 
0.3 



0.6 
0.5 
0.3 



0.1 
0.1 
0.1 



O.f 

0.1 

0.1 



Tulare Liike 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.1 
0.1 
0.1 



0.1 
0.1 
0.1 



0.1 
0.1 
0.1 



0.1 
0.1 
0.1 



North Lahontan 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



South L.ahontan 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



0.1 
0.1 
0.1 



0.1 
0.1 
0.1 




0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



21 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Summary of Volume n 



Table S-15. California Environmental Water Needs (continued) 

(millions of acre-feet) 



Hydrologic Regions 



average 



1990 
drought 



average 



2020 
drought 



1990-2020 
average 



Change 
drought 



Colorado Rh^er 




■1 










Applied Water 


0.0 


H 0.0 


0.0 


0.0 


0.0 


0.0^ 


Net Water 


0.0 


B ^-^ 


0.0 


0.0 


0.0 


• 


Depletion 


0.0 


m 0.0 


0.0 


0.0 


0.0 


OM 


Total 












H 


Applied Water 


28^ 


B 16-4 


29.5 


17.3 


0.9 


0^ 

i 


Net Water 


2&2 


B ^^'^ 


29.0 


16.9 


0.8 


0.S 


Depletion 


24.4 


12.7 


24.7 


13.0 


0.3 


0^ 



Demand Reduction — Water Conservation 

Water conservation has become an accepted method for helping reduce water demand in California. 
Therefore, water conservation, including urban Best Management Practices and agricultural Efficient Wa 
ter Management Practices, was incorporated into water demand computations and projections of demand 
to 2020. More than 100 of California's major urban water agencies have agreed to BMPs. Those mea- 
sures, which are detailed in Chapter 6 of Volume I, are projected to reduce urban annual applied water 
demand by about 1.3 MAP by 2020. The annual depletion and net water reduction from urban BMPs 
could amount to 935,000 AF. This amount is in addition to 400,000 AF annual net savings as the result 
of urban conservation measures put into place between 1980 and 1990. Agricultural water conservation, 
land retirement, and crop shifting would reduce agricultural annual applied water by about 1 .9 MAP by 
2020. Agricultural water conservation, through EWMPs, could reduce agricultural annual applied water 
by about 710,000 AF by 2020. As a result, annual agricultural water depletions are expected to be re- 
duced by 330,000 AF by 2020. Although water conservation measures will reduce water demand, they 
alone are not sufficient to eliminate projected shortages during the next 30 years with available supplies^ 

Table S-16 summarizes annual applied water reductions and depletions due to conservation from 
1990 to 2020 by hydrologic region. Impacts of water conservation on depletions vary greatly, depending 
on the opportunity for water reuse within an area. For example, Sacramento River Region water is re- 
used extensively, thus the reduction of 265,000 AF of applied agricultural water will not result in any 
reduction in depletion for the region. Effective water conservation in any region is the reduction in 
depletion, which is defined as reduction of the ETAW, irrecoverable losses from distribution systems, 
outflow to em ocean or a salt sink. Therefore, a larger water savings potential exists in the western San 
Joaquin Valley, Colorado River, and coastal regions, where excess applied water generally enters saline i 
sinks (Salton Sea or the ocean) or saline ground water basins and cannot be economically reused. Out- 
flow from water users within the Sacramento region is generally "reused" within the region and is also 
used to maintain water quality and flow standards in the Bay-Delta. Reductions in applied water can 
reduce pumping and treatment costs and diversions from streams, thus benefiting fish and wildlife. Ho^ 
ever, care must be taken to look at impacts on downstream reuse such as other farms or managed fresh 
water wetlands that rely on excess applied water from upstream farms. 



22 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Summary of Volume II 



Table S-16. Annual Applied Water and Depletion Reductions 

Due to Conservation 
from 1990 to 2020 by Hydrologic Region 

(thousands of acre-feet) 





Urban 


Agricultural 




Total 


HSA 


Appiied 

Water 

Reductions 


Reductions 
in Depletion 


^^!^ Reductions in 
ReS!.ctlons °«P'««°" 


"^^^ Reductions in 
Reductions DeP'etion 


NC 


65 


55 





65 


55 


SF 


250 


250 





250 


250 


CC 


30 


30 


20 


50 


30 


SC 


610 


490 


65 10 


675 


500 


SR 


110 


25 


265 


375 


25 


SJ 


60 


20 


40 20 


155 


80 


TL 


65 


20 


90 90 


115 


70 


NL 


5 








5 





SL 


50 


10 


10 10 


60 


20 


CR 


40 


35 


200 200 


240 


235 


Total 


1,285 


935 


710 330 


1,990 


1,265 



California Water Balance 

I The California water balance. Table S-17, compares total net water demand with supplies from 1990 
through 2020. (Delta supplies assume SWRCB's D-1485 operating criteria without endangered species 

' actions.) Average annual supplies for the 1990 level of development are generally adequate to meet aver- 
age demands. However, during drought, 1990 level supplies are insufficient to meet demand, which re- 
sults in a shortage of over 2.7 MAF under D-1485 operating criteria. In drought years 1991 and 1992, 
these shortages were reflected in urban mandatory water conservation, agricultural land fallowing and 
crop shifts, reduction of environmental flows, and short-term water transfers. 

Projected 2020 net demand for urban, agricultural, and environmental water needs amounts to 66.4 
, MAF in average years and 55.7 MAF in drought years, after accounting for future reductions of 1.3 MAF 
j in net water demand due to increased water conservation efforts (resulting from implementation of urban 

BMPs, and increased agricultural irrigation efficiencies) and another 0.15-MAF reduction due to future 
. land retirement. These demand amounts could increase by 1 to 3 MAF depending on the outcome of a 
' number of actions being taken to protect aquatic species (see Volume I, Chapter 8). 

By 2020, without Level I water management programs, an annual shortage of 2.2 to 4.2 MAF could 
occur during average years depending on the outcome of various actions taking place to protect aquatic 
■■ecies. This shortage is considered chronic and indicates the need for implementing long-term water 
supply augmentation and management measures to improve water service reliability. Similarly, by year 



I 



23 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Summary of Volume n 

2020, annual drought year shortages could amount to 5.8 to 7.8 MAF under D-1485 operating criteria, 
also indicating the need for long-term measures. 

However, water shortages would vary from region to region and sector to sector. For example, the 
South Coast Region's population is expected to increase to over 25 million people by 2020, requiring an 
additional average year water supply of 1 .5 MAF. Population growth and increased demand combined 
with a possibility of reduced supplies from the Colorado River means the South Coast Region's annual 
shortages for 2020 could amount to 0.4 MAF for average years and 1 .0 MAF in drought years. Projected 
shortages would be larger if solutions to complex Delta problems are not found and proposed local water 
management programs and additional facilities for the SWP are not constructed. 

Level I water management options could reduce ground water overdraft and projected shortages in 
2020 by implementing short-term drought management options (demand reduction through urban ration- 
ing programs or water transfers that reallocate existing supplies through use of reserve supplies and agri- 
cultural land fallowing programs) and long-term demand management and supply augmentation options 
(increased water conservation, agricultural land retirement, additional waste water recycling, benefits of a 
long-term Delta solution, more conjunctive use programs, and additional south-of-the-Delta storage 
facilities). These factors combined leave a potential shortfall in annual supplies of about 1.6 to 3.6 MAF 
in average years and 2.5 to 4.5 MAF in drought years that must be made up by future water supply aug- 
mentation and demand management programs shown as Level n options. (Volume I, Chapter 1 1 explains 
these options.). 



24 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Summary of Volume II 



Table S-17. California Water Balance 
(millions of acre -feet) 



Net Demand/Suppiy/Balance 



1990 



2020 



average drought average drought 



Net Demand 

Urban - with 1 990 level of conservation 

- reductions due to long-term conservation measures (Level I) 
Agricultural - with 1990 level of conservation 

- reductions due to long-term conservation measures (Level I) 

- land retirement in poor drainage areas of San Joaquin Valley (Level 1) 
Environmental 

Other 
Subtotal 

Proposed Additional Environmental Water Demands^ 

Case I - Hypothetical 1 MAF 

Case II -Hypothetical 2 MAF 

Case III - Hypothetical 3 MAF 



6.7 



27.0 



28.2 

1.8 

63.7 



7.1 



28.3 



16.1 

1.7 

53.2 



11.4 
-0.9 
25.5 
-0.4 
-0.1 
29.1 
1.8 
66.4 

1.0 
2.0 
3.0 



11.9 
-0.9 
26.8 
-0.4 
-0.1 
16.9 
1.5 
55.7 

1.0 
2.0 
3.0 



Total Net Demand 
Case I 
Case II 
Case ill 



63.7 



53.2 



Total Water Supplies 



63.7 



50.5 



67.4 
68.4 
69.4 



65.2 



56.7 
57.7 
58.7 



Water Supplies w/Existing Facilities Under D-1485 Operating Criteria for Delta Exports 

Developed Supplies 

Surface Water 28.0 22.2 28.4 21.7 

Groundwater 7.5 12.2 8.3 12.9 

Ground Water Overdraft 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.7 

Subtotal 36.5 35.4 37.4 35.3 

Dedicated Natural Flow 27.2 15.1 27.8 15.6 



50.9 



Demand/Supply Balance 
Case i 
Case 11 
Case ill 



0.0 



-2.7 



-2.2 
-3.2 
-4.2 



-5.8 
-6.8 
-7.8 



Level I Water Management Options: ^ 

Long-Term Supply Augmentation 

Reclaimed 

Local 

Central Valley Project 

State Water Project 
Short-term Drought Management 

Potential Demand Management 

Drought Water Transfers 
Subtotal- Level I Water Management Options: 
Net Ground or Surface Water Use Reduction Resulting from Level I Programs 



1.0 
0.8 
1^ 



0.5 
0.0 
0.0 
0.7 



1.2 

■0.6 



0.5 
0.3 
0.0 
0.9 

1.0 
0.8 
3.5 

-0.2 



Net Total Demand Reduction/Supply Augmentation 


- 


1.6 


0.6 


3.3 


Remaining Demand/Supply Balance Requiring Future Level II Options 


0.0 


-0.9 






Case 1 


- 


- 


-1.6 


-2.5 


Case II 


- 


— 


-2.6 


-3.5 


Case III 


- 


- 


-3.6 


-4.5 



^ Proposed Environmental Water Demands-Case l-lll envelope potential and uncertain demands that have immediate and future conse- 
quences on supplies available from the Delta, beginning with actions in 1992 and 1993 to protect winter-run salmon and Delta smelt (ac- 
tions which could also indirectly protect other fish species). 

^ Protection of fish and wildlife and a long-term solution to complex Delta problems will determine the feasibility of several water supply 
augmentation proposals and their water supply benefits. 



25 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Summary of Volume n 

Local Water Supply Issues 

The following highlights local issues of concern. Each regional chapter contains more specific in- 
formation on water supply issues affecting that region. 

In the North Coast Region, a number of smaller communities have continuing water supply reliabil- 
ity problems, often related to the lack of economic base to support water management and development 
costs. Several small communities along the coast, such as Moonstone, Smith River, and Klamath, either 
experience chronic water shortages or have supplies inadequate to meet projected growth. Water use is 
already low due to conservation, so most of these problems will have to be solved by either constructing 
or upgrading community water systems. 

Marin Municipal Water District in the San Francisco Bay Region has relied on imported supply 
from Sonoma County Water Agency and extensive conservation efforts by its customers to ensure ade- 
quate supplies throughout the recent drought. Without supplemental supplies, the district estimates a 40 
percent deficiency once every 10 years. MMWD negotiated an agreement with SCWA to import an addi- 
tional 10,000 AF. This could decrease the MMWD deficiency to about 10 percent. 

Imported supplies by the City of San Francisco and East Bay Municipal Utilities District also suf- 
fered deficiencies during the recent drought. During 1991, the City of San Francisco was able to reduce 
expected rationing from 45 to 25 percent through purchases of 50,000 AF from the 1991 State Drought 
Water Bank and 20,000 from Placer County Water Agency. Customers were still required to reduce in- 
door use by 10 percent and outdoor use by 60 percent. 

Water supplies in much of the Central Coast Region are greatly dependant upon the region's 
ground water basins whose storage is small and fluctuates from year to year. Since ground water and 
limited local surface supplies are its primary source of water, the region is vulnerable to droughts. As 
ground water extractions exceed ground water replenishment, several of the region's coastal aquifers are 
experiencing overdraft conditions, allowing sea water to permeate into the freshwater aquifers. The re- 
cent drought required many communities in the region to implement stringent water conservation pro- 
grams. The City of Santa Barbara constructed a sea water desalination plant to improve its water service 
reliability. 

The South Coast Region is home to more than one half of the State's population, 16 million people. 
The region's population is expected to increase to more than 25 million people by 2020. Such growth 
poses several critical water supply difficulties, most notably increased demand with limited ability to in- 
crease supply. Further, imports from Mono Lake and the Colorado River will be reduced and limits on 
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta exports imposed by endangered species actions could further reduce wa- 
ter service reliability in the South Coast Region. MWDSC has several programs in progress to improve 
its water delivery and supply capability, including the construction of Domenigoni Valley Reservoir, and 
supports improved Delta transfer capabilities to improve reliability of its SWP supplies. 

Sacramento Valley water users are concerned about protecting their area's ground water resources 
from export. Organized ground water management efforts in the Sacramento River Region are current- 
ly under way in Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Shasta, Tehama, and Yolo counties. Also, several foothill areas 
that rely heavily on ground water are finding those supplies limited. With many people relocating to 
these areas, concern about ground water availability and the potential for contamination is increasing. In 



26 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Summary of Volume II 

many areas within this region, there is no readily available alternative water supply if the ground water 
becomes depleted or contaminated. 

Flood protection is another major concern for the region, especially along the Sacramento and Ameri- 
can rivers near Sacramento. In 1991 , the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers completed a feasibility report 
and environmental documentation for a flood detention dam at the Auburn site in combination with levee 
modification along the lower American River to increase flood protection for the Sacramento area. The 
report, however, generated much controversy over whether Auburn Dam should be a flood detention only 
(dry dam) or multipurpose dam. A separate effort is now under way by the USER and local sponsors to 
evaluate a multipurpose reservoir. 

Foothill areas of both the San Joaquin River and TYilare Lake regions face limited water supplies. 
The San Joaquin Valley, the largest block of irrigated land in California, contains about 5.5 million acres. 
Major concerns for this region's agricultural community are agricultural drainage disposal and treatment 
costs and potential reduction of imported supplies. The CVP and SWP supplies will be reduced by the 
CVP Improvement Act of 1 992 and by endangered species actions in the Delta. 

In the North Lahontan Region years of disputes over the waters of the Truckee and Carson rivers 
led to the 1 990 enactment of the Truckee-Carson-Pyramid Lake Water Rights Settlement Act. This fed- 
eral act makes an interstate allocation of the rivers between California and Nevada, provides for the 
settlement of certain Native American water rights claims, and provides for water supplies for specified 
environmental purposes in Nevada. The act allocates to Califomia: 23,000 AF annually in the Lake Ta- 
hoe Basin, 32,000 AF annually in the Truckee River Basin below Lake Tahoe, and water corresponding 
to existing water uses in the Carson River Basin. Provisions of the Settlement Act, including the inter- 
state water allocations, will not take effect until several conditions are met, including negotiation of the 
Truckee River Operating Agreement required by the act. 

Growth has long been a major issue in the Tahoe Basin and strict controls have been adopted by local 
agencies under the lead of the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency. These controls have been very effec- 
tive. For example, the City of South Lake Tahoe grew by only 4 percent in the 1 980s, while population 
of the Lassen County portion of the region increased by nearly 30 percent over the same period. A major 
contributor to Lassen's growth was the construction of the Califomia Correctional Center-Susanville, 
which houses about 4,000 inmates and employs a staff of about 1 ,000. Potential ground water export 
from the Honey Lake Valley is a controversial issue in the North Lahontan Region. The Truckee Mead- 
ows Project is proposed to export at least 13,000 AF of ground water annually from the Nevada portion 
of Honey Lake Valley to the Reno area. Lassen County and the Pyramid Lake Paiute Indian Tribe op- 
pose the project on the grounds that it would deplete the local ground water supply and harm the environ- 
ment. Presently, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management is preparing an Environmental Impact Statement 
for a pipeline that would take the water from Honey Lake to the north Reno area. The EIS also covers 
the area of export and the area of import. 

Water exports from the South Lahontan Region have been the subject of litigation since the early 
1970s. In 1972, the County of Inyo sued the City of Los Angeles claiming that increased ground water 
pumping for export was harming the Owens Valley. Consequently, the City of Los Angeles and Inyo 
County implemented enhancement projects to mitigate the impacts of ground water pumping. In 1989, 



27 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Summary of Volume n 

the parties reached agreement on the long-term ground water management plan for Owens Valley and 
the EIR was accepted by the court. 

Another long standing issue is the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power diversions from 
Mono Lake tributaries and the impact of these diversions on the lake level. As a result of extensive liti- 
gation between the City of Los Angeles and a number of environmental groups, LADWP is now prohib- 
ited by court order from diverting from the tributaries until the lake level stabilizes at 6,377 feet above 
sea level. 

The Colorado River Region faces increasingly difficult issues involving water quality. In the late 
1960s, 1970s, and early 1980s, the Salton Sea suffered from high water levels caused by increased agri- 
cultural runoff, treated urban waste water, and above average rainfall. In 1984, the State Water Resources 
Control Board, responding to a farmer's lawsuit, adopted Water Right Decision 1600, and forced Imperial 
Irrigation District to prepare a conservation program and take other steps to improve its delivery system. 
Imperial Irrigation District agreed to follow a nine-year plan designed to conserve irrigation water and 
lower the Salton Sea's water level by about 8 feet. The sea level has stabilized during recent years, due 
primarily to conservation measures taken by IID. However, salinity concentrations have increased at a 
rate of about 500 parts per million per year. Higher salinity has harmed fish and wildlife as well as the 
recreational resources in the area. Since 1987, the Salton Sea task force has been studying the sea's prob- 
lems to find a way to continue its viability to support various aquatic species. The Salton Sea dilemma 
illustrates the complexity and opportunities for cooperative solutions of water management issues in 
California. 

Public Involvement 

California's water policies are still evolving as new statutes, court decisions, and agreements become 
effective. In light of this, the California legislature passed and Govemor Wilson signed AB 799 in 1991 
requiring the California Water Plan be updated every 5 years. This water plan update was developed with 
extensive public involvement including an outreach advisory committee, made up of urban, agricultural, 
and environmental interests. This committee was established in June 1992 to review and comment on the 
adequacy of work in progress. That process has been valuable in developing Bulletin 160-93 into a com- 
prehensive water plan for water management in California. / 



* * * 



28 



Draft of The California Water Plan Update 



Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 



NORTH COAST REGION 




A wild and scenic river in Trinity county. 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Coast Region 



NORTH COAST REGION 

The North Coast Hydrologic Region comprises all of the California area tributary to the ocean from 
the mouth of Tomales Bay north to the Oregon border and east along the border to a point near Goose 
Lake. It encompasses over 12 percent of the State's area, including redwood forests, inland mountain 
valleys, and the desert-like Modoc Plateau. 

Much of the region is mountainous and rugged. Only 13 percent of the land is classified as valley or 
mesa, and more than half of that is in the northeastern part around the upper Klamath River basin. The 
dominant topographic features in the region are the California Coast Ranges and the Klamath Mountains. 
The eastern boundary is formed by mountains that average around 6,000 feet above sea level with a few 
peaks over 8,000 feet. About 400 miles of ocean shoreline form the western boundary of the region. 

Average annual precipitation in the North Coast Region is 53 inches, ranging from over 100 inches in 
eastem Del Norte County to less than 15 inches in the Lost River drainage area of Modoc County. A rel- 
atively small fraction of the precipitation is in the form of snow. Only at elevations above 4,000 feet 
does snow remain on the ground for appreciable periods. The heavy rainfall concentrated over the moun- 
tains makes this region the most water abundant area of California. Mean annual runoff is about 29 
MAF, which constitutes about 40 percent of the State's total natural runoff. There is also 1 .86 MAF of 
average annual runoff flowing into the region from Oregon. 

Population 

Much of the North Coast Region is sparsely populated with most of the population living (nearly 60 
percent) in and around Santa Rosa, within the Russian River Basin. Most of the remainder of the popula- 
tion is concentrated in the Eureka-Arcata-McKinleyville area around Humboldt Bay and the Crescent 
City area. Other sizable towns include the county seats of Yreka (Siskiyou), Weaverville (Trinity), and 
Ukiah (Mendocino). 

Overall, the North Coast Region's population has grown from 467,890 in 1980 to 571,750 in 1990 
and accounts for 1.9 percent of California's population. During the 1980s, the population in the Santa 
Rosa area grew by 3 1 percent, due primarily to spillover from the Bay Area, while essentially no growth 
occurred in the Modoc and Siskiyou County portions of the region. Average annual population growth 
rate in the northern half of the region has been relatively slow at 3 percent. One exception is Crescent 
City, which had a population increase of 81 percent in 1991, resulting from the annexation of the new 
Pelican Bay State prison. Previous growth rates in Crescent City have been 6.5 percent and 14 percent in 
1989 and 1990, respectively. 

Rapid growth is projected for the Santa Rosa area over the next 30 years, while only moderate expan- 
sion is expected in Humboldt County. The traditional economic bases of timber, cattle, and fishing are in 

Region Characteristics 
Average Annual Precipitation: 53 inches Average Annual Runoff: 28,886,000 AF 

Land Area: 20,000 square miles 1990 Population: 571, 750 



29 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Coast Region 



a state of flux. Recreation, government, and retirees are becoming the major growth generating activities 
in the north part of the region. Table NC-1 shows regional population projections to 2020. 

Table NC-1. Population Projections 

(thousands) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 


Upper Klamath 


29 


34 


39 


43 


Lower Klamath - Smith 


46 


62 


75 


88 


Coastal 


160 


189 


211 


233 


Russian River 


337 


403 


464 


510 


Total 


572 


688 


789 


874 



Land Use 

About 97 percent of the land area is forest or range land. Much of this land lies within national fo- 
rests. State and national parks, and Indian reservations. A considerable amount of the remainder is pri- 
vately owned forest land, often held in large ownerships. Only about 325,000 acres (2.6 percent) of the 
region's area are irrigated. Of that total, 225,900 acres lie in the Upper Klamath River Basin, above the 
confluence of the Scott and Klamath rivers. (See Appendix C for maps of the planning subareas and land 
ownership in the region.) In the Upper Klamath area, the main irrigated crops are pasture and alfalfa, 
grain, and potatoes. Orchards and vineyards are found in the Russian River drainage area. Pasture, alfal- 
fa, and grain are the predominate crops in irrigated areas throughout the remainder of the region. 

Besides small areas of urban and agricultural development (mainly around the Santa Rosa and Eureka 
areas) land is used for timber production and wildlife habitat. Land use issues in the region include acti- 
vities causing soil erosion, such as road construction, gravel mining, and logging. Figure NC-1 shows 
land use in the North Coast Region. 

Water Supply 

About 94 percent of the region's 1990 level average water supply is dedicated natural runoff, primari- 
ly for wild and scenic rivers. Summer water supplies are limited throughout much of the area when rain- 
fall and runoff is much less. The few surface water supply projects that exist on tributary streams are 
small and provide limited carryover capacity to deal with extended months of low rainfall. Larger water 
supply projects include the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation's Klamath Project, the U.S. Army Corps of Engi- 
neers' Russian River Project (Lakes Mendocino and Sonoma), and the Humboldt Bay Municipal Water 
District's Ruth Reservoir and Eureka to McKinleyville distribution system. The largest reservoirs in the 
region (the Central Valley Project's Clair Engle Lake and the Corps' Lake Sonoma) export to adjacent 
hydrologic regions, while Clear Lake Reservoir supplies water to the USBR Klamath Project. Table 
NC-2 lists major reservoirs in the region. 



30 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Coast Region 






n. > 






Legend 


v^ 


Vr 1 




g Urban Land 


-2. 


N:A 




1 Inigated Land 




\ 


^- Region Water Transfers 

(1/XXrt of Acra-FMt pw Ymt) 


) 


S-, 



Sonoma PetaJuma 

Aqueduct 

25 



Figure NC-1. North Coast Region 
Land Use, Imports, Exports, and Water Supplies 



31 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Coast Region 



Table NC-2. Major Reservoirs 



Reservoir Name 


River 


Capacity (1 ,000 AF) 


Owner 


Upper Klamath 


Klamath 


873.3 


USBR 


Clear Lake 


Klamath 


526.8 


USBR 


Gerber 


Klamath 


94.3 


USBR 


Copco 


Klamath 


77.0 


PP&LCo. 


Iron Gate 


Klamath 


58.0 


PP&LCo. 


1 ake Shastina 


Shasta 


50.0 


Montague WCD 


Lewiston 


Trinity 


14.7 


USBR 


Clair Engle 


Trinity 


2,447.7 


USBR 


Ruth 


Mad 


51.8 


Humboldt Bay MWD 


Lake Pillsbury 


Eel 


80.5 


PG&E 


Lake Mendocino 


Russian 


122.4 


USAmny 

Corps of Engineers 


Warm Springs 
1 ake Sonoma 


Dry Creek 


381.0 


US Army 

Corps of Engineers 



PP&L = Pacific Power and Light Company 



PG&E = Pacific Gas and Electric Co. 



Supply with Existing Facilities 

The Klamath Project, in Klamath County, Oregon, and in Siskiyou and Modoc counties, was the first 
federal reclamation projects. It drained and reclaimed lakebed lands of Lower Klamath and Tule lakes 
and developed water supplies from the Klamath and Lost rivers to irrigate the reclaimed lands. The prin- 
cipal project storage facilities are Upper Klamath Lake in Oregon (873,300 AF) and Clear Lake Reservoir 
on the Lost River in California (527,000 AF). The project normally irrigates over 230,000 acres 
(100,(XX) of which lie in California) through a network of about 185 miles of canals with associated di- 
version dams, pumping plants, and drainage facilities. 

The Klamath River Basin Compact addresses interstate water sharing matters in the upper Klamath 
River and Lost River basins. Negotiated by the states of Oregon and California, approved by their re- 
spective Legislatures, and consented to by the U.S. Congress in 1957, the compact is to (1) facilitate or- 
derly development and use of water, and (2) further cooperation between the states in the equitable shar- 
ing of water resources. The compact is administered by the Klamath River Compact Commission, which 
is chaired by a federal representative appointed by the President. The commission provides a forum for 
communication t)etween the various interests concerned with water resources in the upper Klamath River 
Basin. Its recent activities have focused on water delivery reductions caused by the drought and operat- 
ing restrictions to protect two species of endangered sucker fish. Other pressing issues are water supplies 
for wildlife refuges and upper basin impacts on anadromous fisheries in the lower Klamath River. 



32 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Coast Region 



Figure NC-2. North Coast Region 

Water Supply Sources (Average Conditions) 

1990 level 




Other 
Federal* 

3% 



Reclaimed 



Local 

Surface 

Water 



*lncludes imports by local agencies and imports from other federal projects. 



The Bureau of Reclamation constructed the Trinity River Division in the early 1960s to augment 
CVP water supplies in the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys. The principal features of this part of the 
CVP are Trinity Dam and the 2.5 MAF Clair Engle Lake on the upper Trinity River and the 10.7-mile 
Clear Creek Tunnel beginning at Lewiston Dam and ending at Whiskeytown Lake in the Sacramento 
River Basin. Exports from the Trinity River began in May 1963 and, since 1980, have averaged 926,000 
AF annually. There are no in-basin deliveries of water from the Trinity River Division. However, the 



33 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Coast Region 



Central Valley Improvement Act of 1992 allocated an additional 123,000 AF to instream environmental 
use. 

The Russian River Project, constructed by the Corps of Engineers, includes Lake Mendocino 
(122,000 AF) formed by Coyote Dam on the East Fork of the Russian River near Ukiah and the Lake 
Sonoma (381, 000 AF) behind Warm Springs Dam on Dry Creek near Geyserville. Lake Mendocino was 
completed in 1958 and Lake Sonoma in 1982. Both reservoirs provide flood protection to the lower Rus- 
sian River area, reservoir recreation, and water supply for urban, irrigation, and instream uses. Most of 
the water supply made available by the Russian River Project is contracted to the Sonoma County Water 
Agency. The SCWA delivers about 29,000 AF per year via aqueduct to Santa Rosa, Rohnert Park, Cota- 
ti, and Forestville. In addition, the agency exports approximately 25,000 AF per year from the North 
Coast's Russian River Project to the San Francisco Bay Region. This water is delivered via several 
aqueducts to Novato, Petaluma, the Valley of the Moon, and Sonoma areas. 

The principal reaches and major tributaries of the Klamath, Eel, and Smith rivers are designated Wild 
and Scenic under federal and State law, and therefore are precluded from large scale water development. 
Figure NC-2 shows the region's 1990 level sources of supply and Table NC-3 shows water supplies with 
existing facilities and water management programs. 

Table NC-3. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities 

and Programs 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Supplies 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Sur^ce 


















Local 


438 


433 


451 


446 


470 


464 


483 


480 


Local Imports 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


Colorado River 


























CVP 


























Other federal 


471 


471 


471 


471 


471 


471 


471 


471| 


SWP 


























Ground water 


264 


283 


275 


296 


285 


308 


296 


317 


Overdraft 


























Reclaimed 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


Dedicated natural flow 


18,850 


8.704 


18,973 


8,827 


18,973 


8,827 


18,973 


8,827 


Total Supply 


20,037 


9,905 


20,184 


10,054 


20,213 


10,084 


20,237 


10,109 



Supplies with Additional Facilities 

Future water management options are presented in two levels to better reflect the status of investiga- 
tions required to implement them. 



34 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Coast Region 



O Level I options are those that have undergone extensive investigation and environmental analyses 
and are judged to have a high likelihood of being implemented by 2020. 

O Level II options are those that could fill the remaining gap between water supply and demand. 
These options require more investigation and alternative analyses. 

Most of the water demand within the North Coast Region is supplied by the above projects, and 
many other smaller local water developments. These water suppliers range from relatively large and well 
organized municipal systems serving communities such as Yreka, Weaverville, Hayfork, Willits, Crescent 
City, and Fort Bragg to small residential or agricultural water systems (usually based on ground water) in 
locations like Mendocino, Garberville and Shelter Cove. Future upgrades in these systems to improve 
water supply reliability are planned. These projects are generally relatively small local projects. For ex- 
ample, Weaverville Community Services District, supplied by East Weaver Creek, is planning to 
construct a 5-mile pipeline to the Trinity River to meet its future needs. 

The projected 30 percent increase in average urban water demand by 2020 can be provided largely by 
existing or upgraded water supply systems. However, there is currently no economically or environmen- 
tally feasible solution to. significantly augment dry-year irrigation supplies in the North Coast Region. 

Due to the absence of either large urban concentrations or extensive agriculture, and the cool and wet 
weather patterns, the North Coast did not experienced any large-scale water shortages during the 
1987-92 drought and most of this region did not have to reduce water use significantly. Unlike most oth- 
er regions, water conservation in the North Coast region does not benefit another hydrologic area where 
either the water supply originates in or flows to . However, water conservation can play a vital role in 
reducing urban demand and waste water treatment costs. 

Areas irrigated with surface water will likely continue to make-do with water available from existing 
facilities. A few additional wells are expected to augment irrigation supplies in the Butte Valley/Tule 
Lake area. Pressure for additional ground water development in areas like Scott and Shasta valleys will 
be greater if some salmon races are listed or if strict application of Department of Fish and Game code 
regulations reduce the supplies available from existing water developments or natural runoff. 

Present water supplies and modest expansion of local water sources will generally be adequate to 
meet the region's expected municipal and industrial demands over the next 30 years, and the Humboldt 
Bay-McKinleyville area will continue to be adequately served by Ruth Reservoir on the Mad River, with 
supplies possibly augmented by ground water. Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District's system may 
ultimately be expanded to serve the Trinidad-Moonstone area, which is experiencing deficiencies. How- 
ever, the system draws water from the Mad River through Ranney collector wells that are being undercut 
by erosion of stream bed gravels. HBMWD is investigating the problem and hopes to solve it soon. 

Crescent City has an adequate supply from the Smith River but needs to increase system transmis- 
sion and storage capacity. It may also be facing construction of an expensive surface water treatment fa- 
cility. Trinity County Waterworks District No. 1 serves the town of Hayfork from the 800-AF Ewing 
Reservoir and has plans for expanding its surface water system. Growth in the service area has almost 



35 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Coast Region 



reached the design capacity of the existing system, and the district plans to enlarge its offstream reservoir 
within the next few years. This expansion was planned at the time the project was constructed in the late 
1960s. The Weaverville CSD plans to divert from the Trinity River at Douglas City to provide needed 
future water supplies. 

Table NC^ shows water supplies with additional facilities and water management programs. 



Table NC-4. Water Supplies with Level I Water Management Programs 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Supplies 



1990 2000 2010 2020 

average drought average drought average drought average drought 



Surtece 

Local 

Local Imports 

Colorado River 

CVP 

Other federal 

SWP 
Ground water 
Overdraft 
Reclaimed 
Dedicated natural flow 



438 
2 



471 


264 



12 

18,850 



433 
2 



471 


283 



12 

8,704 



451 
2 



471 


272 



15 

18,973 



446 
2 



471 


293 



15 

8,827 



470 

2 





471 



279 



18 

18,973 




2 





471 



302 



18 

8,827 



483 
2 



471 


288 



21 

18,973 



Total 



20,037 9,905 20,184 10,054 20,213 10,084 20,238 10,110 



Water Use 

Although the North Coast Region produces nearly half of California's surface runoff, urban and agri- 
cultural water use within the region is relatively low because it is sparsely populated and has few irri- 
gated acres. Irrigation accounts for 746,000 AF of the region's water use, while municipal and industrial 
(M&I) use is 169,000 AF. These water needs are generally met by small local developments and lim- 
ited ground water extractions. Because of economic and physical restrictions on development of new 
irrigated areas and the small estimated population growth, neither irrigation nor municipal and industrial 
uses are expected to increase greatly. Annual water use in the region is projected to increase only 75,000 
AF by 2020. 

Urban Water Use 

The current total urban water use in the North Coast Region, 169,000 AF per year, represents about 
2.5 percent of the State's total urban water use. Per capita use varies from around 130 gallons per day in 
the Humboldt Bay area to about 300 gallons per day in the warmer inland area of the Lost River Basin. 
Municipal use in areas directly influenced by the coastal climate is up slightly from the 1980 level, while 



36 



I Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Coast Region 



Figure NC-3. North Coast Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990 level 



Environmental 

95% 




Agricultural 

4% 



Urban 

1 1% 



Other 



jhe interior valleys remain level. Around 54,000 AF per year was used by high water using industries 
iprimarily wood and pulp processing plants in the Humboldt Bay area) in the 1 990 level of development. 
;liis has at least temporarily decreased by 22,000 AF per year as a result of the recent indefinite closure 
•f the Simpson pulp mill. This water will be retained in Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District's Ruth 
leservoir for future users or to supply the Simpson pulp mill if it reopens. Because of the present uncer- 
tainty over the length of the mill closure , the area's water use is projected to remain at preclosure levels 
jintil the year 2000. Table NC-5 shows urban water demands for the region to 2020. 



37 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Coast Region 



Figure NC-4. North Coast Region 
Applied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990 level 



Governmental 

6% 




38 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Coast Region 



Table NC-5. Urban Water Demand 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Planning Subareas 



1990 2000 2010 2020 

average drought average drought average drought average drought 



Upper Klamath 

Applied water demand 
Net water demand 
Depletion 



Total 



10 

10 

5 



10 

10 

5 



11 

11 

5 



11 

11 

5 



13 

13 

6 



13 

13 

6 



14 
14 

7 



14 

14 

7 



Lower Klamath -Smith 


















Applied water demand 


10 


11 


13 


14 


16 


17 


18 


19 


Net water demand 


10 


11 


13 


14 


16 


17 


18 


19 


Depletion 


6 


6 


8 


8 


9 


10 


11 


12 


Coastal 


















Applied water demand 


78 


80 


84 1 


84 


87 


88 


92 


93 


Net water demand 


78 


80 


84 


84 


87 


88 


92 


93 


Depletion 


71 


71 


75 


75 


77 


78 


80 


81 


Russian River 


















Applied water demand 


70 


76 


78 


86 


88 


96 


95 


104 


Net water demand 


70 


76 


78 


86 


88 


96 


95 


104 


Depletion 




28 


30 


31 


34 


35 


38 


38 


42 



Applied water demand 


169 


176 


186 


196 


203 


214 


219 


230 


Net water demand 


169 


176 


186 


196 


203 


214 


219 


230 


Depletion 


110 


112 


119 


123 


127 


132 


136 


142 



Volume 1 , chapters 6 and 7, of this report contains a detailed explanation of the methods used in es- 
jtimating regional water use. The impacts of water conservation and best management practices are also 
[discussed in those chapters. 

Agricultural Water Use 

Total irrigated acreage within the North Coast Region in 1990 was 326,000 acres. The number of 
irrigated acres in the region is expect to remain nearly level over the next three decades. Table NC-6 
summarizes irrigated land and Table NC-7 shows evapotranspiration of applied water by crop in the re- 

igion. Figure NC-5 shows 1990 crop acreages, evapotranspiration, and applied water for major crops. 

'The applied water and net demand shown in Table NC-8 were derived from irrigated acreages by apply- 
ing unit water use factors determined by DWR. These unit use factors, which are unique to each detailed 
analysis unit (a portion of a planning subarea), reflect local conditions of climate and cultural practices. 

, Applied water amounts vary with the source of water supply (surface or ground water and the type of wa- 
ter year). Drought year factors reflect the need for additional irrigation to replace water normally sup- 



I 



39 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Coast Region 



150 



Acres (X 1 ,000) 



120 



Acre-Feet p( 1 ,000) 



450 



360 



270 




180 



Grain Pasture Grapes 

Alfalfa Other Truck 

■Acreage ^ETAW ■Applied Water 



Figure NC-5. North Coast Region 
1990 Acreage, ETAW, and Appiied Water for Major Crops 



40 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Coast Region 



plied by rainfall and to meet higher than normal evapotranspiration demands. The trend of unit water use 
in the region is generally stable. The values employed in the trend calculations are representative of cur- 
rent water use in the region and estimates of future agricultural use are based on the 1 990 unit use values. 
Net agricultural water use is expected to increase by only one percent by 2020 in the region. 

Climate, soils, water supply, and remoteness from markets limit the crops that can be grown profit- 
ably throughout most of the region. In the inland valley areas, there is more irrigable land than can be 
irrigated with existing supplies. During dry years, the region experiences substantial water deficiencies 
that are particularly noticeable in the arid inland portions of the region. The agricultural trend in the past 
decade has been one of land consolidation and slow growth; this reflects the low crop values, lack of 
additional low-priced surface water supplies, and use of only the most economically developable ground 
water sources. 

Table NC-6. Irrigated Crop Acreage 

(thousands of acres) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 


2000 


20i0 


2020 




Upper Klamath 


227 


232 


236 


239 




Lower Klamath - Smith 


13 


13 


13 ife 


13 


1 


Coastal 


32 


34 


36 III 


1 38 




Russian River 


54 


55 


^ W^ 


56 




Total 


326 


334 


340 


346 





Table NC-7. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop 



Irrigated Crop 



Total 
Acres 
(1,000) 



Total ETAW 
(I.OOOAF) 



Irrigated Crop 



Total 
Acres 
(1,000) 



Total ETAW 
(I.OOOAF) 



Grain 
Sugar beets 
Com 

Other field 
Alfalfa 



82 
2 
1 
3 

53 



119 
4 
2 
4 

128 



Pasture 

Other deciduous 
Vineyard 
Other truck 

Total 



121 

7 

36 

21 

"326" 



253 
10 
26 
33 

"579" 



41 



Bulletiii 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Coast Region 



Table NC-8. Agricultural Water Demand 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 . 

average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 

average drought 


2020 

average drought 


Upper Klamath 


















Applied water demand 


664 


729 


689 


757 


709 


778 


721 


791 


Net water demand 


585 


589 


587 


592 


596 


601 


602 


607 


Depletion 


459 


5(» 


477 


524 


490 


539 


498 


548 


Lower Klamath -Smith 


















Applied water demand 


31 


31 


32 


32 


32 


32 


32 


32 


Net water demand 


29 


29 


29 


29 


29 


29 


29 


29 


Depletion 


22 


22 


22 


2Z 


22 


22 


22 


22 


Coastal 


















Applied water demand 


62 


63 


66 


68 


69 


71 


73 


75 


Net water demand 


62 


63 


64 


66 


68 


m 


72 


74 


Depletion 


49 


49 


51 


53 


54 


55 


56 


58 


Russian River 


















Applied water demand 


82 


92 


81 


91 


81 


91 


81 


91 


Net water demand 


69 


79 


68 


78 


68 


78 


68 


78 


Depletion 


62 


71 


61 


70 


61 


70 


61 


70 


Total 










' 








Applied water demand 


840 


916 


867 


947 


891 


971 


906 


989 


Net water demand 


745 


760 


748 


766 


761 


778 


771 


787 


Depletion 


592 


648 


611 


669 


627 


686 


638 


699 



Environmental Water Use 

The principal environmental water use for the region is for environmental instream needs. Table 
NC-9. The region's total dedicated natural runoff is 18.9 MAF in average years and 8.7 MAF in drought 
years. Wetland water needs for several national wildlife refuges amount to annual net water demands of 
237,000 AF, Table NC-10. 

Through the California Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1972, Califomians determined that the vast 
majority of water in the North Coast Region will remain in the rivers to preserve their free-flowing char- 
acter and provide for environmental uses. Most of the Eel, Klamath, and Smith rivers are designated 
wild and scenic and their waterways cannot be modified in a manner that affects their free-flowing pris- 
tine character. The Trinity River also receives protection under the federal Wild and Scenic River system. 
Such protection includes prohibitions to water resource project construction that could adversely affect 
the value of the rivers. The Trinity River is also protection under the federal Wild and Scenic River sys- 



42 



Bulletin 16ft-93 Administrative Draft 










North Coast Region 


tem, which similarly prohibits construction of facilities that a 


dversely affect the 


river's free-flowing and 


aesthetic values. 


















Table NC-9. Environmental Instream Water Needs 








(thousands of acre- 


-feet) 










stream 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 

average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Klamath River 


















' Applied water demand 


833 


833 


833 


833 


833 


833 


833 


833 


Net water demand 


833 


833 


833 


833 


833 


833 


833 


833 


Depletion 


833 


833 


833 


833 


833 


833 


833 


833 


Trinity River 


















Applied water demand 


217 


217 


340 


340 


340 


340 


340 


340 


Net water demand 


217 


217 


340 


340 


340 


340 


340 


340 


Depletion 


217 


217 


340 


340 


340 


340 


340 


340 


Wild and Scenic 


















Applied water demand 


17,800 


7,654 


17,800 


7,654 


17,800 


7,654 


17,800 


7,654 


Net water demand 


17,800 


7,654 


17,800 


7.654 


17,800 


7,654 


17,800 


7,654 


Depletion 


17,800 


7,654 


17,800 


7,654 


17,800 


7,654 


17,800 


7,654 


Total 
















M 


Applied water demand 


18,850 


8,704 


18,973 


8,827 


18,973 


8,827 


18,973 


8,827 


Net water demand 


18,850 


8,704 


18,973 


8,827 


18,973 


8,827 


18,973 


8,827 


Depletion 


18,850 


8,704 


18,973 


8.827 


18,973 


8,827 


18,973 


8.827 


Instream fishery needs on the Trinity River below Lewiston Dam 


have beer 


1 under si 


tudy. The 


study 


is expected to be finished in 


1996 and then 


given to 


Congress for revi 


2w. This 


study could result 


in even 


more water than the 1990 level of 340,000 AF per year bein^ 


I allocated to Trinity River instream flows 


and unavailable to the Sacramento River under the CVPIA. 













43 



Bulletiii 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Coast Region 



Table NC-10. Wetlands Water Needs 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Planning Subareas 



1990 2000 2010 2020 

average drought average drougtrt average drougtrt average drought 



Lower Klamath NWR 


















Applied water demand 


115 


115 


115^ 


^tt 


115 


115 


115 


115 


Net water demand 


77 


77 


77! 


^w 


77 


77 


77 


77 


Depletion 


76 


76 


76 


76 


76 


76 


76 


76 


Butte Valley WA 


















Applied water demand 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


Net water demand 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


Depletion 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


Clear Lake NWR 


















Applied water demand 


42 


42 


42 


42 


42 


42 


42 


42 


Net water demand 


28 


28 


28 


28 


28 


28 


28 


^ 


Depletion 


28 


28 


28 


28 


28 


28 


28 


28 


Tule Lake NWR 


















Applied water demarKJ 


180 


180 


180 


180 


180 


180 


180 


180 


Net water demand 


120 


120 


120 


120 


120 


120 


120 


120 


Depletion 


119 


119 


119 


119 


119 


119 


119 


119 


Shasta Valley Refuge 






1 


mmm 


• 








Applied water demand 








^1 


■■ 


4 


4 


4 


4 


Net water demand 








2* 


pup 


2 


2 


2 


2 


Depletion 








2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


Areata Marsh 


















Applied water demarx) 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


Net water demand 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


Depletion 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


Total 


















Applied water demand 


349 


349 


353 


353 


353 


353 


353 


353 


Net water demand 


237 


237 


239 


239 


239 


239 


239 


2^ 


Depletion 


235 


235 


237 


237 


237 


237 


237 


237 



The principal wetland uses of water occur in the Lx)wer Klamath, Tule Lake, and Clear Lake National 
Wildlife Refuges and the State's Butte Valley Wildlife Area. A major share of the wildlife water needs in 
Butte Valley are met by approximately 3,000 AF per year of ground water; the other refuges in the region 
are served from surface supplies. The prevalent crops grown in the refuges are wheat, alfalfa, barley, mil- 
let, and milo. Alkali bulrush is an important naturally occurring food source for wildlife. The predomi- 



44 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Coast Region 



nant types of wildlife using the refuges are Canadian, snow and white fronted geese; mallard, pintail, 
^adwall, teal, canvas back, and redhead ducks; and pheasant. Other wildlife species such as songbirds, 
raptors, shorebirds, antelope, and deer also depend heavily on the refuges and agricultural land during the 
winter. 

Environmental water use within this region will probably remain relatively unchanged to 2020. The 
absence of projected large-scale population growth and the abundance of water in this region leads to 
•datively stable long-term water use patterns. However, releases below existing dams could be modified 
in response to the findings of ongoing or future instream flow need studies for anadromous fisheries. 
Existing instream flow requirements downstream from a number of major dams are shown in Chapter 8 
of Volume I. 

Other Water Use 

Figure NC-6 shows water recreation areas in the North Coast Region. Millions of people throughout 
the State and nation come to the North Coast Region for recreation. The region is an area of rugged natu- 
ral beauty with some of the most renowned fishing streams in North America. It has diverse topography, 
including scenic ocean shoreline; a forested belt immediately inland, which includes more than half of 
California's redwoods; and extensive inland mountainous areas, including 10 wilderness areas, managed 
mainly by the U.S. Forest Service. Over 40 State parks and one national park are in the region. In addi- 
ion to the natural attractions, the area contains scores of small reservoirs which are extensively used for 
kecreation. Rafting and canoeing are popular on the rivers in the area. White water and river sports are 
particularly popular on the Smith, Klamath, Salmon, Trinity, Eel and Russian rivers. 

During 1990, the visitation to the parks in the region was over 10.5 million visitor-days. Public rec- 
reation use of national forests and small local reservoirs is probably several times that of parks. The job 
pase and economic value of travel and recreation has exceeded that of the lumber industry in some North- 
im California counties. Based on studies of recreation and economic development within California, the 
Idemand for recreation is expected to continue to grow. 



I 



( 
I 

45 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



>3 

S 



North Coast Region 



_0 R E G N 



6 



D E Hi^ / 
N R T E s 

\ 



J?i 



ver. 



iPa 



Lower 

Klamath 

Lake 



4. ^5 mIJ D 



Clear 
Lake 

9 
A 



^ -L/"^^ 




_/K ^^^ 


/ 


^^r 'Sl^^^^^^^^^ 








^-N-^^. 


r"^ 


•^ •' «»r^ 






^<5Z^ 


IX ^ J 4^ 




w /^ T 


10.11 



J - 



^ 



A Water Recreation Area 
• Hydroelectric Power Plant 
■• Federal Wild and Scenic River 



H U M 3 OVL D T 



lkiV\ 



^11 



14; 



18. 





I 


1 


^ 


l»A^ 




s 


A, 


«*^^ 


M 


D 0' 



N 



.23 



CINO 



. r 

<-^ > SONOMA 



1. Jedediah Smith Redwoods S.P. 

2. Iron Gate Reservoir 

3. Lower Klamath Lake 

4. Tule Lake 

5. Clear Lake 

6. Lake Earl 

7. Indian Tom Lake 

8. Medicine Lake 

9. Big Sage Lake 

10. Trinity Lake 

11. Clair Engle Lake 

12. Lewiston Lake 

13. Grizzly Creek Redwoods S.P. 

14. Humboldt Redwoods S.R. 

15. Ruth Reservoir 

16. Benbow Lake S.R A 

17. Richardson Grove S.P. 

18. Smithe Redwoods S.R. 

19. Standish-Hlckey S.R.A. 

20. Admiral William Standish S.RJ^ 

21. Lake Cleone 

22. Lake Pillsbury 

23. Van Damme S.P. 

24. Lake Mendocino 

25. Paul M. Dimmick Wayside Campground 

26. Anna Del S.P. 



N 




26. 



f 
10 20 



Figure NC-6. North Coast Region 
Water Recreation Areas 



46 



IvUetin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Coast Region 



Table NC-11. Total Water Demands 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Category of Use 


1990 

average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 

average drought 


'Urban 


















Applied water demand 


169 


176 


186 


196 


203 


214 


219 


230 


Net water demand 


169 


176 


186 


196 


203 


214 


219 


230 


Depletion 


110 


112 


119 


123 


127 


132 


136 


142 


Agricultural 


















Applied water demand 


840 


916 


867 


947 


891 


971 


906 


989 


Net water demand 


745 


760 


750 


765 


761 


777 


771 


787.7 


Depletion 


592 


648 


611 


6^ 


627 


686 


638 


699 


Environmental 


















Applied water demand 


19,199 


9,053 


19,326 


9,180 


19,326 


9,180 


19,326 


9,180 


Net water demand 


19,087 


8,941 


19,212 


9,066 


19,212 


9.066 


19,212 


9,066 


Depletion 


19,085 


8,939 


19,210 


9.064 


19,210 


9,064 


19,210 


9,064 


Other! 


















Applied water demand 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


Net water demand 


36 


35 


356 


35 


36 


35 


36 


35 


Depletion 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


Total 


















Applied water demand 


20,209 


10,146 


20,381 10,323 


20,421 


10,366 


20,452 


10,400 


Net water demand 


20,037 


9,912 


20,182 10,0621 


20,212 


10,092 


20,237 


10,118 


Depletion 


19,796 


9,708 


19,948 


9,864 


19,973 


9,891 


19,992 


9,914 



Includes conveyance losses, recreation uses, and energy production. 

Despite the importance of recreation to its economy, the region's consumptive water use for recre- 
tion is relatively minor. Table NC-1 1 shows the total water demands for this region. 

Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 

Generally, the moderate to low population growth in the North Coast Region is not creating any 
iressing water issues that cannot be solved by local water management, planning, and system upgrading 
>r construction. The main impediment to improving water supply reliability in communities is disagree- 
nent between residents who favor growth and those who want to limit it through restrictions on water 
lookups. The principal water-related issues in the North Coast Region revolve around water quality and 
nvironmental concerns. 

An action pursuant to the Trinity River Restoration Act, having great impact on North Coast water 
applies, was the 1991 decision by the Secretary of the Interior to increase instream flow releases to the 
rinity River below Lewiston Dam to 340,000 AF per year instead of the 1990 level of 217,000 AF per 
ear. The CVPIA directed the Secretary to continue releases at the 340,000 AF level through 1996. The 



47 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Coast Region 



result of this decision is an unquantified enhancement of Trinity River fishery habitat and a decrease of 
Improvement Act 123,000 AF per year of water supply for the Sacramento River and Delta during 
drought years. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is presently conducting a 12-year flow evaluation 
study on the Trinity, which is to be completed in 1996 and forwarded to Congress for review. The result 
of this study will be a recommended instream flow release schedule which could differ substantially from 
the present schedule. The potential exists for further reductions in federal CVP yield in exchange for 
betterment of fishery habitat. 

Drinking Water Standards. A primary issue affecting water managers in this region is complying 
with new EPA-mandated drinking water standards. Compliance could require filtration for most commu- 
nities and would be very expensive to implement. 

Trinity River Sediment Control. The construction of Buckhom Mountain Dam in 1990, in combina- 
tion with sediment pool construction at the mouth of Grass Valley Creek to collect decomposed granite 
sand, has made high periodic flow releases from Trinity Dam less necessary. This 70-foot-high dam 
will keep a large portion of the creeks sand sediment from flowing into the Trinity River where it dam- 
ages spawning and rearing areas. The portion of sediment that flows in below the dam is largely con- 
trolled by sediment ponds at the mouth of the creek. In addition, a proposal to purchase the creek's wa- 
tershed and place it in public ownership for prevention of future soil disturbance is being investigated by 
the Trinity River Task Force. 

Instream Flow Issues. At several locations throughout the region, there is conflict between water 
supplies for in-basin needs and fishery requirements. Examples include the Klamath River below Iron 
Gate Dam, the Shasta and Scott rivers below irrigation diversions, the upper Eel River below Lake Pills- 
bury, and the reaches of the Russian River below Lakes Mendocino and Sonoma. For most of the North 
Coast Region, few major changes in the water supply capabilities of existing facilities are expected over 
the next 30 years. However, some significant possibilities, primarily related to increased instream flows 
below existing reservoirs, could change water supply allocations. Presently, however, there is no reliable 
means of quantifying the effects of potential demands for increased instream flows in the Klamath, Trin- 
ity, upper Eel, or lower Russian rivers. The effect of the State and federal Endangered Species acts as 
additional species are listed cannot be estimated with any certainty. 

Identifying the Primary Causes of Fishery Declines. Fish populations have declined precipitously 
on all north coast streams since the 1960s. Many people tend to identify dams as the main cause of these 
fishery declines, yet undammed streams such as the Smith, Van Duzen, and Mattole rivers have also suf- 
fered steep reductions in salmon populations. There are many factors contributing to fishery declines, 
such as prolonged drought, commercial ocean fishing and logging disturbances blocking tributary 
streams. 

Endangered Species. Two species of sucker fish found in the Klamath Project area have been listed 
as endangered under the federal and State Endangered Species Acts. In response, the U.S. Fish and Wild- 
life Service imposed restrictions on project operations that reduced dry period water supply capabilities. 
As a result, roughly 7,000 acres of normally irrigated land in California was taken out of production in 



48 



bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Coast Region 



992. This modified operation of the Klamath Project, to accommodate the needs of the listed suckers, 
Iso reduced flows below Iron Gate Dam that are critical to salmon and steelhead survival in the middle 
nd lower Klamath. The conflicting needs between listed species must be addressed. 



Pelican Bay State Prison. Opened in December 1 989, Pelican Bay State Prison houses 4,000 in- 
nates. An independent water supply line serves the prison from Crescent City's Ranney collectors on the 
;mith River. The prison currently uses about 672 AF annually, and waste water from the prison facilities 
s treated on-site. A Del Norte County advisory measure allowing the Department of Corrections to 
mild a second prison was passed by the voters and construction is likely to proceed. It appears that the 
ncreased water demand can be met through increased use of Smith River supplies. 

Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District. This district supplies an average of 62,000 AF per year in 
he Humboldt Bay area, including Eureka, Areata, McKinleyville, and several pulp and lumber mills. 
he district's supply from Ruth Reservoir on the Mad River is allocated through existing contracts. 
Vbout 4,480 AF per year of additional supply is available to meet future demands or alleviate drought 
onditions. HBMWD considered enlarging Ruth Reservoir, but this does not appear to be engineeringly 
easible and recent changes in health regulations would require expensive additional treatment of water 
rem that source. Complying with the surface water treatment rules established in the 1986 amendment 
3 the Safe Drinking Water Act presents a difficult, potentially costly, challenge for the Eureka area. Fur- 
rier, water from HBMWD's Ranney collectors in the Mad River has been designated as ground water 
nder the influence of surface water and must be filtered. A regional filtration plant is estimated to cost 
1 6 million. Thus, HBMWD is considering the feasibility of developing ground water to replace a por- 
lon of the Mad River supply for residential and commercial use only. About 50,400 AF of the district's 
2,720 AF average annual water use (80 percent) was normally supplied to the Eureka pulp mills for in- 
ustrial purposes. This water does not require treatment. Since closure of the Simpson pulp mill, the 
istrict will deliver only about 28,000 AF per year to this industry. 

Russian River Instream Flow Decision and Supply Allocations. With water available from Lake 
onoma (Warm Springs Dam), and State Water Resources Control Board Decision 1610 defining in- 
tream flow requirements and operating criteria, most major water supply reliability questions in the Rus- 
ian River Basin have been resolved to beyond 2010. However, there is growing concern over the extent 
f sedimentation in Lake Pillsbury and Lake Mendocino and the resulting reductions in dry-year car- 
yover water supplies. Additionally, Mendocino County is concerned that Decision 1610 will prevent the 
ounty from obtaining additional water from the Russian River. Through the Eel-Russian River Com- 
lission, the two counties are exploring possibilities for maintaining or augmenting available water sup- 
lies, including construction of additional storage on the upper Eel River and conjunctive use of ground 
ater with existing surface supplies. 

Water Supply Reliability Problems in Small Communities. A number of smaller communities 
iroughout the region have continuing supply problems, often related to the lack of economic base to 
upport water supply management and development costs. For example, the areas north and south of the 
)wn of Trinidad in Humboldt County depend on small springs and shallow wells which provide an inad- 



49 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Coast Region 



equate supply during late summer and fall. They have attempted to hook up to Trinidad's system, sup- 
plied from Luffenholtz Creek, but has been unsuccessful due to local fears of over taxing this small sys- 
tem. The City of Willits has had chronic problems with turbidity, taste, and odor in its Morris Reservoir 
and high arsenic, iron, and manganese levels in its well supply. These problems have been largely 
solved by the construction of Centennial Dam and associated treatment facilities. 

The City of Fort Bragg has shortage problems with its individual wells and has hired a consultant to 
investigate alternative solutions. A possible solution is an off stream storage project. Many north coast 
wells located on low terraces near the ocean are vulnerable to sea water intrusion if over pumped. For 
example, the well serving the relocated town of Klamath has recently begun pumping sea water. Several 
small communities along the coast, such as Moonstone, Smith River, and Hiouchi, either experience 
chronic water shortages or have inadequate supplies to meet projected growth in the future. Water use is 
already very low due to extensive conservation, so most of these problems will likely need to be solved 
by constructing or upgrading community water systems. Factors hindering development of community 
systems are low population base contributing to lack of funding and community disagreements on the 
desirability of growth. 

Lakes Earl and Talawa. To increase wildlife habitat, these linked lakes north of Crescent City are 
being allowed to reach higher levels than historically permitted. Local fears, that these actions would 
interfere with operation of surrounding septic systems, have subsided after a year of higher lake levels 
without significant problems. The lake levels are kept higher by breaching an ocean-formed sand bar at 
the common outlet at a higher level. Agreement among agencies on the maximum allowable levels has 
not been reached yet, and studies continue. Higher late summer levels in these lakes could increase water 
availability to surrounding shallow wells. 

Water Balance 

Water balances were computed for each Planning Subarea in the North Coast Region by comparing 
existing and future water demand projections with the projected availability of supply. The region total 
was computed as the sum of the individual subareas. This method does not reflect the severity of 
drought year shortages in some local areas which can be hidden when planning subareas are combined 
within the region. Thus, there could be substantial shortages in some areas during drought periods. Lo- 
cal and regional shortages could also be less severe than the shortage shown, depending on how supplies 
are allocated within the region, a particular water agency's ability to participate in water transfers or de- 
mand management programs (including land fallowing or emergency allocation programs), and the over- 
all level of reliability deemed necessary to the sustained economic health of the region. Volume I, Chap- 
ter 1 1 presents a broader discussion of demand management options. 

Table NC-12 presents water demands for the 1990 level and for future water demands to 2020 and 
balances them with: (1) supplies from existing facilities and water management programs, and (2) future 
demand management and water supply management options. 

Regional net water demands for the 1990 level of development totaled 20.0 and 9.9 MAF for average 
and drought years respectively. Those demands are projected to increase to 20.2 and 10.1 MAF, respec- 



50 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Coast Region 

'lively, by the year 2020, after accounting for a 55,000 AF reduction in urban water demand resulting 
from additional long-term water conservation measures. Urban net water demand is projected to increase 
by about 50,000 AF by 2020, primarily due to expected increases in population; while, agricultural net 
water demand is projected to increase by about 26,000 AF, primarily due to an expected increase in vine- 
yards in the region. Environmental net water demands are increasing by 125,000 AF due to implementa- 
tion of the Central Valley Improvement Act, which increases Trinity River flows for fisheries by about 
123,000 AF. 

Average annual supplies are generally adequate to meet average net water demands in this region out 
to the year 2020. However, during drought, present supplies are insufficient to meet present demands 
and, without additional water management programs, annual drought year shortages are expected to con- 
tinue to be nearly 10,000 AF. 

The only Level I water management program planned for this region is in the Russian River planning 
subarea. That program is 9,000 AF of water recycling, which will reduce ground water pumping for this 
PSA by a similar amount. The remaining shortage of 9,000 AF is in the Upper Klamath PSA, which re- 
ipiires both additional short-term drought management and future Level II options depending on the 
overall level of water service reliability deemed necessary, by local agencies, to sustain the economic 
lealth of the region. 



51 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Coast Region 



Table NC-12. Water Balance 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Demand/Supply 



1990 2021 

average drought average dro' 



Net Demand 








Urban -with 1990 level of conservation 


169 


176 


274 


-reductions due to long-term consen/ation measures (Level 1) 


— 


-- 


-55 


Agricultural 


745 


760 


771 


-reductions due to long-term consen/ation measures (Level 1) 


— 


-- 





Environmental 


19,087 


8,941 


19,212 1 


Other (1) 


36 


35 


36 


Total Net Demand 


20,037 


9,912 


20,237 1( 


Water Supplies w/Existfng Facilities 








Developed Supplies 








Surface Water 


923 


918 


968 


Ground Water 


264 


283 


296 


Ground Water Overdraft 











Subtotal 


1,187 


1,201 


1 ,264 


Dedicated Natural Flow 


18,850 


8,704 


18,973 ( 


Total Water Supplies 


20,037 


9,905 


20,237 1( 


Demand/Supply Balance 





-7 





Future Water Management Options Level 1 








Long-term Supply Augmentation 


* 






Reclaimed 






9 


Local 









Central Valley Project 









State Water Project 









Subtotal - Water Management Options Level 1 






9 


Ground Water/Surface Water Use Reduction Resulting from Level 1 Programs 






-9 


Remaining Demand/Supply Balance Requiring Short Term Drought Management 
and/or Future Level ii Options 







(1) includes conveyance losses, recreation uses and energy production. 


* * * 








V ^2 









Draft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 



SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION 




Looking through the Golden Gate Bridge at San Francisco. 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Francisco Bay Region 



SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION 

The San Francisco Bay Region extends from Pescadero Creek in southern San Mateo County to the 
mouth of Tomales Bay in the north and inland to the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin 
rivers near Collinsville. The total land area of the region is about 3 percent of the State's area. For much 
of the following discussion, the region is divided into the North Bay and South Bay planning subareas, 
which are divided by the bay waterways. (See Appendix C for maps of the planning subareas and land 
ownership in the region.) 

The highest peaks of the Coast Range, which make up much of the eastern boundary, are over 3,000 
feet. Other prominent geographic features include San Francisco, San Pablo, and Suisun bays, and the 
San Francisco and Marin peninsulas. The region also includes many small creeks which flow to the 
Pacific Ocean or into the bays. 

The climate is generally cool and often foggy along the coast, with warmer Mediterranean-like 
weather in the inland valleys. The average high temperature is nearly 10 degrees higher inland than at 
San Francisco, resulting in higher outdoor water use in the inland areas. The gap in the hills at 
Carquinez Strait allows cool air to flow at times from the Pacific Ocean to the Sacramento Valley. Most 
of the interior North Bay and the northern parts of the South Bay also are influenced by this marine 
effect. The southern interior portions of the South Bay, by contrast, experience very little air movement, 
and therefore, have more moderate weather. Average precipitation ranges from 14 inches at Livermore, 
in the South Bay, to almost 48 inches at Kentfield in Marin County in the North Bay. 

Population 

The region is highly urbanized and includes the San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose metropolitan 
areas. There are large undeveloped areas in the western, northern and southern parts of the region. In 
1990, 18 percent of the State's total population lived in the region and almost 88 percent, or 4.8 million, 
of those residents lived in the South Bay. During thel980s, the region's population grew by 
approximately 695,000; the North Bay grew by about 20 percent and the South Bay grew by 14 percent. 

In the North Bay planning subarea, the inland cities of Fairfield, Vallejo, Benicia, and Suisun City 
grew by 33, 36, 59, and 105 percent, respectively, from 1980 to 1990. These cities alone accounted for 
an increase of almost 70,000 people during the decade. Over the same period, most of the cities in Marin 
County grew very slowly. San Rafael, the county's largest city, grew at a modest 8 percent, while Fairfax 
actually declined in population. Further north and east, Petaluma and Napa grew by 28 and 22 percent, 
respectively. 

The most rapid growth in the South Bay also took place in the eastern part of that area. A number of 
cities had growth rates greater than 40 percent during the 1980s, including Dublin, Martinez, Pittsburg, 

L-—^- ^ ~ ■ 

Region Characteristics ^^ 

Average Annual Precipitation: 31 inches Average Annual Runoff : 1,245,500 AF 



Land Area: 4, 1 00 square miles Population: 5, 484. 000 



53 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Francisco Bay Region 



Pleasanton, and San Ramon. Hercules, in the northern part of the PSA, grew by 282 percent. Growth 
during the 1980s was most significant in the larger urban centers: Oakland (32,905), Fremont (41,394), 
San Francisco (44,985), and San Jose (152,666). Table SF-1 shows regional population projections. 



Table SF-1. Population Projections 

(thousands) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 


North Bay 
South Bay 


680 
4,804 


817 
5,398 


889 
5,722 


941 
6,003 


Total 


5,484 


6,215 


6,611 


6,944 



Land Use 

Land use in the region is truly diverse. The San Francisco Bay Region is home to the world famous 
Napa Valley and Sonoma County wine industry; international business and tourism in San Francisco; the 
leading technological development and production center of Silicon Valley; as well as urban, suburban, 
and rural living. Urban land accounts for 23 percent (655,600 acres) of the land area. Irrigated 
agricultural land in 1990 was 61,400 acres. Projected land use reflects an increase in urban areas to 
870,900 acres, or 37 percent of the region's land area, by 2020. Point Reyes National Recreation Area, as 
well as other federal and State parks and reservoirs, make up a small portion of the total region. 

While a relatively large portion of the land area is urbanized, a wide variety of crops also are grown 
in the region. Agricultural land use is strongly influenced by the climatic and urban growth factors 
mentioned above. In almost every area of the region, urban development is encroaching on agricultural 
lands. 

Within the North Bay, vineyards account for over three-fourths of the irrigated acres in Sonoma and 
Napa counties. There are 4,200 acres of pasture and about 3,900 acres of deciduous trees (primarily 
walnuts, prunes, and pears in Solano County) in the North Bay. The coastal area of the South Bay 
supports rangeland, flowers, and a number of high-value specialty vegetables, such as artichokes. 
Vegetables, flowers, vineyards, and many suburban ranchettes with irrigated pasture are found in the 
Santa Clara Valley. Alfalfa, truck crops, and wine grapes are grown in the Livermore Valley. Figure 
SF-1 shows land use, imports, exports, and water supplies in the San Francisco Bay Region. 

Water Supply 

Water supply sources include local surface water, imported surface water (both locally developed and 
purchased from other local agencies), ground water, CVP water, other federal project water (Solano 
Project), SWP water, and a small amount of reclaimed waste water. About 66 percent of the urban 
supplies are imported to the region. Figure SF-2 shows the region's 1990 level sources of supply. 



54 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Francisco Bay Region 









PRESENT WATER SUPPUES 

(1X»0 AF/Yf.) 






LOCAL SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT 


364 


Legend 




PutaA South — 1 
Cana 1 


IMPORTS BY LOCAL WATER AGENOES 
GROUND WATER PERENNIAL YIELD 


661 
97 


Urban Land >-^ 


L 


64 


CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT 


363 


Irrigated Land \^ 
Region Water Transfers V,^ 

|1,000'« o* Aen-f—t put Y««1 1 


W^ 




OTHER FEDERAL WATER DEVELOPMENT 


43 


:f^*^ 


^^ 


STATE WATER PROJECT 
WATER RECLAMATION 


238 
32 



Sonoma PetaJuma 

Aqueducts 

25 



DEDICATED NATURAL FLOW 

WATER SUPPLY 
GROUND WATER OVERDRAFT 

TOTAL 



City of Vallejo 
2 

North Bajr 

Aqueduct 

27 

Carriage Water 
SWP 61 
CVP 183 

Afokeiumne Aqueduct 
244 

Contra Costa Canai 
73 

South Bay 

Aqueduct 

154 




4,616 

6,303 



6,303 



Hetch Hetchjr 
Aqueduc t 
269 



San Felipe 

Unit 

90 



Figure SF-1. San Francisco Bay Region 
Land Use, Imports, Exports, and Water Supplies 



55 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Francisco Bay Region 



Supply with Existing Facilities 

Ground water is found in both the alluvial basins and upland hard rock areas. Well yields in the 
alluvial basins range from less than 100 to over 3,000 gallons per minute. The yield from wells in the 
hard rock areas is generally much lower, but are usually sufficient for most domestic or livestock 
purposes. Recharge to the alluvial basins occurs primarily from rainfall and seepage from adjacent 
streams. However, a significant percentage, especially in the South Bay, is through artificial recharge 
facilities and incidental recharge from irrigation. 



Figure SF-2. San Francisco Bay Region 

Water Supply Sources (Average Conditions) 

1990 level 



Ground Water 
1.5% 




Re- 
claimed 
0.5% 



♦Includes the federal Central Valley Project, other federal projects, and the State Water Project. 



56 



i Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Francisco Bay Region 



I 



For 1990, drought supplies (including dedicated natural flow) were 28 percent less than normal. 
Supply reductions occurred in local surface and imported supplies. Ground water use increased 
primarily because users and suppliers often rely more heavily on aquifers in dry years. 

The major reservoirs in the region are listed in Table SF-2. Table SF-3 shows water supplies with 
existing facilities and programs. 

Table SF-2. Major Reservoirs 



Reservoir Name 


River 


Capacity (1 ,000 AF) 


Owner 


Lake Hennessey 


Conn Creek 


31.0 


City of Napa 


Nicasio 


Nicasio Creek 


22.4 


Marin MWD 


Kent 


Lagunitas 
Creek 


32.9 


Marin MWD 


Alpine 

i 


Lagunitas 
Creek 


8.9 


Marin MWD 


Soulajuie 


Lagunitas 
Creek 


10.6 


Marin MWD 


San Pablo 


San Pablo 
Creek 


38.6 


East Bay MUD 


New Upper San Leandro 


San Leandro 
Creek 


41.4 


East Bay MUD 


Chabot 


San Leandro 
Creek 


10.4 


East Bay MUD 


Briones 


Bear Creek 


60.5 


East Bay MUD 


Del Valle 


Arroyo Del 
Valle 


77.1 


DWR 


San Antonio 


San Antonio 
Creek 


50.5 


City of San Francisco 


Coyote 


Coyote Creek 


22.3 


Santa Clara Valley WD 


Leroy Anderson 


Coyote Creek 


89.1 


Santa Clara Valley WD 


Lexington 


Los Gatos 
Creek 


19.8 


Santa Clara Valley WD 


Austrian 


Los Gatos 
Creek 


6.2 


San Jose Water Works 


Calaveras 


Calaveras 
Creek 


96.9 


City of San Francisco 


San Andreas 


San Andreas 
Creek 


19.0 


City of San Francisco 


Crystal Springs 


San Mateo 
Creek 


58.4 


City of San Francisco 



57 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Francisco Bay Region 



Table SF-3. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities and Programs 

(Decision 1485 Operating Criteria for Delta Supplies) 

(thousands of acre -feet) 

1990 2000 2010 2020 

average drought average drought average drought average drought 



Supply 



364 


253 


364 


253 


364 


253 


364 


253 


551 


512 


575 


512 


594 


514 


601 


516 


























363 


336 


456 


314 


479 


306 


477 


298 


43 


40 


42 


40 


42 


40 


42 


40 


238 


173 


300 


178 


300 


170 


300 


169 


97 


133 


103 


166 


152 


171 


162 


165 


























32 


32 


32 


32 


32 


32 


32 


32 



Surface 

Local 

Local Imports 

Colorado River 
■ CVP(1) 

Other federal 

SWP 
Ground water 
Overdraft 
Reclaimed 

Dedicated natural flow 4,615 3,085 4,615 3,085 4,615 3,085 4,615 3,085 

Total Supply 6,303 4,564 6,487 4,580 6,578 4^71 6,593 4,558 

(1) CVP supplies include Delta outflow carriage water released from storage. The 1990 level CVP carriage water is estimated to 
be 183,000 AF for average years and 176,000 AF for drought years. 

(2) SWP supplies include Delta outflow carriage water released from storage. The 1990 level SWP carriage water is estimated to 
be 61 ,000 AF for average years and 58,000 AF for drought years. 

North Bay. At the 1990 level, the average year local surface water supp ly for the North Bay is 
75,000 AF. An additional 150,000 AF of local surface water is used to meet Suisun Marsh wetlands 
requirements. Recent experiences indicate that local supplies drop by about 22 percent during drought 
conditions to about 58,000 AF. 

Marin Municipal Water District serves the most populated, southeastern portion of Marin County. 
Local supply is obtained from its reservoirs in Marin County which can store up to 79,200 AF and 
supply of about 30,000 AF annually. 

North Marin Water District supplements its imported Sonoma County Water Agency supply with just 
over 1,000 AF from Stafford Lake. The City of Napa produces local surface supply from Lake 
Hennessey and Lake Milliken, and St. Helena receives water from Bell Canyon Reservoir. The City of 
Vallejo gets water from Lake Curry in Napa County. Vineyards along the Napa River annually divert 
approximately 6,000 AF from the River for irrigation and frost protection. Since no major local supply 
projects are anticipated, the local surface supplies are projected to remain constant through 2020. 

Imports by Local Agencies. In the North Bay, water is imported from the Russian and Eel rivers 
(North Coast Region) by Sonoma County Water Agency and from the Delta by the City of Vallejo 
through the SWP. SCWA delivers water from the Russian River Project, which includes Lake 
Mendocino and Lake Sonoma, and the Potter Valley Project, which is operated by PG&E for hydropower 
production to eight principal contractors, including four in the San Francisco Bay Region (Petaluma, 
Sonoma, Valley of the Moon, and North Marin water districts). 

MM WD recently negotiated with SCWA to add 10,000 AF to its annual deliveries. The delivery 
initially would be on an "as available" basis until a water right is recognized by the State Water 



58 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Francisco Bay Region 



Resources Control Board. MMWD customers recently approved financing to provide the necessary 
project facilities. The North Bay's 1990 average imported supply by SCWA and Vallejo is 39,000 AF. 

Ground water. The North Bay 1990 level average supply of ground water is about 26,000 AF. The 
increase in ground water supply during drought years reflects a greater dependence on ground water 
during periods of surface water deficiencies. Future ground water supply is projected to remain fairly 
constant. 

The important alluvial basins in the North Bay PSA include Suisun-Fairfield Valley, Napa 
Valley-Sonoma Valley, Petaluma Valley, and Novato Valley. Ground water levels indicate the basins are 
probably not in overdraft. Estimated ground water storage in the basins is 1 .7 MAF. Salt water 
intrusion has been a problem in the bayside portions of the Sonoma and Napa valleys, but this has been 
substantially mitigated by using imported surface water instead of ground water. The ground water 
quality in the North Bay is generally good. Some isolated areas experience elevated levels of dissolved 
solids, iron, boron, hardness, and chloride. High levels of nitrates occur in the Napa and Petaluma valleys 
as a result of past agricultural practices. 

Other Federal Projects. Solano County Water Agency contracts for water from Lake Berryessa via 
the Solano Project and delivers it to farmers and cities within the county. The project was built by the 
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and began operation in 1959. The project supply is 201,000 AF annually 
and the majority of its entitlement water goes to agriculture in the Sacramento River Region. The 1990 
level average project supply for the North Bay is 43,000 AF. The drought year supply shows a 15 
percent deficiency, which was imposed by the USBR in 1991. Since use under SCWA's contract is 
approaching the project's yield, supplies are projected to increase only slightly through 2020. 

State Water Project. The SWP delivers water through the North Bay Aqueduct to the Solano County 
Water Agency and Napa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. The Aqueduct extends 
over 27 miles from Barker Slough to the Napa Turnout Reservoir in southern Napa County. Maximum 
SWP entitlements are for 67,000 AF annually. The Aqueduct also conveys water for the City of Vallejo, 
which purchased capacity in the NBA. 

Waste Water Reclamation. About 500 AF of reclaimed waste water is used, primarily for landscape 
irrigation in Marin County. Water is also reclaimed by NMWD and Petaluma in the Sonoma County 
Water Agency service area. The total 1990 average and drought waste water reclamation supply in the 
North Bay is 3,000 AF. 

South Bay. The 1990 average local surface supp ly for the South Bay is 139,000 AF. The drought 
year shortage is significantly affected by a 67 percent reduction in local surface supplies. Future supplies 
from existing facilities would remain relatively constant through 2020. 

Imports by Local Agencies. SFWD imports Tuolumne River water via the 150-mile-long Hetch 
Hetchy System. In addition to supplying water to the City and County of San Francisco, SFWD sells 
water wholesale to 30 water districts, cities, and local agencies in Alameda, Santa Clara, and San Mateo 
counties. SFWD now has three pipelines capable of delivering 336,000 AF annually to the Bay Area. 



59 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Francisco Bay Region 



EBMUD imports water from the Mokelumne River through its aqueducts and delivers water in much 
of Alameda and Contra Costa counties. The district supplies water to approximately 1.1 million people 
in 20 cities and 15 unincorporated communities. EBMUD has water rights and facilities to divert up to 
364,000 AF annually from the Mokelumne River, depending on streamflow and water use by other water 
right holders. 

Ground water. The major ground water basins of the South Bay PSA include Santa Clara Valley, 
Livermore Valley, and the Pittsburg Plain. The total ground water storage in the South Bay basins is 
estimated to be 6.5 MAF. 

Artificial recharge programs are in place in several South Bay localities. ACFC&WCD, Zone 7, uses 
several abandoned gravelpits to recharge ground water in the Livermore Valley. Alameda County Water 
District uses a series of artificial barriers and abandoned gravel pits to retard runoff and increase 
percolation in and along Alameda Creek. SCVWD uses a similar system to recharge ground water 
along Coyote and Los Gatos creeks in Santa Clara Valley. 

The SCVWD has supplemented the yield of its ground water aquifers by developing an extensive 
conjunctive use program. Water supplies recharge ponds are located along major creeks in the Santa 
Clara Valley. SCVWD monitors ground water pumping by requiring most agricultural and municipal and 
industrial users to be metered. Ground water users pay for recharged surface water through a basic user 
fee. Decisions on ground water pumping are made by all ground water users, generally in a spirit of 
cooperation. 

These programs have resulted in a general rise to near historic highs in ground water levels in many 
of the basins. Recharge and surface water substitution in the Pittsburg Plain was successful in restoring 
ground water basins which were overdrafted in the past. These efforts mitigated or eliminated low 
ground water level problems, such as salt water intrusion in the Pittsburg Plain and portions of northern 
Santa Clara Valley. Land subsidence in northern Santa Clara Valley has also been greatly reduced. 
Alameda County Water District has begun an Aquifer Reclamation Program to mitigate salt water 
intrusion into the ground water basin near San Francisco Bay. The program includes pumping and 
disposing of saline water using a series of wells and creating a salinity intrusion barrier using 15 wells in 
the upper aquifer. The district anticipates that the basins annual perennial yield will be increased 3,500 
AF at the completion of the Aquifer Reclamation Program. 

Ground water quality is still a problem to various degrees in many South Bay locations. The 
Livermore Valley has elevated levels of dissolved solids, chloride, boron, and hardness. The highly 
urbanized areas of the Santa Clara Valley have experienced ground water pollution over large areas from 
organic solvents used in electronics manufacturing. As a result, a small number of municipal wells have 
been forced out of production. 

Central Vallev Project. CVP water is delivered through the Contra Costa Canal to Contra Costa 
Water District and through the San Felipe Project to SCVWD. CCWD delivers water throughout eastern 
Contra Costa County, including a portion of the district in the San Joaquin River Region. CVP water 
was fu:st delivered by CCWD in 1940. The current contract with USBR is for a supply of 195,000 AF 



60 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Francisco Bay Region 



">e 



r year. The district also has a right to divert almost 27,000 AF from Mallard Slough on Suisun Bay. 
VIost of CCWD's demands are met through direct diversions from the Delta through the Contra Costa 
iCanal. CCWD has very little regulatory or emergency water supply storage to replace Delta supplies 
ivhen water quality is poor. As a result, CCWD service area voters authorized funding for Los Vaqueros 
Reservoir in 1988. The proposed reservoir will improve supply reliability and water quality by allowing 
he district to pump and store water from the Delta during high flows. 

SCVWD's maximum entitlement from the CVP's San Felipe Division, which became operational in 
1987, is 152,500 AF. Average 1990 deliveries to the region are about 93,200 AF. By 1989, much sooner 
iian anticipated, the district was requesting, but did not receive, its full entitlement to reduce impacts of 
he 1987-92 drought. Normally, about two-thirds of the CVP water is used for recharge; the rest is used 
as direct supply. 

I State Water Project. The South Bay Aqueduct conveys SWP water to SCVWD, ACFC&WCD Zone 
(7, and ACWD. The aqueduct is over 42 miles long beginning at SWP's South Bay pumping plant on 
Bethany Reservoir and ending at the Santa Clara Terminal Facilities. SWP water is used in South Bay 
PSA for municipal and industrial supply, agricultural deliveries, and ground water recharge. 

Waste Water Reclamation. There are several waste water reclamation projects in the South Bay PSA 
which provide 29,000 AF to various uses such as environmental, industrial, landscape, and construction. 



Supplies with Additional Facilities and Water Management Programs 

With increasing populations and the resulting increased water demand. Bay Area water agencies are 
looking at a number of options to increase supplies as well as ensure the reliability of their existing water 
sources. Future water management options are presented in two levels to better reflect the status of 
investigations required to implement them. 

' O Level I options are those that have undergone extensive investigation and environmental analyses 

! and are judged to have a high likelihood of being implemented by 2020. 

I O Level II options are those that could fill the remaining gap between water supply and demand. 

I 

i These options require more investigation and altemative analyses. 

I Supplies in the North Bay are available during average years with additional Level I options facilities 
jto meet the water use through 2020. For drought years, shortages range from 30,000 AF in 1990 to 
i74,000 AF in 2020 with existing facilities. With additional facilities, drought year shortages are about 
j53,000 AF in 2020. Some areas that may have difficulty meeting water demand include MMWD, the 
jSolano Project service area, and SWP contractor service areas. MMWD has the ability to use unused 
iconveyance space in SCWA and NMWD aqueducts, thus improving the water district's water supply 
reliability through water transfer. 

' With existing facilities, the South Bay's supplies will meet projected demands through 2020 during 
laverage years. During drought years, with existing facilities, shortages will increase from 280,000 AF in 



61 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Francisco Bay Region 



1990 to 404,000 AF in 2020. With additional facilities, the South Bay will be able to meet average year 
demands to 2020 and drought year supply shortages could be about 290,000 AF. Each of the six major 
water agencies in the South Bay is served by at least one of the import water systems connected to the 
Delta. These connections allow the transfer of water from agencies upstream of the Delta assuming a 
water management program to address key Delta issues has been implemented. Table SF-4 shows 
regional water supplies with additional (Level I) water management programs. 



Table SF-4. Water Supplies with Level I Water Management Programs 

(Decision 1485 Operating Criteria for Delta Supplies) 

(thousands of acre-feet) 



Supply 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Surface 
















W 


Local 


364 


253 


364 


253 


364 


253 


364 


253 


Local Imports 


551 


512 


581 


555 


594 


557 


601 


557 


Colorado River 


























CVP(1) 


363 


336 


456 


314 


479 


306 


477 


298 


Other federal 


43 


40 


42 


40 


40 


40 


42 


40 


SWP (2) 


238 


173 


299 


212 


332 


247 


330 


247 


Ground water 


97 


133 


97 


157 


97 


150 


112 


143 


Overdraft 























$ 


Reclaimed 


32 


32 


43 


43 


53 


53 


70 


# 70 


Dedicated natural flow 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


Total 


6,303 


4,564 


6,497 


4,659 


6,574 


4.691 


6,611 


4,693 



(1) CVP supplies include Delta outflow carriage water released from storage. The 1990 level CVP carriage water is estimated to be 
183,000 AF for average years and 176,000 AF for drought years. 

(2) SWP supplies include Delta outflow carriage water released from storage. The 1990 level SWP carriage water is estimated to 
be 61 ,000 AF for average years and 58,000 AF for drought years. 



Water Supply Reliability and Drought Management Strategies. The San Francisco Bay Region 
weathered both the 1976-77 and 1987-92 droughts with moderate but only temporary impacts. These 
experiences verify that the region's flexibility to efficiently move water is a valuable asset in drought 
years. Three major factors contribute to their flexibility and the region's successful drought strategies: 
(1) effective water conservation and rationing programs, (2) available interconnections between water 
providers, and (3) diversity of water sources. While the region's dependency on imported supplies are 
enough in drought years, water sources are geographically diverse and emergency supplies and water 
transfers can help alleviate drought impacts. The following paragraphs describe some recent drought 
management actions taken in the region. 

During the 1976-77 drought, MMWD received supplemental water through an elaborate sequence of 
interconnections. The transfer involved delivery of SWP water made available by agencies in Southern 



62 



bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Francisco Bay Region 

L ^fomia, which took more water from the Colorado River. Water was conveyed through the South 
P Jay Aqueduct and then by exchange and interconnected through the water systems of the SFWD, City of 
iayward, and EBMUD, to a temporary pipeline across the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge. MMWD 
Customers also achieved a 39 percent reduction in water use during the voluntary reduction period 
laigeted at 25 percent in the recent drought. 

! Another example of drought induced interconnections occurred during the recent drought when 
>FWD requested DWR to install the San Antonio turnout from the South Bay Aqueduct that had been 
ised in the 1976-77 drought. 

EBMUD has facilities to transfer water to both CCWD and the City of Hay ward, while SFWD is 
ible to transfer water to SCVWD. All of the major agencies of the South Bay have access to facilities 
apable of transferring water from other agencies upstream of the Delta. These transfers can be brought in 
hrough the Contra Costa Canal (CVP), the South Bay Aqueduct (SWP), or the San Felipe Project 
I CVP). During the recent drought, EBMUD adopted both voluntary and mandatory water use reduction 
uograms of up to 25 percent. 

SCVWD received 32 percent of its maximum CVP supply in 1991, which included 10,000 AF of 
lardship supply. In addition, it received 30 percent of its SWP supply and 75 percent of its Hetch Hetchy 
iipply. As a result of these deficient supplies, the district elected to purchase 10,000 AF of water from 
^lacer County Water Agency and 20,000 AF from the 1991 State Emergency Drought Water Bank. In 

, addition to supplementing its supplies, the district instituted conservation programs designed to save 20 

I |)ercent of the average water use. 

Locally imported supplies by SFWD and EBMUD also suffered deficiencies during the recent 
. drought. The Hetch Hetchy deficiency was reduced from an initial 45 to 25 percent for 1991 . Customers 
' f/ere required to reduce indoor use by 10 percent and outdoor use by 60 percent. The deficiency 
I "eduction was made possible by purchases of 50,000 AF from the 1991 State Emergency Drought Water 
W and 20,000 AF from PCWA. 

ACWD and ACFC&WCD, Zone 7 were both subject to 80 percent deficiencies in their 1991 SWP 
supplies. ACWD received 14,800 AF from the 1991 State Emergency Drought Water Bank and an 
ncrease in its share of Lake Del Valle supplies. These supplemental supplies allowed the district to scale 
Dack its rationing plan to 25 percent reductions. ACFC&WCD, Zone7 was able to make up for SWP 
Jeficiencies by increased ground water pumping. ACFC&WCD, Zone 7 also acquired a small 
supplemental supply from the 1991 State Emergency Drought Water Bank and instituted a conservation 
I i^ucation program with a 25 percent reduction goal. 

Future Water Management Options. MMWD had one of the least reliable supplies in the Bay 
Area. The district had to rely on supplemental imported supply from Sonoma County Water Agency and 
1 very responsive reduction effort by customers to ensure adequate supplies throughout the recent 
drought. Assuming "base case" growth to 2025 and no supplemental supplies, the district had estimated 
i 40 percent deficiency once every 10 years. MMWD's new contract with SCWA will decrease the 
deficiency to approximately 10 percent. 



63 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Francisco Bay Region 



MMWD currently has no participation rights in the SCWA facilities and uses excess capacity in 
NMWD's system to convey Russian River water as far as Novato. In order to avoid future supply 
deficiencies, the district is proposing its own pipeline to bypass the NMWD system. To do this, MMWD 
will need to participate in SCWA's facilities expansion as well. 

Other suppliers in the area are much less vulnerable. SCWA's principal contractors, for example, 
have very reliable supplies. Using historic hydrology and 2010 demands, SCWA forecast no supply 
deficiencies for the system. 

EBMUD's supply is vulnerable in at least three ways: (1) drought, (2) decreasing availability of 
supplies due to increased use by senior water right holders and an increasing emphasis on environmental 
needs, and (3) the integrity of its delivery system, especially the security of the aqueducts from 
earthquakes or floods as they cross the Delta. EBMUD is currently working on an Updated Water Supply 
Management Program that includes a number of improvements to its water supply system. A detailed 
discussion of this program is in Volume I, Chapter 12, "Options of Balancing Water Supply and 
Demand." A main element of EBMUD's program is the conjunctive use of ground water. In average and 
wet years, available water wold be stored in the lower Mokelumne River's ground water basin and 
withdrawn in dry years. This program will yield 43,000 AF in drought years. 

Local imported supply would increase by 43,000 AF in 2000 for drought years, reflecting EBMUD's 
conjunctive use alternative. American River water is potentially available from a previously unused CVP 
contract for 150,000 AF that was originally to be delivered through Folsom South Canal to the 
Mokelumne Aqueducts. The district is still considering building its own extension of the Folsom South 
Canal so water could be delivered to its aqueducts. 

As described previously, CCWD is pursuing the development of Los Vaqueros Reservoir near Byron 
to secure additional reliability and better quality for its water supplies. 

Water recycling projects are becoming a cost effective method of meeting increased demand in the 
San Francisco Bay Region. By 2020, the region will have a supply of about 40,000 of recycled water to 
meet its demands. 

Water Use 

Water use in the region has undergone dramatic changes over the last 40 years. A 1949 land use 
survey recorded 163,000 acres of irrigated agriculture in the region; the 1990 level land use analysis 
showed 61,400 acres, a 62 percent reduction. The 1990 level agricultural net water demand was 88,000 
AF. Urban water demand is approximately 1.2 MAF; and environmental water use is about 4.8 MAF. 
Almost all environmental water use in the region is associated with the Suisun Marsh demands and 
required Delta outflow. Total water use is projected to increase from approximately 6.3 MAF in 1990 to 
6.6 MAF, primarily due to population increases, in 2020. Figure SF-3 shows the distribution of 1990 
level net water demands for the San Francisco Bay Region. 



64 



tulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Francisco Bay Region 



Figure SF-3. San Francisco Bay Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990 level 



Environmental 
75% 




Agricultural 

2% 

Other includes conveyance losses, recreation uses, energy production, and SWP and CVP carriage water requirements. 



Jrban Water Use 

Urban water demand is computed using population and per capita water use. Census data and State 
department of Finance projections were used to tabulate the region's population. Per capita use in the 
egion varies significantly, depending on factors such as climate, income, population density, residential 
/aid size, and volume of commercial and industrial use. Generally, per capita use showed an upward 
rend after the 1976-77 drought to pre-drought levels. Recently, per capita use values have dropped 
iigain, although not to the levels of the previous drought. This most recent drop is due to conservation 



65 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Francisco Bay Regioi 



Figure SF-4. San Francisco Bay Region 
Applied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990 level 




Governmental 
7% 



efforts during the 1 987-92 drought. Per capita use is projected to continue to drop slowly over the next 
three decades due to implementation of Best Management Practices (Volume I, Chapter 6). 

The cooler coastal portions of the region have the lowest per capita water use. The low per capita use 
values of approximately 100 gpcd in San Mateo County and 139 gpcd in San Francisco are generally 
related to a cooler climate, small yards, and higher population densities than in inland areas. Bayside 
communities in Marin and Sonoma counties use approximately 170 gpcd. 

Santa Clara County's per capita use averages approximately 200 gpcd. The warmer and drier climate 
results in increased outdoor use. Residential areas reflect a range of uses, from high density multiunit 



66 



^ iBulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Francisco Bay Region 



dwellings to some areas of very low density suburban homes. The county also has a mix of water using 
{industries, such as food processing and computer and electronics manufacturing, which tend to raise per 
capita use. 

The highest per capita use in the South Bay is in Contra Costa County, where use averages 230 gpcd 
.because many residential areas consist of large estate size lots which have high landscape water 
■requirements, and there is considerable industrial water use concentrated along the Bay. The average daily 
[per capita use for the region was 193 gallons in 1990. Figure SF-4 shows applied 1990 level urban water 
demands, by sector. 

Urban water demands are displayed in Table SF-5. With a 27 percent increase in population 
anticipated by 2020, urban water use should increase roughly 1 7 percent after accounting for savings 
from implementing water conservation measures such as urban Best Management Practices. The overall 
regional per-capita use should decrease by about 6 percent. 

Table SF-5. Urban Water Demand 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 
average drought 


2000 

average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


North Bay 


















Applied water demand 


151 


165 


174 


191 


188 


216 


196 


226 


Net water demand 


151 


165 


174 


191 


188 


216 


196 


226 


Depletion 


133 


146 


154 


169 


166 


191 


173 


200 


South Bay 


















Applied water demand 


1,033 


1.120 


1,122 


1,197 


1,175 


1,268 


1,208 


1,302 


Net water demand 


1,033 


1,120 


1,122 


1,197 


1,175 


1,268 


1,208 


1,302 


Depletion 


938 


1,022 


1,023 


1,095 


1,072 


1.163 


1,102 


1,260 


Total 


















Applied water demand 


1,184 


1,285 


1,296 


1,388 


1,363 


1,484 


1,404 


1,528 


Net water demand 


1,184 


1,285 


1,296 


1,388 


1,363 


1,484 


1,404 


1,528 


Depletion 


1,071 


1,168 


1,177 


1,264 


1,238 


1,354 


1,275 


1,460 



Agricultural Water Use 

Figure SF-5 shows the irrigated acreage, ETAW, and applied water for major crops grown in the 
region. The following sections discuss agricultural water use in the North and South Bay areas. 

North Bay. Agricultural water use in the North Bay is influenced by the climate of the area. The 
cool air entering San Pablo Bay from the west is a factor in determining crop viability and irrigation 
practices. There is very little agriculture remaining in Marin County, currently about 700 irrigated acres. 
Sonoma and Napa counties, on the other hand, have actually increased agricultural acreage, due to an 
increase in vineyards and adoption of drip irrigation on lands too steep for furrow or sprinkler irrigation 
practices. Most of these agricultural lands are served by ground water or direct diversions from the Napa 



67 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Francisco Bay Region 



and other local streams. Projections are that vineyard acreage will continue to increase, while other crop 
acreages, with the exception of pasture (projected to decrease 20 percent) are expected to remain about 
the same. 

South Bay. The climate of the South Bay is also warmer as you move inland from the coast. The 
area produces many high value crops including artichokes, brussels sprouts, and cut flowers. The Santa 
Clara Valley was historically one of the garden spots for California agriculture. Urbanization over the 
last 40 years has reduced irrigated agricultural land acreage from over 100,000 acres to less than 17,000 
in 1990. Most of the remaining lands in production are along the Highway 101 corridor, north of Morgan 
Hill. Crops grown are primarily high value truck, fruit, and nut crops. Also, one- to five-acre suburban 
ranchettes, with sprinkler-irrigated pasture for horses, are now found on formerly nonirrigated range land 
and compete for limited ground water supplies. 

The Livermore Valley is partially separated from the interior bay climate patterns by the Diablo 
Range. The valley is significantly warmer, reflected in higher outdoor water use. There are 
approximately 2,500 acres of irrigated agriculture, primarily vineyards, grain, and truck crops. 

Table SF-6 shows the irrigated agricultural land use by PSA and for the region, for 1990 through 
2020. Table SF-7 shows agricultural water demand for 1990 through 2020. Table SF-8 summarizes the 
1990 and projected agricultural water demand in the region. 

Table SF-6. Irrigated Crop Acreage 

(thousands of acres) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 


2000 


' 2010 


2020 


North Bay 
South Bay 


44 
17 


48 
16 


49 
16 


49 
16 


Total 


61 


64 


65 


65 



Table SF- 


-7. 1990 Evapotranspiratlon of Applied Water by Crop 


Irrigated Crop 


Total 

Acres 

(1,000) 


Total ETAW 
(1,000AF) 


Irrigated Crop 


Total 

Acres 

(1,000) 


Total bl AW 
(I.OOOAF) 


Grain 
Com 
Other field 


2 
1 
1 


1 
1 

1 


Pasture 
Other truck 
Other deciduous 
Vineyard 


5 

10 
6 

36 


11 
19 
10 
27 




Total 


61 


70 



68 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Francisco Bay Region 



Acres (X 1 ,000) 



Acre-Feet (X 1 ,000) 



120 




Pasture Other Decidious 

Other Truck Grapes 

■Acreage METAVJ ■Applied Water 



Figure SF-5. 1990 San Francisco Bay Region 
Acreage, ETAW, and Applied Water for l\/lajor Crops 



69 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Francisco Bay Region 



Table SF-8. Agricultural Water Demand 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


North Bay 
























Applied water demand 


57 




65 


59 


65 


59 




66 


59 




66 


Net water demand 


53 




61 


55 


61 


55 




62 


55 




62 


Depletion 


48 




55 


50 


55 


50 




56 


50 




56 


South Bay 
























Applied water demand 


35 




38 


35 1 


39 


35 




38 


35 




w 


Net water demand 


35 




38 


35 1 


39 


35 




38 


35 




^7 


Depletion 


32 




34 


32 


35 


32 




34 


32 




33 


Total 
























Applied water demand 


92 




103 


94 


104 


94 




104 


94 




103 


Net water demand 


88 




99 


90 


100 


90 




100 


90 




99 


Depletion 


80 




89 


82 


90 


82 




90 


82 




89 



Environmental Water Use 

The Suisun Marsh is the only identified managed wetland in the San Francisco Bay Region requiring ! 
water supplies. The brackish water marsh consists of approximately 55,000 acres of managed wetlands. 
The State owns about 10,000 acres and about 44,000 acres are under private ownership and managed as 
duck clubs. The estimated water demand of the marsh is about 150,000 AF per year. The additional 
instream demands for the Suisun Marsh are about 15,000 AF in an average year and 145,000 AF during 
drought years. Additional Suisun Marsh instream demands are based on an estimated supplemental flow 
required over the eight-month period when Suisun Marsh Salinity Gates are operational to meet E)-1485 
standards downstream of the gates in the Delta. Table SF-9 shows wetlands water needs. 

Table SF-9. Wetlands Water Needs 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Wetlands 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Suisun Marsh 

Applied water 


150 




150 


150 




150 


150 


150 


150 


150 


Net water 


150 




150 


150 




150 


150 


150 


150 


150 


Depletion 


150 




150 


150 




150 


150 


150 


150 


150 


Total 






















Applied water 


150 




150 


150 




150 


150 


150 


150 


150 


Net water 


150 




150 


150 




150 


150 


150 


150 


150 


Depletion 


150 




150 


150 




150 


150 


150 


150 


150 



r- 



70 



^ I Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Francisco Bay Region 



The largest water use in the region is for Delta outflow to meet SWRCB salinity requirements, which 
requires about 4.6 and 2.9 MAF for average and drought years, respectively. Other instream flows for 
streams throughout the region were not included in the water use tables. Environmental instream water 
needs are shown in Table SF-10. Recent and future actions to protect aquatic species in the Delta will 
increase environmental water needs for this region. Volume I, Chapter 8 presents a broad discussion of 
proposed water needs for the Bay /Delta. 



Table SF-10. Environmental Instream Water Needs 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Stream 



1990 2000 2010 2020 

average drought average drought average drought average drought 



Bay- Delta 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3.085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,oS 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 


4,615 


3,085 



Total 

Applied Water 
I Net Water 
> Depletion 



Other Water Demand 

Other water demand includes water losses by major conveyance facilities in the region, water needs 
of recreational facilities, water demand of power plants and other energy production, and the S WP and 
CVP carriage water requirements. Figure SF-6 shows water recreation areas in the San Francisco Bay 
area. Table SF-11 shows the total water demand for 1990 and projections to 2020 for the San Francisco 
Bay Region. 



71 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Francisco Bay Region 






.2 \ 



X 



SONOMA 
A3 



\ 



MARIN 



NM P A 



^. /' 



SOLANO 



A6 



7- 



/ 



^ 



.9 



V 



CONTRA 



JO 



11 



Leg and 
▲ Water Recreation Area 
• Hydroelectric Power Plant 



1 . Lake Berryessa 

2. Lake Sonoma 

3. Spring Lake 

4. Samuel P. Taylor S.P. 

5. Benicia S.R.A. 

6. Soulajule Reservoir 

7. Aquatic Park 

8. San Pablo Reservoir 

9. Lafayette Reservoir 

10. Contra Loma Reservoir 

11. Lake Chabot 

12. Bethany Reservoir 

13. Lake Merced 

14. Lake Del Valle R.F. 

15. Stevens Creek Reservoir 

16. Lexington Reservoir 

17. Almaden Lake 

18. Lake Cunningham 

19. Anderson Lake 

20. Henry W. Coo 

21. Loch Lomond 

22. Coyote Reservoir 

23. Pinto Lake 

24. El Estero Lake 

25. San Justo Reservoir 



^ 



12 



^"^ 




13 



N 



(p 



■5^ 






\ 



pes 



x*^ 



c»^e^ 



l»^^ 



AS 



aej 



^ Zaire 
Del Valle 



^ 



/ 



^15 

SANTA 



\ 



^<^^ 



.16^ 



CLARA 
^ Anderson 20 



17 



▲ A 



18 



Lake 
.19 



22 



.21 



20 



30 



Figure SF~6. San Francisco Bay Region 
Water Recreation Areas 



72 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Francisco Bay Region 



Table SF-11. Total Water Demands 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Category of Use 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Urban 


















Applied water 


1,184 


1.285 


1,296 


1388 


1363 


1484 


1404 


1528 


Net water 


1,184 


1,285 


1,296 


1388 


1363 


1484 


1404 


1528 


Depletion 


1,071 


1,168 


1,177 


1264 


1238 


1354 


1275 


1460 


Agricultural 


















Applied water 


92 


103 


94 


104 


94 


104 


94 


103 


Net water 


88 


99 


90 


100 


90 


100 


90 


99 


Depletion 


80 


89 


82 


90 


82 


90 


82 


89 


Environmental 


















Applied water 


4,765 


3,235 


4,765 


3.235 


4,765 


3,235 


4,765 


3.235 


Net water 


4,765 


3,235 


4,765 


3,235 


4,765 


3,235 


4,765 


3,235 


Depletion 


4,765 


3,235 


4,765 


3,235 


4,765 


3,235 


4,765 


3,235 


Other (1) 


















Applied water 


248 


238 


328 


179 


339 


168 


331 


157 


Net water 


266 


255 


346 


196 


358 


185 


352 


174 


Depletion 


266 


255 


346 


196 


358 


185 


352 


174 


Total 


















Applied water 


6,289 


4,861 


6,483 


4,906 


6,561 


4,991 


6,594 


5,023 


Net water 


6,303 


4,874 


6,497 


4,919 


6,576 


5,004 


6,611 


5,036 


Depletion 


6,182 


4,747 


6,370 


4,785 


6,443 


4,864 


6,474 


4,958 


(1) includes conveyance losses, 


recreational i 


jses, energy production, and SWP and CVP carriage water 




requirennents 



















Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 

The principal water management issues facing the region are population growth and environmental 
concerns. The following paragraphs describe legislation, litigation, and issues affecting the region. 

Legislation and Litigation 

EBMUD supplies. The SWRCB held hearings in November 1992 regarding instream flow 
requirements for the Mokelumne River. The Department of Fish and Game, private fishing groups, and 
environmental interest groups want to increase flows below Camanche Reservoir to protect the river's 
fishery. In addition, several water agencies in the Sierra foothills, San Joaquin County, and the Delta 
contend that they should receive some priority in the distribution of Mokelumne River water. If the 
SWRCB rules against EBMUD, the district could be forced to take a large portion of its water from the 
Delta rather than through the Mokelumne Aqueducts. Lower quality water from the Delta would mean 
increased treatment costs which would be passed on to EBMUD customers. In a separate process, the 



73 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Francisco Bay Region 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is reviewing the district's hydropower operations and could 
independently rule for higher fish flows. 

EBMUD diverted its contracted American River water only once, during the 1976-77 drought, when 
the district took 25,000 AF from the Delta to supplement its depleted supplies under an emergency 
agreement with USER. In 1972, a suit was filed protesting EBMUD's right to divert water at Folsom 
South Canal. In 1986, the SWRCB affirmed the right and referred the lawsuit to Alameda Superior 
Court for litigation. A preliminary decision in 1989 confirmed the right to divert water at Folsom South 
Canal and established minimum flows for the American River below Nimbus Dam that would be 
required before EBMUD could divert its supplies. A final decision was made in 1990, which cleared the 
way for the district to seriously consider a connection between the canal and the Mokelumne Aqueducts. 
An EIS/EIR will focus on technical, public health and safety, social, and environmental factors for the 
project. 

Recently, EBMUD filed a lawsuit against Contra Costa County to block use of scarce EBMUD water 
for a housing development. The county certified an EIR for the Dougherty Valley development despite 
the concerns about water supply expressed by the district. EBMUD told the county that it does not have 
the water to supply the proposed 11,000-home development. 

CVP Improvement Act Implementation of the 1992 CVPIA will have some cost impacts on Bay 
Area water users in the form of higher prices for CVP water. The Act allocates a portion of CVP water to 
environmental uses and allows municipal and induMrial users to purchase water fi^om agricultural users. 
(See Volume I, Chapter 2.) 

Local Issues 

Slow-growth movement. Anti-growth sentiment is increasing in some Bay Area communities and 
was evident during many of the 1992 local elections. Solano, Napa, and Contra Costa counties elected 
several slow-growth candidates. Marin County residents had opposed efforts to improve their water 
system delivery capabilities beyond limited expansion of local supplies, fearful that more water would 
mean uncontrolled growth. The Marin Municipal Water District has had for the last three years a 
moratorium on growth within its service area due to limited water supplies. The operational yield of 
present district facilities indicated a 5,000 AF deficit for 1990. After more than 20 years of consistently 
rejecting plans to import more surface water, voters narrowly approved financing to increase the district's 
capacity to import water from the Sonoma County Water Agency to reduce the frequency and severity of 
drought year shortages. 

Contra Costa Water District The quality and reliability of CCWD's Delta water supply has been an 
issue for the district. The proposal to build Los Vaqueros Reservoir addresses a number of related issues 
for the district's water supply and the Delta. The proposed reservoir would be an off-stream storage 
facility and would allow more flexibility in CCWD's operations. Specifically, the district could divert 
higher quality water to Los Vaqueros reservoir during high flows in the Delta. Los Vaqueros water would 
then be available to improve water quality delivered throughout the year and in dry years and provide 
emergency storage. By storing water at certain times of the year, the district could shut down its pumps 



74 



iBulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Francisco Bay Region 

during periods when the fisheries are most sensitive to large diversions. CCWD is planning to have the 
project online by 2000. 

Lagunitas Creek. DFG has not established permanent instream flow requirements below Peters 
iDam on Lagunitas Creek. Interim regulations require an average of 4,000 AF annually to preserve or 
{enhance the anadromous fishery of the creek. Significant changes in the permanent requirements would 
alter Marin MWD's operational yield. 

Drinking Water Standards. The California Department of Health Services is rewriting its surface 
water treatment requirements to comply with the Environmental Protection Agency's new drinking water 
: standards. SFWD was recently given an extension of its operating permit to propose specific plans to 
'meet DHS requirements. SFWD estimates that new facilities for treating Hetch Hetchy supplies, if 
required, could cost about $50 million. 

Water Balance 

Water balances were computed for each Planning Subarea in the San Francisco Bay Region by 

comparing existing and future water demand projections with the projected availability of supply. The 

region total was computed as the sum of the individual subareas. This method does not reflect the 

severity of drought year shortages in some local areas which can be hidden when planning subareas are 

combined within the region. Thus, there could be substantial shortages in some areas during drought 

jperiods. Local and regional shortages could also be less severe than the shortage shown, depending on 

I 

ihow supplies are allocated within the region, a particular water agency's ability to participate in water 

I transfers or demand management programs (including land fallowing or emergency allocation programs), 

land the overall level of reliability deemed necessary to the sustained economic health of the region. 

'Volume I, Chapter 11 presents a broader discussion of demand management options. 

Table SF-12 presents water demands for the 1990 level and for future water demands to 2020 and 
balances them with: (1) supplies from existing facilities and water management programs, and (2) future 
demand management and water supply management options. 

Regional net water demands for the 1990 level of development totaled 6.3 and 4.9 MAF for average 
and drought years respectively. Those demands are projected to increase to 6.6 and 5.0 MAF, 
respectively, by the year 2020, after accounting for a 250,000 AF reduction in urban water demand 
resulting from additional long-term water conservation measures. 

Urban net water demand is projected to increase by 470,000 AF by 2020, primarily due to expected 
increases in population; while, agricultural net water demand remains essentially level. Environmental 
net water demands would remain the same but could increase substantially depending on the outcome of 
several actions currently being undertaken to protect aquatic species. 

Average annual supplies with existing water management programs are inadequate to meet average 
net water demands in this region resulting in a shortage of about 1 8,000 AF by 2020. During droughts, 
without additional water management programs, annual drought year shortages are expected to increase 
to about 478,000 AF by 2020. 



75 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Francisco Bay Region 



Table SF-12. Water Balance 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Demand/Supply 



1990 2020 

average drought average drought 



Net Demand 

Urban -with 1990 level of conservation 

-reductions due to long-term conservation measures (Level I) 
Agricultural 

-reductions due to long-term conservation measures (Level I) 
Environmental 
Other (1) 



1,184 


1.285 


1,654 


-- 


— 


-250 


88 


99 


90 



4,765 


4,765 


3,235 


266 


255 


352 



Total Net Demand 



6,303 4,874 6,61 1 



Water Supplies w/Existing Facilities Under D-1485 for Delta Supplies 

Developed Supplies 

Surface Water 1,591 

Groundwater 97 

Ground Water Overdraft 

Subtotal 1,688 

Dedicated Natural Flow 4,615 



1,346 1,816 1,308 

133 162 165 



1,479 1,978 1,473 

3,085 4,615 3,085 



Total Water Supplies 



6,303 4,564 6,593 



Demand/Supply Balance 



■310 



-18 



Future Water Management Options Level I (2) 

Long-term Supply Augmentation 

Reclaimed 

Local 

Central Valley Project 

State Water Project 
Subtotal - Water Management Options Level I 
Ground Water/Surface Water Use Reduction Resulting from Level I Programs 



38 





30 

68 

-50 



Remaining Demand/Supply Balance Requiring Short Term Drought 
Management and/or Future Level II Options 



(1) Includes conveyances losses, carriage water, recreational uses, and energy production. 

(2) Protection of fish and wildlife and a long-term solution to complex Delta problems will determine the feasibility of several water 
supply augmentation proposals and their water supply benefits. 

With planned Level I options, drought year shortages could be reduced to about 343, (XK) AF by 2020. 
This remaining shortage requires both additional short-term drought management, water transfers and 
demand management programs, and future Level II options depending on the overall level of water 
service reliability deemed necessary by local agencies, to sustain the economic health of the region. 

4c :|e ^ 



76 



)raft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 



CENTRAL COAST REGION 




Along the coast in Monterey Bay. 



ulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Central Coast Region 



CENTRAL COAST REGION 

The Central Coast Region accounts for about 7 percent of California's total land area. It 
[icompasses the area adjacent to the Pacific Ocean including Santa Cruz County in the north through 
anta Barbara County in the south to the Diablo and Temblor mountain ranges on the east. Its 
)pographic features include Monterey and Morro Bay; the Pajaro, Carmel, Santa Maria, Cuyama and 
alinas valleys; and a number of mountain ranges. The Central Coast Region is best known for its 
jgged Pacific coastline, scenic bays and redwood forests. 

The varied geography of the region creates diverse climates. During the summer months, 
mperatures are generally cool along the coastline and warm inland. In the winter, temperatures remain 
ool along the coast and become even cooler inland. 

Annual precipitation in the region ranges from 14 to 45 inches, usually in the form of rain. The 
verage annual precipitation near the City of Salinas is about 14 inches while in the Big Sur area, 
pproximately 30 miles south of Monterey along the coast, precipitation averages about 40 inches a year. 
1 1983, however, the Big Sur area had a surprising 85 inches of rain. Average annual precipitation in 
le southern coastal basins ranges from 1 2 to 20 inches, with most of it occurring from November 
irough April. The southern interior basins usually receive 5 to 10 inches per year; the mountain areas 
;ceiving more than the valley floors. 

*opuIation 

With a 1990 population slightly under 1.3 million, the Central Coast Region contains roughly 4 
ercent of California's population. While most of California experienced a substantial population 
icrease over the past 10 years, growth in this region exceeded the State's average. The collective 
opulation of incorporated cities in the Salinas Valley increased 37 percent during the past decade, 
'opulation centers along the coast, such as San Luis Obispo and Santa Maria, also had large population 
ncreases of 23 and 54 percent, respectively. In addition, significant increases were recorded in the Santa 
fnez Valley and smaller communities in Salinas Valley. An inviting atmosphere of good weather, clean 
ir, and close proximity to the mountains and urbanized areas encouraged this growth. Land and water 
upply limitations and building moratoriums limited population growth in the area near Santa Barbara. 

Population growth in the northern part of the region is also associated with space availability and 
iffordable housing prices. While above the national average, the cost of homes in this area is affordable 
ompared to many other parts of California. Much of the region's growth is the result of people 
nigrating from the San Francisco Bay and Los Angeles areas. Current growth in the region's northern 
irea is primarily in and around Hollister, Salinas, and the Watsonville area. Table CC-1 shows 
copulation projections to 2020 for the region. 

Region Characteristics 
Average Annual Precipitation: 20 inches Average Annual Runoff: 2.477,000 acre-feet 
Land Area: 11.300 square miles 1990 Population: 1,292,900 



77 




Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Central Coast Region 



Table CC-1. Population Projections 

(thousands) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 


Northern 
Southern 


702 
591 


823 
699 


969 
792 


1,129 
888 


Total 


1,293 


1,522 


1,761 


2,017 



Despite the population increases, much of the region is sparsely populated. The principal population 
centers are Santa Cruz, Salinas, Watsonville, Monterey, San Luis Obispo, Santa Maria, Santa Barbara, 
and Lompoc. Most of the region's future population growth continue to be in areas showing recent 
growth. (See Appendix C for maps of the planning subareas and land ownership in the region.) 

The economy of many areas of the region is tied to military installations. Fort Ord, Hunter-Liggett 
Military Reservation, Camp Roberts, and Vandenberg AFB are the major facilities. The Monterey 
Peninsula area is now preparing for the closure of Fort Ord. The cities of Seaside and Marina will suffer 
the greatest impacts , but the entire area is expected to be affected by the loss of military personnel, 
civilian workers, and their families. 

Land Use 

Publicly-owned lands constitute approximately 28 percent of the region's area. The four major 
military installations within the region occupy 340,000 acres. The abundance of state parks and national 
forest land (Los Padres, 1 .3 million acres) offers the public many recreational opportunities. Elkhom 
Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve, one of the few remaining coastal wetlands, showcases 
miles of scenic wetlands and rolling hills. The slough is on a migratory flyway and is an important 
feeding and resting ground for a variety of waterfowl. Irrigated and nonirrigated agriculture still remains 
the dominant land use for most of the Central Coast region. Intensive agriculture exists in the Salinas 
and Pajaro valleys in the north and the Santa Maria and lower Santa Ynez valleys in the south. Moderate 
levels of agricultural activity also occur near the Upper Salinas, South Coast, and Cuyama areas. Most of 
the region's irrigated agriculture is in the northern and southwestern valleys, and in recent years irrigated 
acreage has remained fairly stable. Figure CC-1 shows land use, along with imports, exports, and water 
supplies for the Central Coast Region. 

Wine grape acreage has increased in the upper Salinas Valley in San Luis Obispo County but 
decreased in the lower valley within Monterey County. However, acreage planted to vegetables and other 
truck crops far surpassed that planted to vineyard and orchards. Cut flowers and specialty crops, such as 
asparagus, mushroom, artichokes, and holly, are distinctive to the region's northern area. The flower 
seed industry in Lompoc Valley is a thriving business which also attracts many tourists each year. 
Portions of the upper Salinas Valley and Carrizo Plain are dry farmed to produce winter grain. These 
areas also support sheep and cattle ranching. Industries other than agriculture are not well developed, but 
there are petroleum refining operations near Santa Maria and a significant well field in the Cuyama 
Valley as well as frozen food plants in the Pajaro Valley. 



78 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Central Coast Region 



[ocb Loaoad 
Lake , 



A 



PRES^rr WATER 8UPPUE8 

{1,000 AF/Yr.) 



San FeJipe Udi t 
Ssnts CI*rM / 55 

Caaal 



\ 



-^tre 



-^^ 



v^. 



LOCAL SURFACE WATER DEVEPLOMENT 78 

GROUND WATER PERENNIAL YIELD 092 

CEhfTRAL VALLEY PROJECT 55 

OTHER FEDERAL WATER DEVELOPMENT 66 







i^ 




WATER RECLAMATION 






6 






1 




DEDICATED NATURAL FLOW 






3 




Y\ 


• 

Bollistor 




WATER SUPPLY 






809 




1 _^ 


r Conduit 




GROUND WATER OVERDRAFT 






248 




\\ 


(\ 




TOTAL 






1,148 




\l/^ 




Ligind 








^ 




w^ 




H Urban Land 
■ Irrigated Land 








^ 


k: 




L 


-^- Region Water Transfer 

(1,000'a of Aer»-FMt pw Ymt) 




NOF 


^ 


V 










r" 




^L 











y^Nmeimit 
Lake 



rv* 




N 

I 



Mbtil« Hoc 
Beaerroir 



Wbale Rock 
Condul t 



SmnU 
^ \^Mar£artt* 



'jK ^Saa Luis Obisp 

".'.>s8WlERN 

Lopex 



fisqaouc 






v^*^ 



Sou lit Coast Conduit- 



10 20 30 



Figure CC-1. Central Coast Region 
Land Use, Imports, Exports, and Water Supplies 



79 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Central Coast Region 



Urban development is beginning to encroach on the agricultural lands in the highly productive inland 
valleys. Total irrigated agricultural land acreage in the Central Coastal Region decreased from 459,000 
acres in 1980 to 430,000 acres in 1990 (-6 percent). Total crop acreage decreased from 531,000 acres in 
1980 to 528,000 acres in 1990. Although in the Southern PSA total irrigated land decreased from 
156,000 acres to about 145,000 acres, total crop acres increased from about 155,000 acres in 1980 to 
about 182,000 acres in 1990. This indicated an increase in multiple cropping. Urban acreage also 
increased from 182,000 acres to 240,100 acres during the same period. 

Increases in defense related jobs associated with the space shuttle and missile testing programs, at 
Vandenburg Air Force Base accelerated the urbanization of the Santa Maria and lower Santa Ynez valle\ 
during the 1970's. Growth was experienced in all areas of urban land use, but primarily in the residential 
and industrial categories. Prime agricultural land was lost to the initial wave of development. However, 
some local growers have compensated for the agricultural land losses by utilizing nonirrigated pasture 
lands. 

Much of the coastal strip has not been developed because of steep slopes, inaccessibility, and 
military-use restrictions. Developed coastal areas consist primarily of tourist and resort areas (Monterey 
Bay, Cambria, Morro Bay, and Pismo Beach) and middle-to-upper income residential communities 
(Carmel, Lompoc, Goleta, and Santa Barbara). 

Water Supply 

Ground water is the most significant source of water supply for the region. Supplies from federal and 
local surface projects account for roughly 17 percent of the total supply. Completion of the Coastal 
Branch of the State Water Project, as well as other local projects, will lessen the reliance on ground water 
supplies. Figure CC-2 shows the region's 1990 level sources of supply. 

The average water supply for the Central Coastal Region for the 1990 level of development is 
estimated at 1 .15 MAF. Water supplies are projected to increase approximately 134,000 AF by 2020. 
The projected increases in supply come from the San Felipe project of the CVP, the Coastal Branch of the 
SWP, and the Los Padres Dam enlargement/desalination project, a local water supply project. In 1990, 
ground water pumping amounted to 82 percent of total supplies, 26 percent of which was in excess of the 
estimated perennial yield and is considered overdraft. 



80 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Central Coast Region 



Figure CC-2. Central Coast Region 

Water Suppiy Sources (Average Conditions) 

1990ievei 



Ground Water 

82% 




Re- 
claimed 
0.7% 



includes imports from the federal Central Valley Project. 
^*lncludes local surface and other federal projects. 



Supply with Existing Facilities 

There are in excess of 60 reservoirs within the Central Coastal region, the majority of which are 
owned by private concerns. The reservoirs in the region are used for individual and municipal water 
needs, flood control, recreation, irrigation, and riparian habitat. The major reservoirs in the region are 
listed in Table CC-2. 



81 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Central Coast Region 



Table CC-2. Major Reservoirs 



Reservoir Name 


River 


Capacity (1,000 AF) 


Owner 


Santa Margarita 


Salinas 


24 


US Corps of Engineers 


San Antonio 


San Antonio 


330 


MCWRA 


Nacimiento 


Nacimiento 


340 


MCWRA 


Gibralter 


Santa Ynez 


9 


City of Santa Barbara 


Cachuma 


Santa Ynez 


190 


USBR 


Whale Rock 


Old Creek 


41 


DWR 


Lopez 


Arroyo Grande 
Creek 


52 


SLOCFCWCD 


Twitchell 


Cuyama River 


240 


USBR 



In the Northern PSA, ground water is the primary source of water for both urban and agricultural use. 
The Carmel, Pajaro, and Salinas rivers provide most of the ground water recharge for the area. The San 
Antonio and Nacimiento reservoirs regulate the Salinas River. Table CC-3 shows water supplies with 
existing facilities and water management programs. 

Basins in the Southern PSA are smaller, but important to their local communities. These shallow 
riparian basins underlie seasonal coastal streams. During years with normal or above normal rainfall, 
aquifers in the basins are continuously replenished by creek flows. In years of below normal 
precipitation, the creek flows are intermittent, flow is insufficient for both agricultural and municipal 
uses, wells become dry, and seawater intrudes some coastal basins. 

Table CC-3. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities and Programs 

(Decision 1485 Operating Criteria for Delta Supplies) 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Supply 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Surface 


















Ijocal 


78 


56 


78 


56 


78 


56 


78 


56 


Imports by local 


























Colorado River 


























CVP 


55 


23 


55 


23 


60 


23 


63 


SHi 


Other federal 


65 


46 


65 


46 


65 


46 


65 


HH 


SWP 

























Ground water 


692 


774 


686 


772 


724 


817 


755 


858 


Overdraft 


249 


249 


249 


249 


249 


249 


249 


249 


Reclaimed 


6 


6 


6 


6 


6 


6 


6 


6 


Dedicated natural flow 


3 





3 





3 





3 


■■b 


Total 


1,148 


1,154 


1,142 


1,152 


1,185 


1,197 


1219 


1238 



82 



I 



I 






Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Central Coast Region 



Water Supply Reliability and Drought Management Strategies. Many large and small communities 
in the region have initiated both voluntary and mandatory water conservation practices. These 
procedures will undoubtedly be initiated or revived for future critical water years. Practices range from 
voluntary water conservation and limited outdoor watering to mandatory water rationing and little or no 
outdoor watering. The City of Salinas relies on outdoor watering restrictions based upon time of day 
water use limitations, and voluntary water conservation practices. Recently, many of the communities 
who mandated water rationing during the drought have elected to implement a voluntary water 
conservation program. Currently, Monterey has an outdoor watering schedule based upon time of day 
restrictions, and the city's waste water ordinance is in effect. The communities of Watsonville and Santa 
Cruz have voluntary water conservation programs in force. Outdoor watering is based upon the weather 
in Watsonville. Water runoff is prohibited in these communities. 

The Marina County Water District in Monterey County, near Fort Ord, has stepped up its 
conservation effort to deal with the issue of drought and sea water intrusion. In 1991, the Marina County 
Water District adopted an ordinance designed to prohibit water waste and encourage conservation efforts. 
Water conservation projects initiated included a low-flow showerhead retrofit program, resulting in the 
replacement of one-third of all showerheads in the district. A water audit program was also initiated to 
provide owners of both businesses and residences with a personalized water conservation plan. 

Water supply shortages occurred in the South Coast, San Luis Obispo, Arroyo Grande, and North 
Coast areas of the region because of the 1987-92 drought in the Central Coast Region. Dwindling 
siiiface water supplies forced retail water agencies in these areas to depend more on limited ground water 
supplies and water conservation to make up deficits. Portions of the Southern PSA experienced 
unprecedented supply shortages. In the summer of 1990, retail water agencies in the service area of Lake 
Cachuma were confronted with the prospect that only 12 months of supply remained in that reservoir. 
Two of these agencies were the Goleta Water District and the City of Santa Barbara. The Goleta Water 
District began implementing a mandatory water rationing program in 1988 for all urban and agricultural 
customers within its service area. The historical water use by all customers was evaluated and a 
percentage reduction was assigned to each; financial penalties were established to prevent 
noncompliance. In addition, the agency established a rebate program that involved the purchase and 
installation of ultra-low flush toilets for residential customers, passed ordinances that temporarily banned 
certain water related activities, and vigorously advertised water conservation. The conservation efforts 
by the retail customers exceeded the savings levels imposed by the district and resulted in extra water 
supplies being delivered to agricultural customers. 

The City of Santa Barbara implemented similar strategies in combating supply shortages. The city 
also established a drought patrol to monitor water use behavior, and penalties and citations were handed 
out to violators. In addition, the city examined and approved action to: 1) import emergency SWP water 
from Ventura County and 2) examine the potential of sea water desalination. An emergency pipeline was 
installed to bring SWP water into the Santa Barbara-Carpenteria area from Casitas Lake in Ventura 



83 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Central Coast Region 

County by exchange, and a sea water desalination plant was constructed in 1991-92 that is capable of 
producing 10,000 AF per year. 

During the height of the drought, the counties of San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara relaxed certain 
health restrictions on the use of grey water for residential landscape irrigations. Homeowners in San Luis 
Obispo County were permitted to use secondary washing machine rinse water for these irrigations and 
were required to discharge the water underground. 

In Santa Barbara, irrigations with grey water were permitted on nonedible plant materials only and 
homeowners were required to discharge the water through drip systems or leach lines. Regulations on 
the grey water use were not relaxed in other parts of the region. 

Supply with Additional Facilities and Water Management Programs 

Future water management options are presented in two levels to better reflect the status of 
investigations required to implement them. 

O Level I options are those that have undergone extensive investigation and environmental analyses 

and are judged to have a high likelihood of being implemented by 2020. 

O Level II options are those that could fill the remaining gap between water supply and demand. 
These options require more investigation and alternative analyses. 

Increased use of SWP water in the Southern PSA and CVP water in the Northern PSA will require 
additional transportation facilities. As outlined in the water supply section, many agencies are looking to 
these import sources for their future supplies. Local alternatives being examined include increasing 
capacity in local storage reservoirs or, in some cases, authorizing new projects. Cloud seeding and 
desalination are showing to be effective in parts of the region. 

New Los Padres Reservoir. To improve the reliability of water supplies in the Monterey Bay area, 
the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District has taken a number of actions including water 
conservation, water reclamation, and investigating several water development alternatives. 
Improvements to the system also are needed to provide water for municipal and industrial as well as 
environmental water needs of the area. Current supply is inadequate during drought years when 
shortages develop due to lack of adequate storage facilities. The Monterey Peninsula Water management 
District investigated 32 water supply alternatives before selecting five alternatives. The preferred 
environmentally superior alternative is the 24,000 AF New Los Padres Reservoir with or without 
desalination. The New Los Padres Dam would be on the Carmel River and would completely inundate 
the existing dam and reservoir. The New Los Padres Reservoir could provide an average water supply of 
22,000 AF usable storage to the Monterey Peninsula's water supply system. 

Many areas within the Southern PSA use local surface projects and ground water extractions as their 
primary sources of water. Surface water storage facilities include Salinas Reservoir, Twitchell Reservoir, 
and Lake Cachuma. Annual precipitation and spring runoff from nearby mountains determine the 



84 



BulletiD 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Central Coast Region 



reliability of these vital water supplies. In some instances, emergency measures, such as wheeling local 
and SWP water from Ventura County to Santa Barbara in 1990, must be implemented to ensure an 
adequate supply of water. In 1 992, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties approved extending the 
Coastal Branch of the SWP, which will increase their future water supply reliability, assuming present 
limitations of Delta diversions can be removed and additional SWP facilities and programs can be 
implemented. Table CC-4 shows water supplies with additional Level I water management programs. 



Table CC-4. Water Supplies with Level I Water Management Programs 

(Decision 1485 Operating Criteria for Deita Suppiies) 

(tKiousands of acre -feet) 



Suppiy 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 




average 


drought 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


average drought 


Surface 


















Local 


78 


56 


102 


78 


102 


78 


100 


74 


Imports by local 


























Colorado River 


























CVP 


55 


23 


74 


23 


99 


23 


102 


23 


Other federal 


65 


46 


65 


46 


65 


46 


65 


46 


SWP 








43 


36 


43 


36 


43 


36 


Ground water 


692 


774 


595 


716 


615 


760 


656 


804 


Overdraft 


249 


249 


249 


249 


249 


249 


249 


249 


Reclaimed 


6 


6 


37 


37 


44 


44 


50 


50 


Dedicated natural flow 


3 





3 





3 





3 





Total 


1,148 


1,154 


1,168 


1,185 


1,220 


1,236 


1,268 


1,282 



Agencies within San Luis Obispo County have requested almost 4,830 AF from the SWP, while 
requests from Santa Barbara County total approximately 42,486 AF. The County of San Luis Obispo is 
also negotiating to take delivery of its full entitlement of over 17,000 AF of Nacimiento Reservoir water 
by the year 2000. Availability of SWP supplies in San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara counties will 
lessen the severity and frequency of water supply shortages and will help alleviate ground water 
overdraft. 

The City of Lompoc has voted not to take its 4,000 AF entitlement of SWP water and plans to 
negotiate for federal water from Lake Cachuma. Currently, Lake Cachuma water goes to residents in the 
southern portion of the Central Coast Region, in the Santa Barbara area, and in the Santa Ynez River 
Water Conservation District. 

Other measures to augment water supplies are under consideration by various water agencies. Cloud 
seeding was effective in the Monterey County mountains. Desalination, reservoir enlargement, and 
importing surface water are options to increase surface water supplies. The USBR is studying the cost 
effectiveness of extending the San Felipe Project of the federal CVP, which would deliver water to the 



85 



Bulletm 16(^93 Administrative Draft Central Coast Region 



Pajaro Valley. Several local government and water agencies are preparing water management plans 
which will address short- medium-, and long-term schemes to reduce water use and bring in additional 
water. 

Reclaimed water will play an increasing role in water supplies for nonconsumptive use. The Carmel 
Area Wastewater District will begin construction during 1993 of a reclaimed water project that will serve 
seven golf courses and two recreational areas in the Pebble Beach area of Monterey County. Plans call 
for enough reclaimed water to meet almost 100 percent of the users' irrigation demands. The project is 
being developed with the Pebble Beach Community Services District. 

The Monterey Regional peninsula Water Pollution Control Agency was formed in the 1970s to seek 
solutions to the problem of water pollution, and is comprised of a dozen local entities. During the late 
1970s the MRWPCA began purchasing the treatment plants and outfalls owned by its member agencies. 
To comply with regulations of the SWRCB and the U.S. EPA, old outfalls were replaced by a large 
outfall discharging two miles offshore. The installation of interceptor pipelines and pump stations to 
divert waste water from Pacific Grove and the upgrade of the Monterey Treatment Plant was completed 
in 1981. In 1983, a series of interceptor pipelines, pump stations, and a new ocean outfall were 
completed. 

In the final EIS of the Salinas Valley Seawater Intrusion Program, construction of a tertiary treatment 
plant is proposed adjacent to the regional plant. The facility would intercept waste water flows after the 
secondary treatment and process them to produce filtered effluent suitable for irrigation. The MRWPCA 
has hired CH2MHill to prepare preliminary designs for the project, of which are expected to be 
completed by the end of 1993. 

Water Use 

In 1990, water use in the region was divided 60 to 40 percent between the Northern and Southern 
PSAs, respectively. Agricultural water use accounts for 78 percent of the region's total water use, while 
urban water use is 20 percent of the total. The remainder of the region's water use is for energy 
production, environmental needs, conveyance losses, and recreation. The 1990 level net water use in the 
region is about 1.15 MAP. Projections indicate that average annual water demand will increase about 12 
percent to 1 .3 MAP by 2020. Water supplies for the region will increase about 12 percent by that time 
with planned additional water management programs. Figure CC-3 shows net water demand for the 
1990 level of development. 



86 



J 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Central Coast Region 



Rgure CC-3. Central Coast Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990 level 



Agricultural 
78% 




Instream 

'.3% 



Other 
1.8% 



The 1990 level drought demand is 1.21 MAF and it will increase to 1.38 MAF, or 14 percent, by 
2020. Water supplies during drought are projected to increase by 12 percent. Additional ground water 
overdraft and shortages are anticipated to occur as demand increases. 



87 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Central Coast Region 



Urban Water Use 

Population in the Central Coast is expected to grow by about 56 percent by 2020 to over 2 million 
people. Figure CC-4 shows applied urban water demand, by sector, for the 1990 level of development. 
Table CC-5 shows urban water demand projections to 2020. 



Figure CC-4. Central Coast Region 
Applied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990 level 




Governmental 

4% 



88 






bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Central Coast Region 



Table CC-5. Urban Water Demand 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



1990 2000 2010 2020 

Planning Subareas 

average drought average drought average drought average drought 



Northern 

Applied water demand 151 152 176 178 207 210 242 245 

Net water demand 131 132 152 154 179 182 209 212 

Depletion 118 118 137 138 160 162 187 189 



Southern 


















Applied water demand 


122 


125 


139 


143 


158 


163 


178 


184 


Net water demand 


98 


101 


111 


114 


125 


129 


140 


145 


Depletion 


98 


101 


111 


114 


125 


129 


140 


145 


Total 


















Applied water demand 


273 


277 


315 


321 


365 


373 


420 


429 


Net water demand 


229 


233 


263 


268 


304 


311 


349 


357 


1 Depletion 


216 


219 


248 


252 


285 


291 


327 


334 



In the Southern PSA, average 1990 level per capita use for the San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara 
ireas was 190 and 187 gallons, respectively. The per capita water use for the Southern PSA is 187 
^gallons, while that in the Upper Salinas Valley area, in the region's warmer interior, is 223 gallons. Per 
I papita use could increase by about 5 percent in San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara by 2020. 

In the Northern PSA, the average per capita use for the region is about 190 gallons per day. This 
value varied from a high of about 250 gallons per day in the warmer inland communities of Hollister and 
King City to a low of about 150 gallons per day in the chronically water short Monterey-Carmel area. 

With a few exceptions, most cities and metropolitan centers as well as predominant urban water 
demands in the region are geographically near U.S. Highway 101. Construction is primarily in the form 

I [of single and multiple-family style housing units and commercial services. Even though demand has 
•generally increased in the region, per capita water use values have not changed significantly. This is 
because: (1) higher water using industries have not established themselves in areas with new 
I |construction and, (2) the number of multiple-family dwelling units built counterbalance the 
single-family units. 

Table CC-5 projects the applied and net urban water use for the next 30 years. While the population 
is expected to increase 56 percent, the comparatively low per capita use rate in the areas where growth is 
expected, coupled with water saving technologies employed in new developments, will not produce a 
proportional increase in water use for the region. 

Agricultural Water Use 

Projections indicate that agricultural water use will increase, from the 1990 level, 4 percent by 2020. 
Irrigated agriculture in the northern Central Coast Region has remained relatively stable during the past 



89 



Bulletm 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Central Coast Region 



350 



300 



250 



200 



150 



100 



50 







Acres (X 1 ,000) 



Acre-Feet (X 1 ,000) 




1,050 



900 



750 



600 



450 



300 



150 







Grain Other Truck Grapes 

Afalfa Other DecidJous 

■Acreage METPW ■Applied Water 



Figure CC-5. 1990 Central Coast Region 
Acreage, ETAW, and Applied Water for Major Crops 



90 



iulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Central Coast Region 



lecade. Total agricultural land acreage has not changed significantly and total crop acreage has increased 
lue to an increase in multiple cropping of vegetables in the Salinas Valley. There has been a slight shift 
way from permanent crops such as grapes and apples to annual crops. Acreage planted in strawberries, 
very high-market value annual crop, has increased. Lettuce and other annual crops have also increased 
jreage since 1980. In the southern portion of the region, irrigated agricultural activity is projected to 
ntensify slightly by 2020. Although total irrigated land will gradually decrease, planted and harvested 
rop acres will increase because of the: (1) intensification of multiple-cropping and (2) conversion of 
mdeveloped and formerly nonirrigated lands to irrigable lands. Vineyards (primarily wine grapes) show 
he most significant acreage expansion. Truck crop and citrus and subtropical fruit orchard acres will 
cmain relatively stable, while other crop categories will experience decreases. Table CC-6 shows 
mgated acreage projections to 2020. Figure CC-5 shows the 1990 level irrigated acreage, ETAW, and 
ipplied water for major crops in the region. 

Despite the recent drought and continued long-term overdraft in some areas, agricultural water 
upplies have remained dependable. Virtually all applied irrigation water was pumped ground water, 
intil water from the CVP San Felipe Project was introduced into San Benito County in June 1987. 
jround water still constitutes a large majority (82 percent) of the water supply; and, although not without 
ts problems, such as sea water intrusion, the ready availability of ground water is important to the 
tability of this area. Irrigated crop acreage is expected to remain roughly stable with only a slight 
ncrease. Table CC-7 shows the 1990 level evapotranspiration of applied water by crop. Table CC-8 
hows agricultural water demand projections to 2020. 

I Table CC-6. Irrigated Crop Acreage (thousands of acres) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 


Northern 
Southern 


346 
182 


356 
186 


371 
187 


379 

187 % 


Total 


528 


542 


558 


566 



Table CC-7. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop 



Irrigated Crop 


Total Acres 
(thousands) 


Total ETAW 

(thousands of 

acre-feet) 


Irrigated Crop 


Total Acres 
(thousands) 


Total ETAW 

(thousands of 

acre-feet) 


Grain 


28 


5 


Pasture 


20 


51 


Sugar beets 


5 


8 


Tomatoes 


14 


21 


Corn 


3 


3 


Other truck 


321 


415 


Other field 


16 


17 


Other deciduous 


20 


28 


Alfalfa 


27 


68 


Vineyard 


56 


61 








Citrus/olives 


18 


27 




Total 


528 


704 



91 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Central Coast Region 



Table CC-8. Agricultural Water Demand 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Planning Subareas 



1990 2000 2010 2020 

average drought average drought average drought average drought 



Northern 
















";1. 


Applied water demand 


707 


711 


737 


742 


767 


772 


792 


^ : ^' 


Net water demand 


553 


594 


571 


615 


589 


634 


602 


^' 


Depletion 


543 


583 


561 


604 


579 


623 


592 


M^ 


Southern 
















§ ■ 


Applied water demand 


434 


467 


431 


464 


416 


447 


408 


4f: 


Net water demand 


342 


367 


341 


367 


333 


357 


328 


# 


Depletion 


342 


367 


341 


367 


333 


357 


328 


m 


Total 


















Applied water demand 


1,141 


1,178 


1,168 


1,206 


1,183 


1,219 


1,200 


1,2« 


Net water demand 


895 


961 


912 


982 


922 


991 


930 


1,003 


Depletion 


885 


950 


902 


971 


912 


980 


920 


992 





















About one-third of the winegrape acreage in the Salinas Valley has been converted to low volume 
irrigation systems in recent years. There has also been a slight trend to buried drip irrigation in vegetable 
crops in the same area. This trend is even more pronounced in San Benito' County. About one-fourth of 
these plantings are currently using this method. In this same area the small acreage of new deciduous 
tree plantings are on low volume systems. Water conservation measures implemented by growers for 
their irrigation operations are often related to operating cost reduction. Drip, low-flow emitters, and 
sprinklers are used for much of the grape, citrus, and subtropical fruit orchards (vineyards are also 
retrofitted with overhead sprinklers for frost protection). Growers also use hand-moved sprinklers to 
meet pre-irrigation and seed germination requirements for most truck, com, tomato, and some field 
crops; this is usually followed by furrow irrigation. Seedling transplants for some truck crops eliminates 
the need for seed germination irrigation. 

Environmental Water Use 

The recent drought has created problems for the fish and wildlife in the region. Along the rivers, 
riparian habitat has diminished. Likewise, the lack of precipitation has weakened or killed trees and 
native vegetation in the foothill and mountain areas, creating potential fire problems, insect infestation, 
and disease. 

The Carmel River, San Luis Obispo Creek, and Santa Ynez River have historically been major 
spawning habitats for steelhead. However, steelhead migration has been reduced by dam construction, 
low flows due to surface water diversions, poor water quality, and habitat degradation. A number of 
projects have been proposed for these systems, ranging from dam enlargement on the Carmel and Santa 



92 



k! ulletiii 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Central Coast Region 



nez rivers to a water reclamation project on San Luis Obispo Creek. Environmental net water demand 
ccounts for 3,000 AF. Table CC-9 shows the total environmental instream water needs for the region. 

In the Southern portion of the Central Coast Region, there are no federal or State mandated wetlands. 
b the north, Elkhom Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve is a 1 ,340 acre coastal area which 
rotects the habitat or many species of birds, fish, and invertebrates. The reserve is owned by the 
tepartment of Fish and Game. The slough is one of the few relatively undisturbed coastal wetlands 
jmaining in California. It also serves as a feeding and resting ground for migratory fowl. The reserve 
sceives no fresh water. 

Table CC-9. Environmental Instream Water Needs 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Stream 



1990 2000 2010 2020 

average drought average drought average drought average drought 



Carmei Rh^er 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 




Total 

<Vpplied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



4 2 

3 

3 



2 4 

3 

3 



93 



BuUetin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Central Coast Region 



' ■> Coaduit 




Lzg znd 
A Water Recreation Area 
• Hydroelectric Power Plarrt 
■• Federal Wild and Scenic River 



WATER RECREATION AREAS 

1. Loch Lomond and 
Henry Cowell Redwoods 

2. Pfeiffer Big Sur S.P. 

3. Lalce San Antonio RA 

4. Lake Nacimianto RA 

5. Lopez Lake RA 



South Corns t Coaduit- 



10 20 30 



Figure CC-6. Central Coast Region 
Water Recreation Areas 



94 



luUetin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Central Coast Region 



j)ther Water Use 

Other water uses in the region include water for recreation and energy production. Water for 
creation and energy is equivalent to roughly one percent of total demand for the region and is expected 
) remain stable in coming years. Recreational opportunities in the region benefit from the many lakes, 
ivers, parks and forests. Activities include hiking, swimming, fishing, boating, camping, and water 
kiing. Recreational water use accounted for over 1,000 AF in 1990. There does not appear to be any 
jdditional future recreation water use prospects for the region. Surface water recreation is available at 
tan Antonio, Nacimiento, Lopez Lake, Twitchell, and Lake Cachuma reservoirs, among others. Most 
jffer fishing, boating, camping, and water skiing. Figure CC-6 shows water recreation areas in the 
bgion. 

Cooling water is integral to the operations of electrical power plants (gas, oil, and nuclear). Many of 
ne region's power plants are located along the coastline and use sea water for cooling. Injection of 
Ireshwater into the underground oil fields accounted for almost 14,000 AF of water use in 1990 for the 
anta Ynez area. Table CC-10 shows the total water demands for this region. 

* TableCC~10. Total Water Demands 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Category of Use 



1990 2000 

average drought average drought 



2010 2020 

average drought average drought 



MrtMin 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



273 
229 
216 



277 
233 
219 



315 
263 
248 



321 
268 
252 



365 
304 
285 



373 
311 
291 



420 
349 
327 



429 
357 
334 



Agricultural 

JAppiied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



1,141 1,178 1,168 1.206 1,183 1,219 1,200 1,242 

895 961 912 982 922 991 930 1003 

885 950 902 971 912 980 920 992 



Environmental 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



Other (1) 


















Applied water 


18 


181 


18 


18 


18 


18 


18 


18 


Net water 


21 


19 


21 


19 


21 


19 


21 


19 


Depletion 


21 


19 


21 


19 


21 


19 


21 


19 


Total 



















Applied water 1436 1475 1505 
Net water 1148 1213 1199 
Depletion 1125 1188 1174 


1547 
1269 
1242 


1570 
1250 
1221 


1612 
1321 
1290 


1642 
1303 
1271 


1691 
1379 
1345 


(1) includes conveyance losses, recreational uses, and energy production. 


95 













Bulletm 160-93 Administrative Draft Central Coast Region 



Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 

The Central Coast Region, with its inland valleys and coastal ground water basins, presents 
distinctive water management issues. With limited surface supply and fewer surface water storage 
facilities and a growing demand for water, an increased dependence on ground water pumping is 
necessary to meet the region's needs. As ground water extractions exceed ground water replenishment, 
many of the region's aquifers are experiencing overdraft conditions. This condition has allowed sea 
water to advance into some coastal freshwater aquifers. Sea water intrusion is a continuing threat to 
ground water reservoirs, and limits on ground water pumping and use are currently being discussed. 
Unless additional local surface water storage facilities are built and water is imported by the CVP and 
SWP, the region will not be able to support existing water uses let alone additional water users. Recently, 
the drought has required many communities in the region to implement stringent water conservation 
programs. 

Legislation and Litigation 

Nacimiento Releases. Over the past several years, two lawsuits were filed seeking to control the 
water releases from Nacimiento Reservoir. The first one was filed by a group of homeowners and 
interested individuals in the Nacimiento area. Initially, the group obtained a temporary restraining order 
preventing water releases from the reservoir. However, the order was later released and the plaintiff's 
request for an injunction was denied. In addition, the court found that the Monterey County FCWCD 
(now Monterey County Water Agency) was not required to comply with CEQA in setting its yearly 
release schedule. The decision is now on appeal. The second lawsuit was settled shortly after it was 
filed by a recreation concessionaire at Nacimiento to maintain the recreation at the reservoir during the 
drought. The Monterey County FCWCD agreed to retain water in the reservoir for recreation uses for 
the year, but the action did not set a precedent for future years. 

Regional Issues 

SWP Water. Recently, San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara counties voted to extend the SWP 
Coastal Branch to ensure their domestic and agricultural water supplies. The most pressing issue for the 
region at this time is determining how the SWP water will be used. The San Luis Obispo County Board 
of Supervisors approved sending draft water supply contracts to cities and water districts to determine 
their interest in water supplies and amounts from the SWP. A group of farmers and property owners near 
the Nipomo Community Services District decided to form an irrigation district to receive SWP water. 
The City of Paso Robles is declining any SWP water and is working with other communities to get water 
from Lake Nacimiento. 

Cloud Seeding. In early 1990, the Monterey County FCWCD initiated a cloud seeding program 
which was designed to increase rainfall and runoff for the Arroyo Seco River, as well as the San Antonio 
and Nacimiento reservoirs. As part of the rainfall enhancement program, aircraft seeding operations 
dispensed silver iodide. An experimental radio controlled, ground based propane dispenser was also 
installed in the Arroyo Seco area. Overall, the Monterey County Water Agency concluded that rainfall 
increased from 12-16 percent for water year 1990-91. 



% 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Central Coast Region 



Santa Barbara County proposed a cloud seeding design for the 1992-1993 winter program similar to 
the previous year. The proposed project design is ideally suited to conduct a state-of-the-art operation. 
The key components are a dedicated weather radar, a seeding aircraft, remotely controlled ground 
generators, computerized GUIDE model, and an experienced weather modification meteorologist familiar 
with the area. 

For the past two years, in San Luis Obispo County, the City of San Luis Obispo, and Zone 3 of the 
San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District conducted a cloud seeding 
program. 

Local Issues 

Desalination. The City of Santa Barbara's sea water desalination plant began operation in early 
March 1992. The plant operated until early June, when it was shut down; the plant will remain shut 
down until it is needed. Operations of the plant in 1992 helped to alleviate further reductions in 
agricultural, municipal and residential water use. The cost to produce the water was relatively high for an 
area that relies on local surface supplies and ground water. 

Pajaro Valley Shortages. The Pajaro Valley is experiencing adverse effects from the recent drought, 
most notably ground water overdraft and accelerated sea water intrusion. Coastal wells and the ground 
water are becoming unusable in the Sunset Beach, Pajaro Dunes, and Springfield areas. Local 
homeowners installed expensive water purification equipment, purchased bottled water, or trucked water 
in to solve the problem. The homeowners currently are negotiating with City of Watsonville officials to 
obtain a potable water supply. Watsonville officials proposed a pipeline from the city limits to the Sunset 
Beach area at a cost of $10,000 per home. The pipeline construction project will take approximately 
three years to complete, but will provide a potable water supply for the residents. 

' To better manage its water resources, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, in cooperation 
with the USBR, is preparing a Basin Management Plan for the Pajaro Valley. To meet the future 
demands of the area, a combination of alternatives must be employed. 

I , Pajaro Valley Water Augmentation. A $92 million Basin Management Plan for the Pajaro Valley 
Water Management Agency was approved in May 1993 by agency directors. Key elements of the 
preferred alternative includes a dam on College Lake to create a 10,000 AF reservoir and a connection to 
the San Felipe branch of the CVP and a coastal pipeline to meet agricultural users between Highway 1 
and the ocean. The proposed San Felipe extension involves transporting water from the existing Santa 
Clara Conduit, a key feature of the San Felipe Division, which delivers water from San Luis Reservoir 

into Santa Clara County, with a fork into San Benito County. The pipeline, with a capacity up to 67 cfs, 

I 

could provide a maximum annual volume of 19,900 AF annually for municipal and industrial, as well as 
agricultural, water use in the Watsonville area. The supply for the San Felipe extension will probably 
come from reallocation of CVP supply. To date, no contract negotiations have occurred to bring water 
into the Watsonville area. 



97 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Central Coast Region 



Monterey Peninsula Problems. Improvements to the Monterey Peninsula's water supply system are 
needed for several reasons. Water supply in average rainfall years far exceeds demand; however, the area 
is vulnerable to climate variability and the impact of multi-year droughts. When dry years occur, 
shortages rapidly develop due to inadequate storage on the Carmel River. The drought, increases in 
ground water pumping, limited surface water storage facilities, and urban growth have all contributed to 
the need for an increased firm water supply. Demands for water will continue to increase as new homes 
and businesses are built. Tourism, a major industry for the region, has also increased since construction 
of the Monterey Bay Aquarium. Without an increase in the firm water supply for the region, the risk of 
shortages in dry years will increase. The Monterey Peninsula Water Management District has taken a 
number of actions to address the need for a reliable water supply. The district has already implemented 
several programs, including an urban water conservation program. 

Water Balance 

Water balances were computed for each Planning Subarea in the Central Coast Region by comparing 
existing and future water demand projections with the projected availability of supply. The region total 
was computed as the sum of the individual subareas. This method does not reflect the severity of 
drought year shortages in some local areas which can be hidden when planning subareas are combined 
within the region. Thus, there could be substantial shortages in some areas during drought periods. 
Local and regional shortages could also be less severe than the shortage shown, depending on how 
supplies are allocated within the region, a particular water agency's ability to participate in water transfers 
or demand management programs (including land fallowing or emergency allocation programs), and the 
overall level of reliability deemed necessary to the sustained economic health of the region. Volume I, 
Chapter 1 1 presents a broader discussion of demand management options. 

Table CC-1 1 presents water demands for the 1990 level and for future water demands to 2020 and 
balances them with: (1) supplies from existing facilities and water management programs, and (2) future 
demand management and water supply management options. 

Regional net water demands for the 1990 level of development totaled 1.15 and 1.21 MAF for 
average and drought years respectively. Those demands are projected to increase to 1 .30 and 1 .38 MAF, 
respectively, by the year 2020, after accounting for a 30,000 AF reduction in urban water demand 
resulting from additional long-term water conservation measures. 

Urban net water demand is projected to increase by about 52 percent by 2020, due to projected 
increases in population. Agricultural net water demand is projected to increase by about 5 percent, 
primarily due to an expected increase in double cropping in the region. Environmental net water 
demands, under existing rules and regulations, will remain essentially level; however, there are several 
Central Coast Region streams that have proposed increases in instream flow for fisheries. 

Average annual supplies were generally adequate to meet average net water demands in 1990 for this 3 
region. However, during drought, present supplies are insufficient to meet present demands and, without 
additional water management programs, annual average and drought year shortages by 2020 are expected 
to increase to about 84,000 and 140,000 AF, respectively, excluding ground water overdraft. 



98 



iulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Central Coast Region 



With planned Level I options, average and drought year shortages could be reduced to 35,000 and 
)7,000 AF respectively. This remaining shortage requires both additional short-term drought 
nanagement, water transfers and demand management programs, and future long-term Level II options 
lepending on the overall level of water service reliability deemed necessary, by local agencies, to sustain 
he economic health of the region. 



99 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Central Coast Region 



Table CC-11. Water Balance 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



1990 
Demand/Supply 

average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Net Demand 










Urban -with 1990 level of conservation 


229 


233 


379 


387 


-reductions due to long-term conservation measures (Level 1) 


— 


— 


-30 


-30 


Agricultural 


895 


961 


930 


1,003- 


-reductions due to long-term conservation measures (Level 1) 


-- 


-- 








Environmental 


3 





3 





Other (1) 


21 


19 


21 


19 


Total Net Demand 


1,148 


1,213 


1,303 


1,379 


Water Supplies w/Existing Facilities Under D-1485 for Delta Supplies 










Developed Supplies 










Surface Water 


204 


131 


212 


131 


Ground Water 


692 


774 


755 


858 


Ground Water Overdraft 


249 


249 


249 


249^ 


Subtotal 


1,145 


1,154 


1,216 


1,238 


Dedicated Natural Flow 


3 





3 





Total Water Supplies 


1,148 


1,154 


1,219 


1,238 


Demand/Supply Balance 





-59 


-84 


-141 


Future Water Management Options Level 1 (2) 










Long-term Supply Augmentation 


■• 








Reclaimed 






44 


44 


Local 






22 


18 


Central Valley Project 






39 





State Water Project 






43 


36 


Subtotal - Water Management Options Level 1 






148 


98 


Ground Water/Surface Water Use Reduction Resulting from Level 1 Programs 






-99 


-54 


Remaining Demand/Supply Balance Requiring Short Term Drought 
Management and/or Future Level II Options 






-35 


-97 


(1) Includes conveyance losses, recreation uses, and energy production. 

(2) Protection of fish and wildlife and long-term Delta solutions will determine the feasibility of several water supply augmentation 
proposals and their water supply benefits. 



* * * 



100 



raft 



of The California Water Plan Update 



Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 



SOUTH COAST REGION 




Sailing in Santa Monica harbor 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft South Coast Region 



SOUTH COAST REGION 

The most urbanized region in California is the South Coast. Although it covers only about 7 percent of the 
State's total land area, it is home to roughly 54 percent of the State's population. Extending eastward from the 
Pacific Ocean, the region is bounded by the Santa Barbara- Ventura county line and the San Gabriel and San Ber- 
nardino mountains on the north, the international border with Mexico on the south, and a combination of the San 
Jacinto Mountains and low-elevation mountain ranges in central San Diego County on the east. Topographically, 
the region is comprised of a series of broad coastal plains, gently sloping interior valleys, and mountain ranges of 
moderate elevations. The largest mountain ranges in the region are the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, San Jacinto, 
Santa Rosa, and Laguna mountains. Peak elevations are between 5,000 and 8,000 feet above sea level; however, 
some peaks are nearly 11,000 feet high. (See Appendix C for maps of the planning subareas and land ownership 
in the region. 

The climate of the region is Mediterranean-like, with warm and dry summers followed by mild and wet win- 
ters. In the warmer interior, maximum temperatures during the summer can ascend to over 90°F. The moderating 
influence of the ocean results in lower temperatures along the coast. During winter, temperatures rarely descend 
to freezing except in the mountains and some interior valley locations. 

About 80 percent of the precipitation occurs during the four month period, December through March. Aver- 
age annual rainfall quantities can range from 10 to 15 inches on the coastal plains and 20 to 45 inches in the 
mountains. Precipitation in the higher mountains commonly occurs as snow. In most years, snowfall quantities 
are sufficient to support a wide range of winter sport activities in the San Bernardino and San Gabriel mountains. 

There are several prominent rivers in the region, including the Santa Clara, Los Angeles, San Gabriel, Santa 
Ana, and San Luis Rey. Some segments of these rivers have been intensely modified for flood control. Natural 
runoff of the streams and rivers averages around 1 .2 MAF annually. 

Population 

Growth has been fairly steady since the first boom of the 1880s. The 1990 population was up 26 percent 
from 12.97 million in 1980. Much of the population increase is due to immigration, both from within the United 
States and from around the worid. Most of the region's coastal plains and valleys are densely populated. The 
largest cities are Los Angeles, San Diego, Long Beach, Santa Ana, and Anaheim. Each of these is among in 
California's top ten most populated cities; Los Angeles and San Diego also are the second and sixth largest cities 
in the United States, respectively. The region is also home to six of the State's ten fastest growing cities in the 
50,000 to 200,000 population range. These are Corona, Fontana, Tustin, Laguna Niguel, National City, and Ran- 
ch© Cucamonga. Areas undergoing increased urbanization include the coastal plains of Orange and Ventura 
counties, the Santa Clarita Valley in northwestern Los Angeles County, the Pomona/San Bernardino/Moreno val- 




Region Characteristics 
Average Annual Precipitation: 18.5 inches Average Annual Runoff: 1,227,000 AF 

Land Area: 10,955 square miles 1990 Population: 16,292,800 




101 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



South Coast Region 



leys, and the valleys north and east of the City of San Diego. The region's population is expected to increase by 
55 percent by 2020. Table SC-1 shows regional population projections to 2020. 

Table SC-1. Population Projections 

(thousands) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 


Santa Clara 


834 


1,063 


1,301 


1,556 




Metropolitan Los Angeles 


8,501 


9,445 


10,376 ,,, 


11,505 




Santa Ana 


4,023 


5,155 


6,230 It 


7,384 




San Diego 


2,935 


3,610 


4,191 Si 


4,870 




Total 


16,293 


19,273 


22,098 


25,315 



Land Use 

Despite being so urbanized, about one-third of the region's land is publicly owned. Approximately 2.3 mil- 
lion acres is public land, of which 75 percent is national forest. Urban land use accounts for about 1 .7 million 
acres, and irrigated cropland accounts for 288,000 acres. Figure SC-1 shows land use in the South Coast Region. 

The major industries in the region are national defense, aerospace, recreation and tourism, and agriculture. 
Other significant industries include electronics, motion picture and television production, oil refining, housing 
construction, government, food and beverage distribution, and manufacturing (clothing and furniture). While 
defense, aerospace, and oil refining are currently in a decline, the South Coast Region has a strong and growing 
commercial services sector. International trading, financing, and basic services are major economic contributors 
to the region. 

One of the most important land use issues in the South Coast Region is whether to prohibit housing and other 
urban land uses from spreading into the remaining agricultural land and open space. Some of the regions agricul- 
tural land is currently protected through the State's Williamson Act. Some local governments are attempting to 
establish agricultural preserves in their areas. The desire to retain open space in the Los Angeles area also has led 
to parkland status for parts of the Santa Monica Mountains. Preservation of coastal wetlands and lagoons in the 
region is another prime concern. A 1993 agreement between federal. State, and local agencies to protect endan- 
gered gnat catcher habitat is a good example of protection of open space to benefit wildlife. 

The largest amount of irrigated agriculture is in Ventura County, where 116,600 acres of cropland is culti- 
vated. Most of it is fresh market vegetables, strawberries, and citrus and avocados. San Diego PSA has more 
than 110,600 acres in irrigated agriculture, most of which is planted in citrus and avocados. Fresh market vegeta- 
bles and other crops are grown in some of the county's coastal and inland valleys. The region is also ideally 
suited for growing other high value crops, such as nursery products and cut flowers. Other significant irrigated 
agriculture includes forage and field crops related to the dairy industry and vineyards. 



102 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Coast Region 



PRESENT WATBI SUPHJES 

(1,000 AF/Yr.) 



California Aqueduct 
1,232 



Los Auffeles 

Aqueduct 

380 



LOCAL SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT 254 

IMPORTS BY LOCAL WATER AGENQES 380 

GROUND WATER PERENNIAL YIELD 1,128 

OTHER FEDERAL WATER DEVELOPMENT 22 

STATE WATER PROJECT 14tt 

WASTE WATER RECLAMATION It 

COLORADO RIVER MM 

USABLE WATER SUPPLY AjKI 

GROUND WATER OVERDRAFT M 
TOTAL 



Colorado River 
Aqueduc t 





Leg end 
Urban Land 
Irrigated Land 
Region Water Transfer 

{^fiO»^ of Acr»-F«« pm Ymt) 



M B ^ 



N 



i 



10 20 30 



Figure SC-1. South Coast Region 
Land Use, Imports, Exports, and Water Supplies 



103 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



South Coast Region 



Water Supply 

About 67 percent of the region's 1990 level water supply comes from surface water imports. The remaining 
portion is supplied by ground water (25 percent) and to a lesser extent by local surface water (6 percent) and re- 
claimed water (2 percent). Since the turn of the century, water development has been carried out on a massive 
scale throughout the South Coast Region. Steady expansion of the population and economy lead to sufficient de- 
mand and financial backing to build large water supply projects for importing water into the region. Figure SC-2 
shows the region's sources of supply. 



Figure SC-2. South Coast Region 

Water Suppiy Sources (Average Conditions) 

1990 level 



Local Surface 
Water** 

6% 




•Includes imports by local agencies, the Colorado River, and the State Water Project. 
**lncludes other federal projects. 



104 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft South Coast Region 



Supply with Existing Facilities and Water Supply Management Programs 

Local and imported surface water account for about 73 percent of the region's 1990 level water supply. In 
1913, the Los Angeles Aqueduct began importing water from the Mono-Owens area to the South Coast region. 
With the addition of a second conduit in 1970, the Mono-Owens supply is about 10 percent of the region's 1990 
level water supply. Court-ordered restrictions on diversions from the Mono Basin and Owens Valley have re- 
duced the amount of water the City of Los Angeles can receive and have brought into question the reliability of 
Mono-Owens supply for Los Angeles (see South Lahontan Region). In 1941, the Metropolitan Water District of 
Southern California completed the Colorado River Aqueduct, providing about 29 percent of the region's supply 
with Colorado River water. The State Water Project began delivering water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin 
Delta to the South Coast region in 1972, furnishing about 28 percent of the supply. The remainder of the surface 
supply (about 6 percent of the 1990 level total) is provided by local projects. Table SC-2 list the major reservoirs 
in the region. 



105 



Bulletin 16(^93. Administrative Draft 



South Coast Region 



Table SC~2. Major Reservoirs 



Reservoir Name 


River 


Capacity (1 ,000 AF) 


Owner 


Casitas 


Coyote Creek 


254 


USBR 


Lake Piru 


Piru Creek 


88.3 


United WCD 


Pyramid 


Piru Creek 


171.2 


DWR 


Matilija 


Matilija Creek 


1.5 


Ventura CO FCD 


Castaic 


Castaic Creek 


323.7 


DWR 


Cogswell 


San Gabriel 


8.9 


Los Angeles CO FCD/Dept. of 
Public Works 


San Gabriel 


San Gabriel 


42.4 


Los Angeles CO FCD/Dept. of 
Public Works 


Bear Valley 


Bear Creek 


73.4 


Big Bear MWD 


Ferris 


Bernasconi Pass 


131.5 


DWR 


Lake Mathews 


Trib Cajaico Creek 


179.3 


MWDSC 


Lake Hemet 


San Jacinto River 


13.5 


1 ake Hemet MWD 


Railroad Canyon 


San Jacinto River 


11.9 


Temescal Water Co. 


Santiago Creek 


Santiago Creek 


25.0 


Serrano ID/Irvine Ranch WD 


Skinner 


Tucalota Creek 


44.2 


MWDSC 


Vail Lake 


Temecula Creek 


50.0 


Rancho California WD 


Henshaw 


San Luis Rey 
River 


50.0 


Vista ID 


Lake Hodges 


San Dieguito 
River 


37.7 


City of San Diego 


Sutherland 


Santa Ysabel 
Creek 


29.0 


City of San Diego 


San Vicente 


San Vicente 
Creek 


90.2 


City of San Diego 


El Capitan 


San Diego River 


112.8 


City of San Diego 


Cuyamaca 


Boulder Creek 


11.8 


Helix WD 


Lake Jennings 


Quail Canyon 
Creek 


9.8 


Helix WD 


Murray 


Chaparral 
Canyon 


6.1 


City of San Diego 


Lake Loveland 


Sweetwater River 


25.4 


Sweetwater Authority 


Sweetwater 


Sweetwater River 


28.1 


Sweetwater Authority 


Lower Otay 


Otay River 


49.5 


City of San Diego 


Morena 


Cottonwood 
Creek 


50.2 


City of San Diego 


Ban-ett 


Cottonwood 
Creek 


37.9 


City of San Diego 


Miramar 


Big Surr Creek 


7.3 


City of San Diego 



J^:: 



106 



; Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft South Coast Region 



There are numerous ground water basins along the coast and inland valleys of the region. Many of these ba- 
sins are adjudicated or managed by a public agency (see Vol. I, chapters 2 and 4). Recharge occurs from natural 
infiltration along river valleys, but in many cases, basin recharge facilities are in place using local, imported, or 
reclaimed supplies. Some basins are as large as several hundred square miles in area and have a capacity exceed- 
ing 10 MAF. The current estimated annual use approaches 1.1 MAF. 

Basins close to the coast often have troubles with sea water intrusion. Historically, additional recharge or a 
series of injection wells forming a barrier have been used to mitigate this problem. Other ground water quality 
concerns are high TDS, nitrates, PCE, sulfates, pesticide contamination (DBCP), selenium, and leaking fuel stor- 
age tanks. 

Approximately 76,000 AF of fresh water was displaced by reclaimed water in 1990, about 2 percent of the 
region's supply. Reclaimed water is used for irrigating freeway and other urban landscaping, golf courses, and 
some agricultural land; it is also used in ground water recharge and sea water barrier projects. The Central and 
West Basin Water Replenishment District annually recharges the Central and West Coast ground water basins with 

I 50,000 AF of reclaimed water. The Orange County Water District injects about 5,000 AF of reclaimed water into 
the ground at the Alamitos Barrier Project. This process prevents further sea water intrusion into the district's 

. ground water supply and frees imported supplies for other uses. 

Drought Water Management Strategies. To minimize the impacts caused by the shortfalls in imported sur- 
! face water supplies, most agencies in the region established and implemented rationing programs during the 
1987-92 drought to bring demand in line with supplies. Customer rationing allotments were determined by the 
customer's use prior to the drought. Rationing levels, or reductions, ranged from 15 to 50 percent. 

Programs implemented by the Cities of San Diego and Los Angeles are typical of the efforts agencies 
throughout the region made to combat recent drought-induced shortages. The City of San Diego implemented a 
20 percent rationing program for its customers during 1991; a 10 percent program had been in place since 1988. 
Other programs and activities by the City of San Diego included establishing customer rebates for the installation 
of ultra-low flush toilets, distributing free showerheads, providing turf and home audit service, expanding the ex- 
isting public information program (with a 24-hour hotline), establishing a field crew to handle waste-of-water 
complaints, constructing a xeriscape demonstration garden, and retrofitting city water facilities. Landscape de- 
signs for new private and public construction are regulated for water conservation by a 1986 City ordinance. San 
Diego also has ordinances that permit enacting water conservation measures and programs during critical water 
supply situations and that require all residential dwellings to be retrofitted prior to resale. 

The City of Los Angeles has had a rationing program in place since 1986. The program was mandatory for 
all its customers until eariy in 1992, when it was revised to voluntary status. The program originally called for a 
10 percent reduction; however, it was amended to 15 percent during 1992 when the State's water supply situation 
worsened. Programs established by the City of Los Angeles are similar as those described for San Diego. Los 
Angeles also established a "drought buster" field program with staff patrolling neighborhoods looking for water 
wasters. Table SC-3 shows the region's water supplies with existing facilities and programs. 



107 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



South Coast Region 



Table SC-3. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities 

and Programs 

(Decision 1485 Operating Criteria for Delta Supplies) 

(thousands of acre-feet) 



Supply 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


Surface 


















Local 


254 


118 


254 


118 


254 


118 


254 


118 


Imports by local^ 


425 


208 


425 


208 


425 


208 


425 


208 


Colorado River^ 


1,265 


1,230 


626 


626 


626 


626 


626 


626 


CVP 


























Other federal 


22 


21 


22 


21 


22 


21 


22 


21 


swpi 


1,232 


1,032 


1,746 


1,072 


1,901 


1,140 


1,903 


1,154 


Ground water 3 


1,083 


1,296 


1,379 


1,524 


1,515 


1,611 


1,611 


1,611 


Overdraft 


22 


22 


5 


5 














Reclaimed 


76 


76 


76 


76 


76 


76 


76 


76 


Dedicated natural flow 


























Total 


4,379 


4,003 


4,533 


3,650 


4,819 


3,800 


4,917 


3,814 



^ 1990 supplies are normalized and do not reflect additional supplies needed to offset reduction of supplies from the Mono and 
Owens basins. SWP supply was used in 1990 to replace reduction of supplies from Mono and Owens basins, putting additional 
demand on Delta supplies. 

2 Colorado River supplies for the year 2000 and beyond reflect elimination of surplus Colorado River supplies and the transfer of 
76,000 AF of water from the Colorado River Region as a result of currently agreed upon conservation programs 

3 Includes ground water reclamation. MWDSC ground water recovery program would provide additional supplies of 85,000 AF 
by year 2000 and 95,000 AF by 201 and beyond. 

Water Management Options with Existing Facilities. MWDSC is pursuing additional supplies to replace 
those it has lost under recent court's rulings. Other factors contribute to a growing demand for water from 
MWDSC. Water use in its service area has increased from 2.8 MAF in 1970 to 4.0 MAF in 1990. The increase 
reflects a large population growth. Moreover, the City of Los Angeles is increasing its reliance upon MWDSC's 
water to make up for its loss of imported water from the Owens River-Mono Basin. Following are highlights of 
major MWDSC water supply and demand management programs, most of which are in place, that would provide 
options for additional supplies, especially in critical years. 

Imperial Irrigation District Water Conservation Agreement (Phase I) began in January 1990. In return for fi- 
nancing certain conservation projects, MWDSC is entitled to the amount of water saved by IID. Conservation 
projects include lining existing canals, constructing local reservoirs and spill interceptor canals, installing nonleak 
gates and automation equipment, and instituting distribution system and on-farm management activities. 

MWDSC has an advance delivery agreement with Desert Water Agency and Coachella Valley Water District 
for ground water banking. Under this agreement MWDSC makes advance deliveries of Colorado River water 
(conditions permitting) to the two agencies for recharging the Coachella Valley ground water basin. MWDSC, in 
turn, may use the SWP entitlements of the two agencies (61,200 AF per year). Water stored in the basin during 
the recent drought was used by the two agencies, enabling MWDSC to make full use of the DWA and CVWD 
entitlements. 



108 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft South Coast Region 



Under the Chino Basin and San Gabriel Basin Cyclic Storage Agreement, imported water is delivered to and 
i stored in the Chino and San Gabriel basins. When water supplies are abundant, advance deliveries of MWDSC's 
I ground water replenishment supplies are provided for later use. When imported supplies are limited, MWDSC 

has the option of meeting the replenishment demands through surface deliveries or a transfer of the stored water. 

NfWDSC's maximum storage entitlements are 100,000 AF in the Chino Basin and 142,000 AF in the San Gabriel 

Basin. As of July 1990, 28,000 AF was stored in the Chino Basin and 58,000 AF in the San Gabriel Basin. 

MWDSC is also planning for additional conjunctive use programs. 

MWDSC promotes water reclamation through its Local Projects Program of 1981 . Under this program, the 
district provides financial assistance for local water reclamation projects which develop new water supplies. The 
programs' primary focus is on increasing the use of reclaimed water in landscape irrigation and industry, thereby 
reducing the demand for potable water supplies. To date, MWDSC is participating in 32 projects, with a total ul- 
timate yield of 147,000 AF per year. Currently, four additional projects submitted to MWDSC for inclusion in the 
program are in various stages of review. These proposed projects have a combined estimated ultimate yield of 
2 1,700 AF per year. 

MWDSC promotes conjunctive use at the local agency level under its Seasonal Storage Service Program of 
1989 by discounting rates for imported water placed into ground water or reservoir storage. The discounted rate 
and program rules encourage construction of additional ground water production facilities allowing local agencies 
to be more self sufficient during shortages. Additionally, the program is designed to reduce the member agencies' 
dependence upon district deliveries during the peak summer demand months. As of December 31, 1992, approxi- 
mately 1.24 MAF of water has been delivered as Seasonal Storage Service. 

Other water management options include water banking, short-term fallowing of land, desalination, reclaim- 
ing waste water and brackish ground water, water conservation, and additional offstream storage facilities for im- 
ported supplies. 

j 

j Supply with Additional Facilities and Water Management Programs 

Future water management options are presented in two levels to better reflect the status of investigations re- 
I quired to implement them. 

O Level I options are those that have undergone extensive investigation and environmental analyses and are 
judged to have a high likelihood of being implemented by 2020. 

O Level II options are those that could fill the remaining gap between water supply and demand. These op- 
tions require more investigation and alternative analyses. 

With planned Level I options, 2020 average and drought year shortages could be reduced to 373,000 and 
1,001,000 AF, respectively. A shortage of this magnitude could have severe economic impacts on the region. 
This remaining shortage requires both additional short-term drought management, water transfers and demand 
management programs, and future long-term and Level II options depending on the overall level of water service 
reliability deemed necessary, by local agencies, to sustain the economic health of the region. In the short-term. 



109 




Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft South Coast Region 



some areas of this region that rely on Delta exports for all or a portion of their supplies face greater uncertainty in 
terms of water supply reliability due to the uncertain outcome of a number of actions undertaken to protect aquat- 
ic species in the Delta. Local water districts are seeking to improve water service reliability of their service area i 
through water transfers, water recycling, conservation, and supply augmentation. 

Water Management Options with Additional Facilities. The USER is studying the potential for recycled 
water use under its "Southern California Comprehensive Water Reclamation Study." The goal of the $6 million, 
three-phase study is to "identify opportunities and constraints for maximizing water reuse in Southern California. 
Phase I is expected to be complete in one year; the scheduling of phases n and HI will be determined during the 
first phase. Expected completion date is March 1999. The USBR believes the success of the study depends on 
the active participation of local and State agencies. 

MWDSC authorized preliminary studies for a 5-mgd (5,600 AF per year) desalination pilot plant (distillation 
method). Although the location is undecided, plans call for the plant to be near an existing power plant on the 
coast. Planned ultimate capacity of the plant is 100 million gallons per day (1 12,000 AF per year). 

The Colorado River Banking Plan is a proposal that would create an additional water supply for MWDSC by 
making use of available SWP water in place of Colorado River water. Under the plan, MWDSC would adjust its 
Colorado River diversions according to the availability of water from the SWP. In years when SWP supplies are 
adequate, MWDSC would take more of its SWP water and correspondingly less Colorado River water. The dif- 
ference between available Colorado River water and MWDSC's actual diversions would remain in Lake Mead 
and be credited to a water management account. Any additional water lost by spills or evaporation due to the 
storage of such water would be deducted from the water management account. 

The final environmental impact report for the Arvin-Edison Water Exchange Program, involving an agree- 
ment between MWDSC and the Arvin-Edison Water Storage District, is scheduled for 1993. Arvin-Edison is a 
Central Valley Project contractor in southeastern Kern County. Its CVP water is delivered through the California 
Aqueduct by arrangement with the State. According to the proposed contract, MWDSC will help construct Ar- 
vin-Edison 's partially completed distribution system and deliver a portion of its SWP water in wet years for use 
in Arvin-Edison 's replenishment programs. In return, MWDSC will receive some of Arvin-Edison 's CVP water 
during dry years. Through this proposed agreement, MWDSC expects to store as much as 135,000 AF per year of 
SWP water in the southern San Joaquin Valley. During wet periods, MWDSC could accumulate a storage account 
of up to 800,(K)0 AF. In dry periods, the program would make roughly 100,0(X) AF per year available for 
MWDSC. In another exchange program, MWDSC negotiated with Kern County Water Agency to store SWP 
supplies in the Semitropic Water Storage District's ground water basin. (See Volume I, Chapter 11.) 

In October 1991, MWDSC certified the final environmental impact report for the Eastside Reservoir Project 
(Domenigoni Valley Reservoir). Final design and land acquisition activities for the reservoir, which will be in 
the Domenigoni Valley, are proceeding. The ERP, combined with the ground water storage program, will: (1) 
maximize ground water storage by regulating imported water supplies for conjunctive use programs, (2) provide 
emergency water reserves if facilities are damaged as a result of a major earthquake, (3) provide supplies to re- 
duce water shortages during droughts, (4) meet seasonal operating requirements, including seasonal peak de- 



110 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft South Coast Region 



mands, and (5) preserve operating reliability of the distribution system. This conjunctive use program should 
eventually provide two years of drought or carryover storage protection for MWDSC (528,000 AF). The project 
should be completed by 1999. 

Under the Ground Water Recovery Program of 1991, MWDSC will improve regional water supply reliability 
by providing financial assistance for local agencies to recover contaminated ground water. The goal of the 
Ground Water Recovery Program is to recover 200,000 AF per year of degraded ground water. About half of this 
ultimate annual production will be untapped local yield, or new supplies. The remainder will require replenish- 
ment from MWDSC's imported water to avoid basin overdraft. Those projects will produce water, including dur- 
ing droughts, but will only receive replenishment water when imported supplies are available. Currently, 
NfWDSC has approved participation of eight projects, with an estimated ultimate production of 21,800 AF per 
year. The program is expected to reach its goal of 200,000 AF per year by the year 2004. The net projected yield 
associated with natural replenishment from the Ground Water Recovery Program through the year 2020 is: 



Year Net Projected Yield 

Acre-Feet Per Year 



1993 U54 

2000 86,100 

2010 95.540 

2020 95,540 



Local surface water supplies provide a minor contribution to the South Coast Region, making up only about 6 
percent of the region's total supplies. During drought years, these surface supplies, for the most part, dry up. 
However, during the winter, this region can be hit with devastating floods. Many people speculate that more local 
surface reservoirs could help alleviate the region's need for increased imported supplies. However, the cost of 
developing local surface water supply projects for rare or limited runoff makes them impractical at present. Table 
SC-4 shows water supplies with additional Level I facilities and programs. 



Ill 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



South Coast Region 



Table SC-4. Water Supplies with Level I Water Management Programs 

(Decision 1485 Operating Criteria for Delta Supplies) 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Supply 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


Surface 


















Local 


254 


118 


254 


118 


254 


118 


254 


118 


Imports by local 2 


425 


208 


425 


208 


425 


472 


425 


472 


Colorado River ^ 


1,265 


1,230 


696 


696 


696 


696 


696 


696 


CVP 


























Other federal 


22 


21 


22 


21 


22 


21 


22 


21 


SWP2 


1,232 


1.032 


1,846 


1,336 


2,233 


1,815 


2,237 


1,834 


Ground water ^ 


1,083 


1,296 


1,273 


1,488 


1,341 


1,537 


1,539 


1,611 


Overdraft 


22 


22 


5 


5 














Reclaimed 


76 


76 


234 


234 


296 


296 


357 


357 


Dedicated natural flow 


























Total 


4,379 


4,003 


4,755 


4,106 


5,267 


4,955 


5,530 


5,109 



^ Colorado River supplies for year 2000 and beyond reflect elimination of surplus Colorado River supplies, ransfer of 76,000 AF 
of water as a result of currently agreed upon conservation programs, and an additional 70,000-AF water transfer from the 
Colorado River Region as a result of IID/MWDSC agreement on lining of the All American Canal. 

2 1990 supplies are normalized and do not reflect additional supplies needed to offset reduction of supplies from the Mono and 
Owens basins. SWP supply was used in 1990 to replace reduction of supplies from Mono and Owens basins, putting additional 
demand on Delta supplies. 

3 Includes ground water reclamation. MWDSC ground water recovery program would provide additional supplies of 85,000 AF 
by year 2000 and 95,000 AF by 201 and beyond. 



Water Use 

Urban water demands for the South Coast Region have progressively increased over the last decade. Tremen- 
dous population growth rates and rapidly expanding urbanized areas contributed heavily to this increase. In many 
areas, urban expansion has lead to reductions in agricultural acreage and water use. Figure SC-3 shows the dis- 
tribution of 1990 level net water demands for the region. 

Urban Water Use 

Total municipal and industrial applied water use in 1990 is estimated at 3.85 MAF (Table SC-5), an increase 
of 1.10 MAF from 1980. The increase is attributed to population and economic growth. Table SC-5 shows that 
1990 applied urban water use in the Metropolitan Los Angeles planning subarea is about half of the region's total. 
Projections indicate that urban applied water use in the region will increase by 56 percent between 1990 and 
2020. 

Although overall demands have increased since 1980, per capita water use has leveled off somewhat in older 
urbanized areas with modest increases in the newer urbanized areas, particularly in the warmer interior sections of 
the region. Since there is little space for expansion, the older urban core areas are being renovated and converted 
from one type of use to another, such as single-family residential to multi-family residential. Such conversions 



112 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Coast Region 



tend to decrease household water use because of reductions in the exterior water uses associated with these 
multi-family housing structures. 



Figure SC-3. South Coast Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990 level 



Urban 
80% 



Other 

5% 




Wetlands 



113 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



South Coast Region 



Table SC-5. Urban Water Demand 
(thousands of acre-feet) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Santa Clara 


















Applied water demand 


183 


190 


231 


240 


287 


298 


345 


358 


Net water demand 


153 


158 


194 


201 


241 


250 


290 


301 


Depletion 


149 


154 


186 


193 


231 


240 


278 


289 


Metropolitan Los Angeles 
















■l' 


Applied water demand 


1,911 


1,985 


2,055 


2,135 


2,270 


2,359 


2,520 


2,620 


Net water demand 


1,833 


1,904 


1,971 


2,048 


2,177 


2,263 


2,417 


2,512 


Depletion 


1,795 


1,866 


1,888 


1.965 


2,074 


2,160 


2,294 


2,390 


Santa Ana 


















Applied water demand 


1,067 


1,111 


1,344 


1,401 


1,665 


1,736 


2,020 


2,108 


Net water demand 


848 


882 


1,045 


1,087 


1,265 


1,317 


1,500 


1,564 


Depletion 


720 


746 


872 


905 


1,036 


1,077 


1,209 


1,257 


San Diego 


















Applied water demand 


690 


711 


816 


841 


958 


988 


1,123 


1,158 


Net water demand 


677 


697 


800 


825 


940 


969 


1,102 


1,137 


Depletion 


666 


687 


733 


758 


857 


886 


1,003 


1.037 


Total 


















Applied water demand 


3,851 


3,997 


4,446 


4,617 


5,180 


5,381 


6,008 


6,244 


Net water demand 


3,511 


3,641 


4,010 


4,161 


4,623 


4,799 


5,309 


5,514 


Depletion 


3,330 


3,453 


3,679 


3,821 


4,198 


4,363 


4,784 


4,973 



Average 1990 per capita water use by PSA for the region is 21 1 gallons daily. This daily per capita value 
ranges from 246 gallons for the Santa Ana PSA to 204 gallons in the Metropolitan Los Angeles PSA. With con- 
tinued water conservation, the region's average per capita water use is expected to increase slightly to 212 gallons 
daily by 2020. Figure SC-4 shows 1990 level applied urban water demand by sector. 

Recent State laws require that most urban water wholesale and retail agencies prepare urban water manage- 
ment and water shortage contingency plans. Under the Urban Water Management Act of 1985 most agencies 
must analyze their water conveyance operations and water use in their service areas, identify areas for improve- 
ment, and develop and implement plans to correct any inefficiencies. The plans must be updated at 5-year inter- 
vals. The act requires that agencies examine operations and demands in their service area during droughts and 
develop plans to cope with the shortfall in supply. These plans will be attached to existing urban water manage- 
ment plans. 

Most of the water conservation programs identified in these plans are a part of a package known collectively 
as the Best Management Practices (a more detailed discussion about urban BMPs is in Volume I, Chapter 6). 



114 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Coast Region 



BMPs assist agencies develop specific strategies to augment or stretch their dependable water supplies to meet 
ever-increasing water demands within their service areas. Plans must be implemented on a timetable once an 
agency decides to adopt these practices. 

Since 1980, many water and local governmental agencies have developed and implemented water conserva- 
tion programs, similar to those required in the Best Management Practices list. Many local agencies provide tech- 
nical assistance to schools who wish to incorporate discussions on water resources and conservation into their nat- 
ural science curricula. Total urban water use will be reduced through these ongoing programs, implemented 
BMPs, building and plumbing code modifications, and more efficient irrigation operations for major landscaping 
projects. 






Figure SC-4. South Coast Region 
Applied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990ievel 






/ Residential \ 
/ 59% \ 




y^ \\\^ Unaccounted 
\ y^ \ \ ^-^ ^^ / 

\ Commercial \ \ industrial / 

\ 19% \ \ 7% / 

^ — J '""^Governmental 

6% 



115 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft South Coast Region 



Agricultural Water Use 

Total agricultural applied water use for the 1990 level was approximately 727,000 AF, a decrease of approxi- 
mately 26 percent since 1980. The Santa Clara PSA used the most agricultural water in 1990, roughly 34 per- 
cent of the total, followed closely by San Diego PSA with 33 percent and Santa Ana PSA with 31 percent. The 
Metropolitan Los Angeles PSA had the least demand, using only about 2 percent of the region's total applied agri- 
cultural water. Figure SC-5 shows the irrigated acreage, ETAW, and applied water for major crops grown in the 
region. 

The South Coast Region's 1990 normalized crop acreage was almost 318,000 acres (Table SC-6). The major 
agricultural operations in the region are found in the Santa Clara, San Diego and Santa Ana PSAs. A 42 percent 
decrease in total irrigated crop acres (including multiple cropped acres) is projected for the region, to about 
184,(XX) acres by 2020 primarily due to economics and the urbanization of irrigated lands. The region's total irri- 
gated land acres are also projected to decrease about 1 15,(XX) acres over the same time period. 

Five major crops produced in the region are citrus and subtropical fruit, truck (vegetables and nursery prod- 
ucts), improved pasture grass, small grains, and alfalfa. Slightly more than half of the total cropped acres and 
gross applied water in the region is associated with citrus and subtropical fruit orchards. Citrus (mostly oranges, 
lemons, and grapefruit) is found in all parts of the South Coast Region, but the largest amounts are in the San Di- 
ego and Santa Clara PSAs. High-value crops, such as avocados, are generally grown in the hills above the Santa 
Clara River in Ventura County and in the hills in the extreme southwestem Riverside County (Santa Ana PSA) 
and San Diego County. The region also has a substantial cut-flowers industry. Truck crops follow citrus and sub- 
tropical fruit in terms of planted and harvested acres and use of applied water. Irrigated grain is cultivated in 
southern San Diego County, southwestem San Bernardino County, and southwestern Riverside County. Irrigated 
pasture and alfalfa are grown primarily in southwestem San Bemardino County. 



116 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Coast Region 



180 



Acres (X 1 ,000) 



Acre-Feet (X 1 ,000) 



120 




540 



360 



180 







Other Truck Subtropical 

■Acreage MEYAVJ ■Applied Water 



Figure SC-5. South Coast Region 
Acreage, ETAW, and Applied Water for Major Crops 



117 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



South Coast Region 



Table SC-6. Irrigated Crop Acreage 

(thousands of acres) 



Planning Subareas 



1990 



2000 



2010 



2020 



Santa Clara 

Metropolitan Los Angeles 
Santa Ana 
San Diego 



118 


110 


94 


71 


7 


6 


5 


5 


83 


66 


48 


30 


111 


105 


88 


78 



Total 



319 



287 



235 



184 



Table SC-7. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop 



Irrigated Crop 


Total Acres 
(thousands) 


Total ETAW 

(thousands 

of acre -feet) 


Irrigated Crop 


Total Acres 
(thousands) 


Total ETAW 

(thousands 

of acre -feet) 


Grain 11 2 
Com 5 7 
Other field 4 8 
Alfalfa 10 26 
Pasture 20 55 


Tomatoes 9 20 
Other truck 87 123 
Other deciduous 3 8 
Vineyard 6 9 
Citrus/olives 164 282 




Total 319 540 



Vmeyards in Pomona Valley are on the decline; however, modest acreages in southwestem Riverside County 
have remained stable since 1980. Deciduous tree crops are relatively small, but there is a concentration of apples 
and pears in central San Diego County. 

Even though the region's projected acres are expected to decline, citrus and subtropical fruit and truck crops 
will be significant portions of the remaining cropped acres. 

Water conservation efforts by the growers will contribute to the reduction of agricultural water demands in the 
region. Most citrus and subtropical growers use the latest irrigation system technologies of drip emitters and low- 
flow sprinklers. Also, they are managing their irrigation operations with more efficiency. The best potential for 
conservation beyond current achievements will be in the citrus and subtropical orchard irrigation operations. 
Much of the potential for savings will occur by the end of the decade, possibly up to an additional 5 percent. In- 
creased use of drip irrigation, improved furrow irrigation, plastic mulches, and irrigation scheduling services will 
save water in the other crop categories. 

Table SC-8 shows 1990 level and projected applied agricultural water demand in the region. Applied water 
amounts vary with the source of water supply (surface or ground water). Drought year factors reflect the need for 
additional irrigation to replace water normally supplied by rainfall and to meet higher than normal evapotranspira- 
tion demands. The region's total applied agricultural water use is expected to decrease 47 percent by 2020. Ur- 
banization of irrigated agricultural land is the main factor in this reduction. Other factors include continued im- 
provements in on-farm irrigation operations and irrigation system technologies. Decreases range from about 66 
percent to 34 percent among the PSAs. 



;•' 



118 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Coast Region 



Table SC-8. Agricultural Water Demand 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Santa Clara 


















Applied water demand 


245 


256 


222 


233 


184 


193 


138 


145 


Net water demand 


214 


224 


197 


207 


167 


175 


126 


133 


Depletion 


214 


224 


197 


207 


167 


175 


126 


133 


Metropolitan Los Angeles 


















Applied water demand 


15 


16 


11 


12 


10 


11 


9 


9 


Net water demand 


13 


14 


10 


11 


9 


9 


8 


8 


Depletion 


13 


14 


10 


11 


9 


9 


8 


8 


Santa Ana 
















IHI 


Applied water demand 


227 


232 


179 


181 


127 


129 


77 


-^ 78 


Net water demand 


186 


190 


149 


152 


109 


110 


68 


69 


Depletion 


186 


190 


149 ; 


152 


109 


110 


68 


69 


San Diego 
















'"' 'M 


Applied water demand 


240 


249 


220 


229 


178 


185 


158 


ier 


Net water demand 


231 


240 


213 


222 


173 


180 


154 


160 


Depletion 


231 


240 


213 


222 


173 


180 


154 


160 


Total 


;; ,: 
















Applied water demand 


727 


753 


632 


655 


499 


518 


382 


396 


Net water demand 


644 


668 


569 


592 


458 


474 


356 


370 


Depletion 


644 


668 


569 


592 


458 


474 


356 


370 



Environmental Water Use 

Currently, the State's San Jacinto Wildlife Area occupies approximately 5,000 acres, and there are applica- 
tions to increase the size of the facility by 1,600 acres. The SJWA is run by DFG. It is unique in that it is the first 
such operation in the State to use reclaimed waste water. Eastern Municipal Water District supplies the facility 
; with reclaimed water from its Hemet/San Jacinto Water Reclamation Plant. Reclaimed water allocations to the 
I SJWA are 2,200 AF a year, even though only 400 AF and 800 AF were used in 1990 and 1991, respectively. By 
the year 2000, the allocation will be 4,500 AF. Table SC-9 shows wetland water needs to 2020. 




119 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



South Coast Region 



Table SC-9. Wetlands Water Needs 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Wetlands 



1990 2000 2010 2020 

average drought average drought average drought average drought 



San Jacinto WA 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



Total 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



2 2 

2 2 

2 2 



Additional environmental water supply requirements may be needed for the Sespe Wilderness. This preserve 
is in the Ventura County portion of the Los Padres National Forest and totals approximately 219,700 acres. A 
portion of Sespe Creek has been added to the list of Wild and Scenic Rivers. 

Other Water Demand 

Recreational water use in the South Coast Region amounted to almost 23,000 AF in 1990. Most recreational 
facilities in the region consist of campgrounds and parks, and their use entails water for lawns, toilets, showers, 
and facility maintenance and public service. Use in the Santa Clara, Metropolitan Los Angeles, Santa Ana, and 
San Diego PSAs in 1990 amounted to about 8,000 AF; 8,000 AF; 3,000 AF; and 3,000 AF, respectively. Figure 
SC-6 shows water recreation areas in the South Coast Region. 

Conveyance losses account for 160,000 AF and are realized in the transmission of water via the three major 
aqueducts in the region. Cooling water for power plants amounts to 35,000 AF, while approximately 5,000 AF is 
used to inject water in deep wells to extract oil. Table SC-10 shows total water demand projections to 2020 for 
the South Coast Region. 



120 



1 Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Coast Region 



Legend 
A Water Recreation Area 
• Hydroelectric Power Plant 
** Federal Wild and Scenic River 





WATER RECREATION AREAS 

1. Pyramid Lake S.RA 
Castaic Lake S.RA 
Baldwin Hills S.RA 
Kenneth B. Hahn S.RA 
L.ake Penis S.RA 
Lake Elsinore S.RA 
Palomar Mountain S.P. 

8. Cuyamaca Rancho S.P. 

9. Border Field S.P. 



N 



Figure SC-6. South Coast Region 
Water Recreation Areas 



121 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



South Coast Region 



Table SC-10. Total Water Demands 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Category of Use 


1990 
average drought 


2000 

average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 

average drought 


Urban 


















Applied water 


3,851 


3,997 


4,446 


4,617 


5,180 


5,381 


6,008 


6,244 


Net water 


3,511 


3,641 


4,010 


4.161 


4,623 


4,799 


5,309 


5.514 


Depletion 


3,330 


3.453 


3,679 


3.821 


4,198 


4,363 


4,784 


4,973 


Agricultural 


















Applied water 


727 


753 


632 


^5 


499 


518 


382 


396 


Net water 


644 


668 


569 


592 


458 


474 


356 


370 


Depletion 


644 


668 


569 


592 


458 


474 


356 


370 


Environmental 


















Applied water 


2 


2 


6 


6 


6 


6 


6 


6 


Net water 


2 


2 


6 


6 


6 


6 


6 


6 


Depletion 


2 


2 


6 


6 


6 


6 


6 


6 


Other (1) 














'-'W^ 


^M 


Applied water 


62 


57 


67 


62 


72 


67 


72 


er 


Net water 


222 


210 


227 


215 


232 


220 


232 


220 


Depletion 


222 


210 


227 


215 


232 


220 


232 


220 


Total 


















Applied water 


4,642 


4,809 


5,151 


5,340 


5,757 


5,972 


6,468 1 


6,713 


Net water 


4,379 


4,521 


4,812 


4,974 


5,319 


5,499 


5,903 1 


6,110 


Depletion 


4,198 


4^3 


4,481 


4,634 


4,894 


5,063 


5,378 ! 


5,569 


(1) includes conveyance losses, 


recreational uses, and ( 


snergy production 











Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 

Each PSA in the region has its own set of geographic and demographic conditions which present several wa- 
ter management issues. In general, though, the South Coast Region faces several critical water supply issues, 
most notably increasing demand with limited ability to increase supply, and ground water degradation. The most 
significant events in recent years regarding regional water supplies were the court decisions regarding Mono 
Lake and Colorado River diversions. (For a detailed discussion about these court decisions, see Volume I, Chap- 
ter!.) 

Legislation and Litigation 

Legislation and litigation played a very important part in developing water supplies for the South Coast Re- 
gion. Most court decisions and legislation that affect the region are those which also affect statewide water re- 
sources. A complete discussion of these decisions and laws are in Volume I, Chapter 2. 

MWDSC is the largest water purveyor in the region; it has 27 member agencies, some of whom rely solely on 
MWDSC for their water supply. Many other agencies, like the City of Los Angeles, rely on MWDSC to supple- 



122 



3iilletin 160-93 Administrative Draft South Coast Region 



nent their existing water supplies. MWDSC lost an extremely important supply of water when its Colorado Riv- 
Ir entitlement was cut by 650,000 AF; the City of Los Angeles lost an important supply of water when its Mono 
.ake and Owens Valley water supplies were reduced. Details are provided in Volume I, Chapter 3. 

[ A brief synopsis of agreements and litigation which affect regional water matters follows: 

Untreated Sewage from Mexico. Tijuana's excess sewage has plagued the City of San Diego and its South 
3ay beaches since the 1930s. During frequent failures of Tijuana's inadequate, antiquated sewage treatment sys- 
lem, millions of gallons of raw sewage have been carried across the border through the Tijuana River to its estu- 
iry in San Diego County. San Diego's first attempt to alleviate this nuisance was in 1965, when the city agreed to 
reat Tijuana's waste on an emergency basis. In 1983, the United States and Mexico signed an agreement stating 
;h^ Mexico would modernize and expand Tijuana's sewage and water supply system and build a 34-mgd sewage 
reatment plant. 



j Mexico received a grant for $46.4 million from the Inter-American Development Bank to help finance the 
expansion and was to spend an additional $11 million to build the waste water treatment plant, 5 miles south of 
ihe International Border. Phase I of the facility was completed in January 1987. The plant was fiiUy operational 
n September 1987, only to break down a month later. In May 1988, the facility was again operational. 

A future facility will be funded jointly by Mexico and the U.S. at a cost of $192 million. Additional phases 
vill be added as needed, with an ultimate capacity of 100 mgd. The effluent will be discharged to the Pacific 
Ocean just north of the Mexican border and will meet U.S. standards. 

San Bernardino Ground Water. As late as the 1940s, the lowest portion of the San Bernardino Valley was 
omposed mainly of springs and marshlands. It now boasts a thriving urban complex and industrial center, but 
l^ound water levels in the area remain high, impairing the use of some buildings. The San Bernardino Valley 
viunicipal Water District began alleviating the high ground water problem by pumping ground water firom the 
!>ressure area to the Colton-Rialto basin through the Baseline Feeder. 

In 1969, the Superior Court of Riverside County, in response to a lawsuit filed by the Western Municipal Wa- 

sr District of Riverside County against the East San Bernardino County Water District, limited the amount of wa- 

jerthat can be produced or exported from the San Bernardino Basin area. The ruling requires the SBVMWD to 

'eplenish the basin when ground water pumping exceeds the specified amount. This has appeared at times to be 

t cross purposes with attempts to alleviate the effects of the high ground water . 

' * 
^ocal Issues 

Ventura County Ground Water. Ground water is the main water supply for irrigation and urban uses over 

nuch of the coastal plain of Ventura County (including the Oxnard Plain). As a result of increasing water de- 

nand, the ground water aquifers underlying the plain have been overdrafted. The overdraft within the United 

Vater Conservation District averaged 18,900 AF per year during 1976-85. The Fox Canyon Ground Water Man- 

gement Agency was formed to manage the ground water resources underlying the Fox Canyon aquifer zone. To 

liminate the overdraft in all aquifer zones, the agency adopted ordinances requiring meter installation on all 

veils pumping more than 50 AF per year. The objective of the ordinances is to limit the amount of ground water 

hat can be pumped and to restrict drilling of new wells in the North Las Posas Basin. In February 1991, United 



123 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft South Coast Region 



Conservation District completed construction of the Freeman Diversion Improvement Project on the Santa Clara 
River. The improved structure increases average annual diversions by about 43 percent, from 40,000 AF to 
57,000 AF. The diverted water is used for ground water recharge and agricultural irrigation, thereby reducing 
agricultural ground water demand. 

In an effort to prevent degradation of the Ojai ground water basin, a coalition of growers, public agencies, 
water utilities, and pumpers decided in early 1990 to have legislation enacted to form the Ojai Basin Ground Wa- 
ter Management Agency. Its activities include implementing agency ordinances; monitoring key wells; determin- 
ing amounts of extractions, ground water in storage, and operational safe yield; surveying land use within the 
agency's boundaries; compiling water quality data; and artificial recharge of the basin. 

Water Balance 

Water balances were computed for each Planning Subarea in the South Coast Region by comparing existing 
and future water demand projections with the projected availability of supply. The region total was computed as 
the sum of the individual subareas. This method does not reflect the severity of drought year shortages in some 
local areas which can be hidden when planning subareas are combined within the region. Thus, there could be 
substantial shortages in some areas. Local and regional shortages could also be less severe than the shortage 
shown, depending on how supplies are allocated within the region, a particular water agency's ability to partici- 
pate in water transfers or demand management programs (including land fallowing or emergency allocation pro- 
grams), and the overall level of reliability deemed necessary to the sustained economic health of the region. Vol- 
ume I, Chapter 1 1 presents a broader discussion of demand management options. 

Table SC-1 1 presents water demands for the 1990 level and for future water demands to 2020 and balances 
them with: (1) supplies from existing facilities and water management programs, and (2) future demand manage- 
ment and water supply management options. 

Regional net water demands for the 1 990 level of development totaled 4.4 and 4.5 MAF for average and 
drought years respectively. Those demands are projected to increase to 5.9 and 6.1 MAF, respectively, by the year 
2020, after accounting for a 490,000 AF reduction in urban water demand resulting from implementation of long- 
term conservation measures and a 10,000 AF reduction in agricultural demand resulting from additional long- 
term water conservation measures. 

Urban net water demand is projected to increase by about 1.8 MAF by 2020, primarily due to expected in- 
creases in population; while, agricultural net water demand is projected to decrease by about 288,000 AF, primari- 
ly due to lands being taken out of production resulting from the high cost of imported water supplies and urban- 
ization. Environmental net water demands, under existing rules and regulations, are projected to increase from 
2,000 to 6,000 AF annually due to increased acreage at the San Jacinto Wildlife Area. 

Average annual supplies were generally adequate to meet average net water demands in 1990 for this region. 
However, during drought, present supplies are insufficient to meet present demands and, without additional water 
management programs, annual average and drought year shortages are expected to increase to nearly 1 .0 and 2.3 
MAF by 2020 respectively. With implementation of Level I programs, shortages could be reduced to 0.4 MAF 
and 1 .0 MAF for average and drought years, respectively. 

/* 124 



iBulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Coast Region 



Table SC-11. Water Balance 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Demand/Supply 



1990 2020 

average drought average drought 



Net Demand 

Urban -with 1990 level of conservation 

-reductions due to long-term consen^ation measures (Level I) 
Agricultural 

-reductions due to long-term conservation measures (Level i) 
Environmental 
Other (1) 
Total Net Demand 



3,511 


3,641 


5,799 


6,004 


— 


— 


-490 


-490 


644 


668 


366 


380 


-- 


— 


-10 


-10 


2 


2 


6 


6 


777 


210 


232 


220 


4,379 


4,521 


5,903 


6,110 


3,274 


2,685 


3,306 


2,2ol 


1,083 


1,296 


1,611 


1.611 


22 


22 








4,379 


4,003 


4,917 


3,814 














4,379 


4,003 


4,917 


3,814 



^HtXw Supplies w/Existing Facilities Under D-1485 for Delta Supplies 

Developed Supplies 

Surface Water 

Ground Water 

Ground Water Overdraft 
Subtotal 

Dedicated Natural Flow 
Total Water Supplies 



Demand/Supply Balance 



-518 -986 -2,296 



Remaining Demand/Supply Balance Requiring Siiort Term Demand 
Management and/or Future Level II Options 



-373 




Future Water Management Options Level i (2) 

Long-term Supply Augmentation 

Reclaimed 

Local 

Colorado River 

State Water Project 
Subtotal - Water Management Options Level i 
Ground Water/Surface Water Use Reduction Resulting from Level I Programs 



281 


im 





264 


70 


70 


334 


680 


685 


1,295 


-72 






•1,001 



(1) Includes conveyance losses, recreation uses and energy production. 

(2) Protection of fish and wildlife and the ultimate Delta transfer solution will detemnine the feasibility of several water supply 
augmentation proposals and their water supply benefits. 



* * * 



125 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft South Coast Region 



126 



pnit of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 



SACRAMENTO RIVER REGION 




Oroville Dam spillway in 1986. 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Sacramento River Region 



SACRAMENTO RIVER REGION 

The Sacramento River Region contains the entire drainage area of the Sacramento River and its 
tributaries and extends almost 300 miles from CoUinsville in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta north to 
the Oregon border. The crest of the Sierra Nevada forms the region's eastern border; the northern is 
bounded by the crest of California's Cascade Range; and the western side is defined by the crest of the 
Coast Range. The vast watershed of the American River and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta form the 
southern border. The snow-capped Mt. Shasta, rising 14,162 feet above sea level, dominates the north 
end of the region, and is followed closely in by Mt. Lassen, at 10,457 feet above sea level. Both 
mountains are part of the Cascade Range. About 100 miles south of those mountain peaks stand the 
Sutter Buttes; the remnants of a prehistoric volcano, which has been called the smallest mountain range 
in the world. Winding its way through the entire region is the State's largest river, the Sacramento. 
The region contains 17 percent of the State's total land area. (See Appendix C for maps of the planning 
subareas and land ownership in the region.) 

The climate varies considerably in the region; however, three distinct climate patterns can be defined. 
The northernmost area, mainly high desert plateau, is characterized by cold snowy winters with only 
moderate rainfall, and hot, dry summers. This area depends on melting snowpack to provide a 
summertime water supply. Average annual precipitation is 12 inches. Other mountainous parts in the 
north and east have cold, wet winters with major amounts of snow providing considerable runoff for the 
summer water supply. These higher mountainous areas may receive rainfall during any month of the 
year. Summers are usually mild. Precipitation totals from 21 to 41 inches. The Sacramento Valley, the 
south-central part of the region, has mild winters with less precipitation. Precipitation usually takes 
place from October through May; virtually no precipitation occurs ft"om June to September. Summers in 
the valley are hot and dry. Sacramento's average annual precipitation is 18 inches. 

Popuiation 

The 1990 census shows that there are 535,000 more people in the region than in 1980, a 32 percent 
increase. Immigration from other parts of California played a big role in the increase. The fastest 
growing town was Loomis, a foothill community about 25 miles northeast of Sacramento, where there 
was a 344 percent increase in the number of people between 1980 and 1990. The City of Sacramento had 
the greatest number of new residents: more than 93,600 additional people. More than half of the 
region's population lives in the greater metropolitan Sacramento area. Other fast growing communities 
include Vacaville, Dixon, Redding, Chico, and the Sierra Nevada foothill counties. Table SR-1 shows 
population projections to 2020 for the Sacramento Region. 




Region Characteristics 
Average Annual Precipitation: 36. inches Average Annual Runoff: 22, 389, 700 AF 

Land Area: 26,960 square miles Population: 2,208,900 



1 



127 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Sacramento River Region 





Table SR-1. 


Population Projections 








(thousands) 






Planning Subareas 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 


Shasta- Pit 


31 


35 


39 


43 


Northwest Valley 


110 


132 


153 


176 


Northeast Valley 


187 


258 


311 


365 


Southeast 


253 


329 


400 


467 


Central Basin West 


242 


328 


390 


461 


Central Basin East 


1,267 


1,629 


1,977 


2,316 


Southwest 


53 


72 


91 


110 


Delta Service Area 


66 


85 


108 


125 


Total 


2,209 


2,869 


3,467 


4,063 













Land Use 

A wide variety of crops are grown in the Sacramento River Region, where agriculture is the largest 
industry. The region produces a significant amount of the overall agricultural tonnage in California, 
especially rice, grain, tomatoes, field crops, fruit, and nuts. Because of comparatively mild weather and 
good soil, double cropping occurs in the region. The largest acreage of any single crop is rice, which 
represents about 23 percent of the total. 

Crop statistics show that irrigated agricultural acreage in the region peaked during the 1980s and is 
now decreasing. The main reason for this decline is the conversion of irrigated agricultural lands to 
urban development. The comparison of 1980 and 1990 crop patterns shows that grain, field, rice, and 
pasture crops decreased a total of 137,000 acres. On the other hand, orchard, alfalfa, and tomato crops 
gained a total of 106,000 acres. The net decrease between 1980 and 1990 was 31,000 acres of irrigated 
crops. The Sacramento Region supports about 2.1 million acres of irrigated agriculture (23 percent of 
State total). About 1.7 million acres are irrigated on the valley floor and the surrounding mountain 
valleys within the region add 0.5 million irrigated acres (primarily pasture and alfalfa) to the region's 
total. 

The rapid growth in single and multi-family housing has had a major impact on the Sacramento 
County area, as well as the surrounding areas like Placer, El Dorado, Yolo, Solano, and Sutter counties. 
Most of the development has been along the major highway corridors and has taken some irrigated 
agricultural land out of production. Suburban "ranchette" homes on relatively large parcels often 
surround the urban areas, sometimes converting previously non-irrigated areas into irrigated pasture or 
small orchards. Most of the land in these "ranchette" areas is typically non-irrigated. Figure SR-1 
shows land use, imports, exports, and water supplies for the Sacramento Region. 

Water Supply 

The Sacramento River Region is the main water supply source for much of California's urban and 
agricultural areas. Basin runoff averages 22.4 million acre-feet, providing nearly one-third of the State's 



128 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Sacramento River Region 



PmttMT WATBI SUPfUtt 

(1JX» AF/Yr.) 



LOCAL SURFACE WATCT DEVELOPMEhfT 
IMPOflTS BY LOCAL WATIR AGENQES 
GROUND WATBR PERENNIAL YIELD 
CENTIUU. VALLEY PROJECT 
OTHER FEDERAL WATER DEVELOPMBfT 
STATE WATER PROJECT 
WATER RECLAMATION 
DEDICATED NATURAL FLOW 

WATER SUPPLY 
GROUND WATER OVERDRAFT 

TOTAL 



OREGON 



Trinity River 
Diversion - CVP 
881 



Ragion Water Tranafors 
\.ytxa% or Aa»^Mt v ymii 




Figure SR-1. Sacramento River Region 
L^nd Use, imports, Exports, and Water Supplies 



129 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Sacramento River Region 



total natural runoff. Major supplies in the region are provided through surface storage reservoirs and 
through direct ground water pumping. These sources supply 8 MAF of water to the region. About 2.5 
MAF of ground water is pumped from the region's ground water basins. Figure SR-2 shows the 
region's 1990 level sources of supply. 



Figure SR-2. Sacramento River Region 

Water Supply Sources (Average Conditions) 

1990 level 



Local Surface 

Water * 

49.8% 



Reclaimed 
0.1% 



Dedicated Natural 
Flows 
28.5% 




Total 

Imports 

0.1% 



includes local surface, SWR CVR and other federal projects. 



Supply with Existing Facilities 

Major reservoirs in the region providing water supply, recreation, power, environmental, or flood 
control benefits are shown in Table SR-2. 



130 



[Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Sacramento River Region 



Table SR-2. Major Reservoirs 



Reservoir Name 


River 


Capacity (1,000 AF) 


Owner 


McCloud 


McCloud River 


35.2 


PG&E 


Iron Canyon 


Pit River 


24.2 


PG&E 


l^e Britton 


Pit River 


40.6 


PG&E 


Pit No. 6 


Pit River 


15.9 


PG&E 


Pit No. 7 


Pit River 


34.6 


PG&E 


Shasta 


Sacramento 


4,552.0 


USBR 


Keswick 


Sacramento 


23.8 


USBR 


Whisl<eytown 


Clear Creek 


241.1 


USBR 


1^6 Almanor 


Feather River 


1,143.8 


PG&E 


Mountain Meadows 


Feather 


23.9 


PG&E 


Butt Valley 


Butt Creek 


49.9 


PG&E 


Bucks Lake 


Bucks Creek 


105.6 


PG&E 


Antelope 


Indian Creek 


22.6 


DWR 


Frenchman 


Little 1 ast 
Chance Creek 


55.5 


DWR 


Lake Davis 


Big Grizzly 
Creek 


84.4 


DWR 


Little Grass Valley 


Feather 


94.7 


Oroville Wyandotte ID 


1 Sly Creek 


Lost Creek 


65.7 


Oroville Wyandotte ID 


1 

Thermalito 


Feather 


81.3 


DWR 


Oroville 


Feather 


3,537.6 


DWR 


New Bu Hards Bar 


Yuba River 


966.1 


Yuba County WA 


Jackson Meadows 


Yuba River 


69.2 


Nevada ID 


Bowman Lake 


Canyon Creek 


68.5 


Nevada ID 


French Lake 


Canyon Creek 


13.8 


Nevada ID 


Spaulding 


Yuba River 


135.7 


PG&E 


Englebright 


Yuba River 


70.0 


USACOE 


Scotts Flat 


Deer Creek 


48.5 


Nevada ID 


Rollins 


Bear River 


66.0 


Nevada ID 


Camp Far West 


Bear River 


104.0 


So. Sutter WD 


French Meadows 


American River 


136.4 


Placer Co. WA 


Hell Hole 


Rubicon River 


207.6 


Placer Co. WA 


Loon Lake 


Gerle Creek 


76.5 


SMUD 


Slab Creek 


American River 


21.6 


SMUD 


Caples 1 ake 


Caples Creek 


16.6 


PG&E 


Union Valley 


Silver Creek 


277.3 


SMUD 


Ice House 


Silver Creek 


46.0 


SMUD 


Folsom Lake 


American River 


974.5 


USBR 



131 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Sacramento River Region 



Table SR-2. Major Reservoirs (continued) 



Reservoir Name 


River 


Capacity (1 ,000 AF) 


Owner 




Lake Natoma 


American River 


9.0 


USBR 




East Park 


Stony Creek 


50.9 


USBR 




Stony Gorge 


Stony Creek 


50.0 


USBR 




Black Butte 


Stony Creek 


143.7 


Santa Clara USCE 




Clear Lake 


Cache Creek 


313.0 


Yolo Co. FCWCD 




Indian Valley 


Cache Creek 


301.0 


YCFCWCD 




Lake Berryessa 


Putah Creek 


1,600.0 


USBR 





The region's water supply moves through a complex natural and engineered conveyance system. 
Water is both imported into the region and exported from the region. On the import side, the Clear Creek 
Tunnel on the Trinity River system carries roughly 926,000 AF annually from Lewiston Lake Reservoir 
into Whiskeytown Reservoir. Since 1 876, PG&E has imported 2,000 AF annually from Echo Lake in 
the North Lahontan Region to the South Fork of the American River. Sierra Valley imports about 6,000 
AF annually from the Little Truckee River. 

Shasta Valley exports 2,000 AF from Sacramento Basin to the Klamath River watershed, and 3,000 
AF is exported to the Madeline Plains in the North Lahontan Region. About 6 MAF is also exported to 
the regions to the south and west through local. State, and federal conveyance facilities. 

Ground water provides about 22 percent of the water supply in the region. Ground water is found in 
both the alluvial basins and in the upland hard rock areas. Well yields in the alluvial basins vary from 
less than 100 to over 4,000 gallons per minute. Yields in most of the upland hard rock areas are 
generally much less, but can support most domestic activities or livestock. Some wells in the volcanic 
hard rock areas of the upper Sacramento River and Pit River watersheds yield large amounts of water. 
Ground water recharge in the region's alluvial basins is primarily from river and stream seepage or 
infiltration of applied agricultural water. Additional recharge occurs as rainfall and snow melt percolates 
into the basins. A detailed description of water supplies for the different areas of the region follows. 

Mountains and Foothill Areas. It is often thought that the Sierra Nevada foothills of California 
have a lot of water because of the many creeks, rivers, and reservoirs in the area. However, water is 
scarce in much of the foothill area because many creeks that experience high flows during the winter 
rains and spring runoff become dry or nearly dry during summer and fall. This is also true for foothill 
regions on the west side of the Sacramento Valley, including the Clear Lake and Lake Berryessa areas. 
Most of the water for the mountains and foothills come from local surface sources. 

Mining operations of the Gold Rush resulted in the first water development in the Sierra area. When 
hydraulic mining operations ceased, some of the mining ditches were incorporated into what eventually 
became the PG&E's hydroelectric power system or local water supply systems, such as that of the 
Nevada Irrigation District. Currently, they provide agricultural and urban water supplies. The 



132 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Sacramento River Region 



conveyance systems tend to have large but not irrecoverable losses. A number of areas lack distribution 
systems to convey the water to the places of need. 

Though ground water is a lesser source of water in the foothills, it plays an important role in meeting 
the needs of many individuals. The ground water within the mountain counties exists mostly in fractured 
rock and provides approximately 17 percent of their water supply, about 7,300 AF annually. 

Ground water quality in this area is generally good, depending on the rock type from which the 
water is produced. Locally significant ground water quality problems may occur where ground water is 
in contact with radon or uranium-bearing rock, or sulfide mineral deposits that contain heavy metals. 
There is also a potential for ground water quality degradation where septic systems have been constructed 
in high density subdivisions. Moderate levels of hydrogen sulfide can be found in the volcanic and 
geothermal areas in the western portion of the region. 

Valley Area. The Sacramento Valley geologically is a trough partially filled with clay, silt, sand, and 
gravel deposited through millions of years of flooding. Although ground water is in all the younger 
sediments, only the more permeable sand and gravel aquifers provide enough for pumping. These 
younger sediments overlie older marine sediments throughout the valley, which contain brackish or saline 
water. The depth to saline water in the Sacramento Valley ranges from less than 500 feet in the north to 
over 3,000 feet in the south. 

The ground water quality in the Sacramento Region is generally excellent. However, there are areas 
where local contamination or pollution of the ground water supplies exist. In some parts of the region, 
elevated levels of naturally occurring chemicals make ground water use problematic. 

Agriculture's water supply varies considerably, with a large number of irrigation districts supplying 
surface water through regulated rivers, sloughs, and pipelines. USER, PG&E, SWP, and county water 
agencies have developed some of the water for the region. 

Ground water is available in much of the areas, but often surface water is less expensive and 
therefore preferred. Surface supplies are available either through riparian or appropriative water rights, or 
through an agency which delivers the water. The valley floor has an intricate water distribution system 
of sloughs, ditches, and canals devoted to conveying irrigation water. Water users also have some of the 
oldest rights to the surface water. Some water rights go back before the Gold Rush to old Spanish land 
grants. 

Reclaimed water, primarily from urban waste water reclamation plants total 9,000 AF. About half of 
that supply comes from projects on the west side of the Northern Sacramento Valley. Table SR-3 shows 
water supplies with existing facilities and water management programs. 



133 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Sacramento River Region 



Table SR-3. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities 

and Programs 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Supply 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


Surfece 


















Local 


3,169 


2,856 


3,205 


2,890 


3,301 


3,003 


3,352 


3,060 


Local imports 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


a 


Colorado River 


























CVP 


2,382 


1.996 


2,453 


2,064 


2,458 


2,065 


2,462 


2,075 


Other federal 


239 


218 


243 


218 


243 


218 


243 


218 


SWP 


5 


5 


7 


7 


7 


7 


7 


7 


Ground water 


2,480 


2,850 


2,469 


2,982 


2,430 


3,032 


2,497 


3,044 


Overdraft 


33 


33 


33 


33 


33 


33 


33 


33 


Reclaimed 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


Dedicated natural flow 


3,323 


2,929 


3,749 


3,355 


3,749 


3,355 


3,749 


3,355 


Total 


11,648 


10,904 


12,176 


11,566 


12,238 


11,730 


12,360 


11,809 



Supply with Additional Facilities and Water Management Programs 

Future water management options are presented in two levels to better reflect the status of 
investigations required to implement them. 

O Level I options are those that have undergone extensive investigation and environmental analyses 
and are judged to have a high likelihood of being implemented by 2020. 

O Level II options are those that could fill the remaining gap between water supply and demand. 
These options require more investigation and alternative analyses. 

There are no major additional water supply facilities coming on line by the year 2020 in this region. 
However, El Dorado County Water Agency has issued a Final Environmental Impact Report for the El 
Dorado Project, which will augment supplies in the El Dorado Irrigation District service area. The 
preferred alternative includes: (1) obtaining consumptive use rights to PG&E water currently used solely 
for power generation; (2) increasing the district's contract for CVP water from Folsom Reservoir; and (3) 
construction of the White Rock Project, which will convey water from the South Fork American River to 
proposed EID treatment and distribution facilities. The additional supplies from this alternative are 
17,000 AF of firm supply (average and drought) from PG&E water, and 7,500 and 5,600 AF for average 
and drought years, respectively, from Folsom Reservoir. The White Rock Project is strictly a conveyance 
project, which will not supplement the district's water supply. 

Water Service Reliability and Drought Water Management Strategies. Urban areas in the central 
part of the region generally have sufficient supplies to survive dry periods with only voluntary cutbacks. 



134 



JBolletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Sacramento River Region 



However, communities in Butte, Lake, and Shasta counties, and areas served from Folsom Lake have 
used rationing or water transfers. 

The Redding Basin is fundamentally an area of abundant water supplies, but outlying areas are 
subject to severe shortages in dry years due to the terms of USBR contracts and the lack of alternative 
supplies. Small districts located virtually in the shadow of Shasta Dam face chronic water shortages. 

Mountain valley areas in the region that depend on surface water are generally irrigated to the extent 
water is available; when water runs low or runs out, irrigation is cut back. This type of drought 
management is a way of life for the ranchers. Holders of riparian and pre-1914 water rights on perennial 
streams generally enjoy reliable supplies, even during droughts. They are technically subject to restriction 
during times of shortage, but, as a practical matter, such restrictions have not been enforced in the past. 

The 30 percent of the region's lands that are irrigated with ground water generally enjoy a very 
reliable supply. Ground water levels may decline moderately during an extended drought, but the main 
result is a modest drop in well production and an increase in pumping costs. 

Much of the foothill area relies on ground water to meet water needs. Ground water supplies are 
highly variable and do not contain significant volumes due to the nature of the fractured rock 
characteristic of the area. 

I There are roughly two dozen CVP contractors for project water, but the majority of diverters along 

'the Sacramento River existed before major reservoirs were constructed. There are only three Sacramento 

[River Region SWP contractors: Plumas County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Butte 

County, and Yuba City. The Feather River had a similar history before the construction of the SWF's 

lOroville Reservoir. The diverters executed water rights settlement contracts with the USBR and DWR 

I 

jafter the CVP and SWP water rights were filed. These contracts normally provide for deficiencies of 

jonly 25 to 50 percent in extremely dry years, whereas CVP and SWP contractors can receive much larger 

Ideficiencies. These water rights settlement contracts include these provisions because their water rights 

jwere filed long before the federal and State projects were built; most go back to before the turn of the 

'century. 

CVP contractors account for 20 percent of the region's water use and are subject to sizeable cutbacks 
in drought years; some contractors suffered a 75 percent reduction in 1991 . The effects of such cuts 
Idepend on what alternatives are available. Some areas can fall back on ground water; others have no 
feasible alternatives. 

A final category of water users includes those who depend primarily on return flow from upstream 
areas. These users usually do not have a firm water right because an upstream user is not generally 
obliged to continue to provide return flows. The recent drought, the resulting water banking activities, 
and increased emphasis on water conservation have reduced return flows available for downstream users. 
Among those affected have been State and federal wildlife areas and various privately owned duck clubs. 

Water Management Options with Existing Facilities. Changes in the surface water allocation 
within the region will probably result from pressure for environmental restoration, negotiations for 



135 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Sacramento River Regior 



renewal of CVP contracts, expanded conjunctive use of surface and ground water, and various proposals 
and designs for water transfers. Cumulatively, these changes could result in further substantial increases 
in ground water use in the region. Water transfers are becoming increasingly important throughout 
California. Since the Sacramento River system potentially is the major source of future water transfers,^ 
this region will probably experience more water transfer activities in the future. 

Water conservation efforts in this region do not usually result in substantial actual water savings 
because water not consumptively used is available for reuse downstream. For example, most water 
delivered in the Sacramento Region that is not consumptively used is returned to surface or ground water 
sources from which it may be diverted and used again. 

Some water users would find themselves without a supply if upstream users did not provide surplus 
runoff from their "inefficient" application of water. If return flows were reduced by upstream water 
conservation efforts, downstream users who have the rights to do so would elect to divert more water 
from the Sacramento River to meet their needs. 

Water Management Options With Additional Facilities. Many potential surface water 
developments within the Sacramento River Region have been examined over the last 40 years. Most of 
these studies were geared primarily to producing additional water supplies for use in other regions of the 
State. Agricultural payment capacity within the Sacramento River Region generally is insufficient to 
justify expensive new reservoir projects. 

The most attractive surface water projects in the Sacramento River Region have already been built. 
High construction costs and the increasing emphasis on environmental considerations have greatly 
restricted the remaining options for additional surface water development. There are a few reservoir 
projects under consideration within the region, but none is far enough along in the planning and 
environmental review analysis to be constructed within the 30-year forecast presented here. The 
proposed Auburn Dam is discussed earlier in the "Local Issues" section of this chapter. 

Additional ground water development will most likely provide for the limited increasing water 
demands of the region. The potential for developing new supplies from ground water is most favorable 
in the northern portion of the Sacramento Valley; the southern portion is already operating close to 
perennial yield in many areas. From the standpoint of overall basin management, increasing use of 
ground water will come partially at the expense of depleting existing surface supplies. Table SR-4 
shows water supplies with additional facilities and programs. 



136 



ulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Sacramento River Region 



Table SR-4. Water Supplies with Level I Water Management Programs 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Supply 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


Surface 


















Local 


3.169 


2.856 


3,222 


2.907 


3,318 


3.020 


3,369 


3,077 


Local imports 


8 1 


w ^ 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


1 Colorado River 


























CVP 


2,382 


1,996 


2,453 


2,070 


2,459 


2,071 


2,469 


2,081 


Other federal 


239 


218 


243 


218 


243 


218 


243 


218 


SWP 


5 


5 


7 


7 


7 


7 


7 


7 


Ground water 


2,480 


2,850 


2,452 


2,982 


2,413 


3,032 


2,480 


3,044 


Overdraft 


33 


33 


33 


33 


33 


33 


33 


33 


Reclaimed 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


Dedicated natural flow 


3,323 


2,929 


3,749 


3.355 


3,749 


3,355 


3,749 


3,355 


,Total 


11,648 


10,904 


12,176 


11,588 


12,239 


11,753 


12,367 


11,832 



I Water Use 

The 1990 level water usage in the Sacramento River Region is 1 1 .6 MAF, and is projected to rise to 
[Imost 12.4 MAF in the year 2020. Since 1980, urban use has increased while agricultural use has 
lemained relatively stable except for the peak in acreage during the early 1980s. A general decline in 
Agricultural acreage is forecast, but there will be limited expansion in some areas. Therefore, agricultural 
ivater use is expected to decline slightly during the next 30 years as agricultural irrigation efficiencies 
iontinue to improve. Environmental use is expected to increase by 0.5 MAF by 2020 under existing 
ishery and wetland requirements. Figure SR-3 shows net 1990 level water demands for the Sacramento 
tiver Region. 



137 



i I 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Sacramento River Regioi 



Figure SR-3. Sacramento River Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990 level 




138 



iBulIetin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Sacramento River Region 



jUrban Water Use 

Cities in the region tend to be on or near major rivers and much of the population receives its water 
supplies from those rivers. Ground water supplies some cities and rural dwellers and also supplements 
(surface supplies in some areas. In the last decade, rapid growth on the outskirts of cities with surface 
supplies has led to a number of residential developments using ground water. 



Figure SR-4. Sacramento River Region 
Appiied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990 levei 




An average of 75 percent of the total residential water use is for landscaping. Per capita water use 
averages 248 gallons per day for valley residents. In the northern part of the region per capita water use 
ranges from about 200 to around 350 gpd. The higher unit use is generally associated with the hot, dry 



139 



■1 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Sacramento River Region 



floor of the northern Sacramento Valley. Overall, daily per-capita urban water use of 300 gallons has not 
changed significantly over past years except during droughts. At those times, communities with high 
water use have reduced their use by employing standard water conservation methods. 

Overall, the region's population is expected to more than double. Municipal and industrial use is 
expected to increase along with the region's population from 1990 to 2020. Much of the growth will be 
in the southern part of the region including El Dorado, Placer and Sacramento counties. 

The high water using industries of the region are closely tied to agriculture and forestry. Tomato and 
stone fruit processing, sugar mills, paper pulp, and lumber mills consume large amounts of water and 
many have their own supplies. Table SR-5 summarizes the applied and net urban water use projections 
for the region. Figure SR-4 shows applied 1990 level urban water demand, by sector. 



140 





Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 












Sacramento River Region 






Table SR 


-5. Urban Water Demand 












(thousands of 


acre- 


-feet) 












Planning Subareas 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 




Shasta -Pit 






















Applied water demand 


11 


13 




13 


15 


14 


16 


15 


18 




Net water demand 


11 


13 




13 


16 


14 


16 


15 


18 




Depletion 


5 


6 




6 


7 


7 


8 


7 


9 




Northwest Valley 






















Applied water demand 


53 


54 




61 


63 


68 


70 


77 


79 




Net water demand 


53 


54 




61 


63 


68 


70 


77 


79 




Depletion 


19 


20 




24 


24 


27 


28 


31 


32 




Northeast Valley 






















Applied water demand 


55 


58 




75 


79 


90 


95 


104 


110 




Net water demand 


55 


58 




75 


79 


90 


95 


104 


110 




Depletion 


27 


29 




37 


39 


45 


47 


52 


55 




Southeast 


















m 




Applied water demand 


75 


82 




93 


102 


111 


121 


127 


13p 




Net water demand 


75 


82 




93 


102 


111 


121 


127 


139 




Depletion 


25 


28 




32 


35 


37 


41 


43 


47 




Central Basin West 






















Applied water demand 


71 


76 




87 


95 


100 


109 


116 


125 




Net water demand 


71 


76 




87 


95 


100 


109 


116 


125 




Depletion 


22 


22 




26 


28 


31 


33 


36 


38 




Central Basin East 


















8or 




Applied water demand 


448 


490 




543 


593 


645 


705 


735 




Net water demand 


448 


490 




543 


593 


645 


705 


735 


803 




Depletion 


127 


140 




154 


170 


185 


202 


211 


232 




Southwest 






















Applied water demand 


9 


10 




13 


14 


16 


17 


19 


20 




Net water demand 


9 


10 




13 


14 


16 


17 


19 


20 




Depletion 


4 


5 




6 


6 


7 


8 


9 


9 




Delta Service Area 










l^^l 








i 




Applied water demand 


23 


25 




27 


30 


34 


37 


38 


42 




Net water demand 


23 


25 




27 


30 


34 


37 


38 


42 




Depletion 


7 


7 




8 


9 


10 


11 


11 


12 




Total 






















Applied water demand 


745 


809 




912 


989 


1,078 


1,169 


1,230 


1,334 




Net water demand 


745 


809 




912 


989 


1,078 


1,169 


1,230 


1,334 




Depletion 


238 


256 




293 


318 


348 


378 


399 


433 










141 















pr" 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Sacramento River Region 



Agricultural Water Use 

Agricultural water use is estimated using crop acreages and corresponding applied water and 
evapotranspiration of applied water unit use values for each crop. Figure SR-5 shows irrigated acreage, 
ETAW, and applied water for major crops grown in the region. On-farm irrigation efficiencies vary 
widely, depending on individual crops, soils, irrigation methods, system reuse, water scarcity, and 
irrigation costs. Areas depending on ground water or limited surface water tend to be very efficient. 
Others who enjoy high priority rights to dependable supplies are often less conservative in their water 
usage. Excess water supplied simply returns to the supply system through drainage canals. Basin 
efficiency is usually very good because downstream users recycle return flows for their own use. In 
many places, return flows are the only water source for downstream users. The capital investment 
necessary to increase on-farm irrigation efficiency is generally not considered warranted unless water 
supplies are unreliable. Along with that, many farmers are working with a narrow profit margin and are 
growing the most profitable crop for the soil and climate in the area; additional production costs often 
may not be an option, but rather will cause the farming operation to cease. 

Rainfall during the growing season is virtually non-existent. During normal years, surface and 
ground water are plentiful and water availability is not the limiting factor in production. Much of the 
valley is irrigated using various flood irrigation methods. Table SR-6 shows irrigated acreage 
projections for the region. Table SR-7 presents 1990 ETAW by crop and Table SR-8 shows agricultural 
water demands to 2020. 



Table SR-6. Irrigated Crop Acreage 
(thousands of acres) 



Planning Subareas 



1990 



2000 



2010 



2020 



Shasta- Pit 
Northwest Valley 
Northeast Valley 
Southeast 
Central Basin West 
Central Basin East 
Southwest 
Delta Service Area 
Total 



147 


142 


144 


146 


129 


139 


146 


149 


89 


91 


93 


93 


104 


104 


104 


104 


786 


784 


804 


815 


679 


664 


653 


642 


22 


21 


22 


23 


189 


189 


190 


190 



2,145 



2,134 



2,156 



2,162 



142 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Sacramento River Region 



Acres (X 1 ,000) Acre-Feet (X 1 ,000) 
1 ,200 1 ^ ^^ V 3,600 



900 



600 



300 




2,700 



1,800 



900 





Grain Other Field Pasture 

Rice Alfalfa Other Decidious 

■Acreage ^ETAW ■ Applied Water 



Figure SR-5. 1990 Sacramento River Region 
Acreage, ETAW, and Appiied Water for Major Crops 



143 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Sacramento River Region 



Table SR- 


-7. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop 


Irrigated Crop 


Total 
Acres 
(1,000) 


Total ETAW 
(1,000AF) 


Irrigated Crop 


Total 

Acres 

(1,000) 


Total ETAW 
(1,000AF) 


Grain 


303 


183 


Pasture 


357 


809 


Rice 


494 


1,458 


Tomatoes 


120 


303 


Sugar Beets 


75 


165 


Other truck 


55 


65 


Corn 


104 


232 


Almonds/pistachios 


101 


234 


Other field 


155 


197 


Other deciduous 


205 


475 


Alfalfa 


141 


326 


Vineyard 


17 


28 








Citrus/olives 


18 


35 




Total 


2,145 


4,510 



In the Sacramento River Region, several crops are expected to decrease in acreage, especially on the 
valley floor. The main reasons for the decreases in certain crops are urban encroachment on irrigated 
agricultural land and changes in market factors and advanced technology. Pasture is the crop projected 
to have the largest decrease in acreage at 35,500 acres (10 percent), followed by rice at 1 1,900 acres (2 
percent), small grains, 9,200 acres (3 percent) and sugar beets, 3,000 acres (4 percent). However, 
between 1990 and 2020, a net increase in irrigated crop acreage of about 17,000 acres, or 1 percent, is 
forecast. Almost all of this increase is expected to occur north of the Sutter Buttes where there exists 
adequate farmable soils with sufficient surface and ground water supplies. The crops projected to have 
the largest increase in acreage are almonds, miscellaneous truck crops, tomatoes, vineyard, com, and 
miscellaneous deciduous orchards. 



144 



1 BuUetin 160-93 Administrative Draft 










Sacramento River Region 




Table SR-8. 


Agricultural Water Demand 










(thousands of acre- 


-feet) 










Planning Subareas 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Shasta -Pit 


















Applied water demand 


440 


469 


433 


463 


440 


470 


449 


479 


Net water demand 


379 


396 


374 


391 


380 


397 


387 


405 


Depletion 


330 


358 


325 


352 


330 


358 


335 


363 


Northwest Valley 


















Applied water demand 


472 


569 


490 


590 


505 


609 


508 


612 


Net water demand 


460 


485 


480 


506 


498 


525 


504 


532 


1 Depletion 


356 


433 


374 


455 


388 


471 


392 


476 


Northeast Valley 


















Applied water demand 


306 


353 


306 


353 


310 


358 


310 


358 


Net water demand 


298 


312 


299 


314 


304 


319 


303 


318 


Depletion 


230 


266 


234 


271 


238 


276 


239 


276 


1 Southeast 


















Applied water demand 


358 


426 


355 


423 


351 


418 


351 


418 


Net water demand 


346 


388 


344 


385 


341 


381 


341 


381 


1 Depletion 


261 


306 


261 


306 


261 


304 


261 


306 


' Central Basin West 


















Applied water demand 


2,830 


3,081 


2,804 


3,052 


2,803 


3,049 


2,812 


3,057 


Net water demand 


2,159 


2,397 


2,168 


2,456 


2,159 


2,443 


2,167 


2,440 


Depletion 


1,896 


2,153 


1,919 


2,179 


1,947 


2,210 


1,970 


2,235 


Central Basin East 


















Applied water demand 


2,907 


3,124 


2,781 


3,020 


2,660 


2,960 


2,605 


2,799 


Net water demand 


2,613 


2,754 


2,463 


2,627 


2,363 


2,580 


2,324 


2,435 


Depletion 


1,950 


2,151 


1,923 


2,132 


1,886 


2,080 


1,852 


2,042 


Southwest 


















Applied water demand 


74 


77 


72 


74 


70 


74 


70 


73 


Net water demand 


71 


72 


69 


69 


67 


69 


68 


68 


Depletion 


50 


51 


47 


48 


46 


47 


45 


-i 46 


Delta Service Area 


















Applied water demand 


461 


546 


457 


542 


453 


537 


453 


537 


Net water demand 


426 


504 


383 


455 


369 


450 


379 


450 


Depletion 


403 


403 


342 


405 


342 


403 


343 


405 


Total 


















Applied water demand 


7,847 


8,645 


7,697 


8,516 


7,594 


8,475 


7,558 


8,333 


Net water demand 


6,752 


7,308 


6,580 


7,203 


6,480 


7,164 


6,473 


7,029 


Depletion 


5,476 


6,121 


5,425 


6,147 


5,438 


6,148 


5,437 


6,150 








145 













Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Sacramento River Region 



Environmental Water Use 

Instream flow requirements of major streams in the region are listed in Table SR-9. This region 
contains the largest wetland areas in the State, totalling approximately 175,000 acres. Water for these 
wetlands is from several sources, including CVP supplies, agricultural return flows, and ground water. 
The estimated wetland applied water, shown in Table SR-10, is about 456,000 AF. The projected supply 
for year 2000 is expected to go up by 34 percent due to the 1992 CVP Improvement Act of 1992 which 
allocated more water to wetlands. In the year 2000, 612,000 AF would be allocated for wetlands. The 
CVP Improvement Act of 1992 is discussed in Volume I, Chapter 2. 

The Butte and Sutter basins contain large wetlands areas which serve as critical habitat for migratory 
waterfowl in the Pacific Fly way. There are about 13,000 acres of publicly owned and managed 
waterfowl habitat in the Butte Basin. In addition, private hunting clubs maintain more than 30,000 acres 
of habitat during normal years. The Sutter Basin has almost 2,600 acres of publicly owned waterfowl 
habitat, all are in the Sutter National Wildlife Refuge. Private duck hunting clubs provide an additional 
1 ,500 acres of waterfowl habitat. 



146 



i Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Sacramento River Region 



Table SR- 


-9. Environmental Instream Water Needs 








(thousands of acre- 


-feet) 










Stream 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 




average 


drought 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


average drought 


Sacramento River 


















Applied Water 


1,903 


1.702 


1,903 


1.702 


1,903 


1,702 


1,903 


1,702 


Net Water 


1,903 


1,702 


1,903 


1,702 


1,903 


1.702 


1,903 


1,702 


Depletion 


























Ybba River 


















Applied Water 


280 


280 


600 


600 


600 


600 


600 


600 


Net Water 


174 


174 


600 


600 


600 


600 


600 


600 


Depletion 


























Feather River 


















Applied Water 


977 


784 


977 


784 


977 


784 


977 


784 


Net Water 


977 


784 


977 


784 


977 


784 


977 


784 


Depletion 


























American River 














1 


^B 


Applied Water 


234 


234 


234 


234 


234 


234 


234 


234 


Net Water 


234 


234 


234 


234 


234 


234 


234 


234 


Depletion 


























Others (1) 


















Applied Water 


49 


49 


49 


49 


49 


49 


49 


49 


Net Water 


35 


35 


35 


35 


35 


35 


35 


35 


Depletion 
Total 










































Applied Water 


3,443 


3,049 


3,763 


3,369 


3,763 


3,369 


3,763 


3,369 


» Net Water 


3,323 


2,929 


3,749 


3,355 


3,749 


3,355 


3,749 


3,355 


1 
Depletion 



























147 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Sacramento River Region 



Table SR-10. Wetlands Water Needs 

(thousands of acre -feet) 





1990 




2000 


2010 




2020 


Wetlands 




















average drought 


average 


drought 


average drought 


average 


drought 


Modoc NWR 


















Applied water 


20 


20 


20 


20 


20 


20 


20 1 


1 20 


Net water 


17 


17 


17 


17 


17 


17 


17 


17 


Depletion 


15 


15 


15 


15 


15 


15 


15 


15 


Sacramento NWR 


















Applied water 


35 


35 


50 


50 


50 


50 


50 J 50 


Net water 


30 


30 


30 


30 


30 


30 


30 


30 


Depletion 


18 


18 


18 


18 


18 


18 


18 


18 


Colusa NWR 


















Applied water 


17 


17 


25 


25 


25 


25 


25 ^ 


^'. 25 


Net water 


14 


14 


14 


14 


14 


14 


14 


14 


Depletion 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


Butte Sink NWR 


















Applied water 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


Net water 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


Depletion 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


Delevan NWR 


















Applied water 


23 


23 


30 


30 


30 


30 


30 


30 


Net water 


20 


20 


20 


20 


20 


20 


20 


20 


Depletion 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


Sutter NWR 


■ 
















Applied water 


g» 


9 


30 


30 


'30 


30 


30 


30 


Net water 


4 


4 


30 


30 


30 


30 


30 


30 


Depletion 


4 


4 


4 


4 


4 


4 


4 4 4 


Gray Lx>dge WA 


















Applied water 


44 


44 


44 


44 


44 


44 


44 


44 


Net water 


36 


36 


36 


36 


36 


36 


36 


36 


Depletion 


21 


21 


21 


21 


21 


21 


21 


21 


Ash Creeic WA 


















Applied water 


13 


13 


13 


13 


13 


13 


13 js 


^ 13 


Net water 


13 


13 


13 


13 


13 


13 


13 


: 13 


Depletion 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


Upper Butte Basin 


















Applied water 








56 


56 


56 


56 


56 


56 


Net water 








49 


49 


49 


49 


49 


49 


Depletion 








27 


27 


27 


27 


27 


27 






1 


148 













iBulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 










Sacramento River Region 




Table SR-10. Wetlands Water Needs (continued) 










(thousands of 


acre- 


feet) 










Yolo Bypass 

1 




ft 












'M 


mssm 


1 Applied water 




0^^ 


^ 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


1 


i Net water 




^ flH 


1 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


M, 


1 Depletion 










2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


Stone Lakes 




^ii 


|M 


1 


HHI 










i Applied water 




oP^ 


™ 


40 


^^r 


40 


40 


40 


40 


1 Net water 




^^m 


^ 


40 


40 


40 


40 


40 


40 


' Depletion 




oH 


m 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


Butte Basin 




















1 Applied water 




120 120 


120 


120 


120 


120 


120 


120 


' Net water 




74 ^ 


74 


74 


74 


74 


74 


74 


74 


; Depletion 




33 * 


33 


33 


33 


33 


33 


33 


33 


Colusa Basin 

1 




















1 
Applied water 




97 


97 


97 


97 


97 


97 


97 


97 


Net water 




68 


68 


68 


68 


68 


68 


68 


68 


Depletion 




25 


25 


25 


25 


25 


25 


25 


25 


i American Basin 




















! Applied water 




31 


31 


31 


31 


31 


31 


31 


31 


1 Net water 




31 


31 


31 


31 


31 


31 


31 


31 


Depletion 




7 


7 


7 


7 


7 


7 


7 


7 


Sutter Basin 




















1 Applied water 




16 


16 


16 


16 


16 


16 


16 


16 


Net water 




16 


16 


16 


16 


16 


16 


16 


16 


, Depletion 




4 


4 


4 


4 


4 


4 


4 


4 


Yolo Basin 




















Applied water 




21 


21 


21 


21 


21 


21 


21 


21 


Net water 




21 ^- 


21 


21 


21 


21 


21 


21 


21 


Depletion 




5 


5 


5 


5 


5 


5 


5 


5 


^ Sherman Island 




M 
















> Applied water 




gK 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


1 Net water 




9 P 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


; Depletion 




2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


j Cosumnes River 




















! Applied water 










1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


; Net water 










1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


Depletion 




























Total 




















Applied water 




456 A 


156 


612 


612 


612 


612 


612 


612 


Net water 




354 : 


154 


478 


478 


478 


478 


478 


478 


Depletion 




167 1 


67 


207 


207 


207 


207 


207 


207 



149 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Sacramento River RegioDi 



Other Water Use 

Figure SR-6 shows water recreation areas in the Sacramento Region. Table SR-1 1 shows the total 
water demands for the region. 



Figure SR-6. Sacramento River Region 
Water Recreation Areas 



1 . Goose Lake 

2. Castle Crags S.R 

3. West Valley Reservoir 

4. Blue Lake 

5. Ahjumaw Lava Springs S.R 

6. Tule Lake 

7. McArthur-Burney Falls M.S.R 

8. Lake McCloud 

9. Shasta Lake 

10. Iron Canyon Reservoir 

11. LakeBritton 

12. Whiskeytown Reservoir 

13. Crater Lake 

14. Manzanita Lake 

15. Lake Al manor 

16. William B. Ide Adobe S.H.R 

17. Butte Valley Resen/oir 

18. Round Valley Reservoir 

19. Antelope Lake R.F. 

20. Woodson Bridge S.R.A. 

21 . Snag Lake 

22. Lake Davis 

23. Frenchman Lake 

24. Black Butte Lake 



Shown on map. 

25. Bidwell River Park S.R.A. 

26. Plumas-Eureka S.R 

27. Bucks Lake 

28. Lakes Basin Recreation Are 

29. Stony Gorge Reservoir 

30. Thermalito Afterbay R.F 

31. Thermalito Forebay R.F 

32. Lake Oroville S.R.A. 

33. Little Grass Valley Reservoir 

34. New Bullards Bar Reservoir 

35. Malakoff Diggins S.H.R 

36. Bowman Lake 

37. Jackson Meadow 

Recreation Area 

38. Boca Resen/oir 

39. Prosser Creek Reservoir 

40. PlaskettLake 

41. Collins Lake 

42. South Yuba Trail Project 

43. Lake Spaulding 

44. Lake Valley Reservoir 

45. Eagle Lake 

46. Martis Creek Lake 

47. Blue Lakes -Lake County 

48. Lake Pillsbury 



49. Colusa-Sacramento River S. 

50. Scotts Flat Lake 

51 . Indian Valley Resen/oir 

52. Camp Far West Lake 

53. Rollins Lake 

54. Englebright Reservoir 

55. Sugar Pine Reservoir 

56. French Meadows Reservoir 

57. Clear Lake S.R 

58. Anderson Marsh S.H.R 

59. Auburn S.R.A. 

60. Stumpy Meadows Reservoir 

61 . Marshall Gold Discovery S.H. 

62. Hell Hole Reservoir 

63. Loon Lake 

64. Union Valley Resen/oir 

65. Jenkinson Lake Sly Park R.A. 

66. Ice House Reservoir 

67. Wrights Lake 

68. Echo Lake 

69. Folsom lake S.R.A. 

70. Lake Natoma 

71. Brannan Island S.R.A. 



R.A. 



150 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Sacramento River Region 



OREGON 



Legend 
A Water Recreation Area 
• Hydroelectric Power Plant 
■» Federal Wild and Scenic River 





Figure SR-6. Sacramento River Region 
Water Recreation Areas 



151 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Sacramento River Region 



Table SR-11. Total Water Demands 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



1990 
Category of Use 

average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Urban 
















Applied water 744 


808 


911 


988 


1077 


1168 


1229 


1333 


Net water 745 


809 


912 


989 


1078 


1169 


1230 


1334 


Depletion 238 


256 


293 


318 


348 


378 


399 


433 


Agricultural 














■il- 


Applied water 7,847 


8,645 


7,697 


8,516 


7594 


8475 


7558 


i; 8333 


Net water 6,752 


7,308 


6,580 


7,203 


6480 


7164 


6473 


7029 


Depletion 5,476 


6,121 


5,425 


6,147 


5438 


6148 


5437 


1 6150 


Environmental 
















Applied water 3,899 


3,505 


4,375 


3,981 


4375 


3981 


4375 


3981 


Net water 3,677 


3,283 


4,227 


3,833 


4227 


3833 


4227 


f 3833 


Depletion 167 


167 


207 


207 


207 


207 


207 


207 


Other (1) 
















Applied water 1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


Net water 475 


408 


458 


398 


455 


398 


438 


398 


Depletion 71 


60 


71 


60 


71 


60 


71 


60 


Total 
















Applied water 12,491 


12,959 


12,984 


13,487 


13046 


13625 


13163 


13649 


Net water 11,648 


11,807 


12,176 


12,423 


12239 


12564 


12367 


12593 


Depletion 5,952 


6,605 


5,995 


6,733 


6063 


6793 


6113 


6849 


(1) includes conveyance losses, recreational uses, and ( 


energy production 










Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 







Legislation and Litigation 

Bay/Delta Proceedings and Other Delta Issues. A comprehensive discussion of the Bay /Delta 
hearings and other Delta issues can be found in Volume I, Chapter 2 and Chapter 10. 

Sacramento River Fisheries and Riparian Habitat Management Plan (Senate Bill 1086). The 

salmon and steelhead fishery in the upper Sacramento River has declined greatly in the last few decades. 
Contributing to this decline are problems on the river's main stem: unsuitable water temperatures, toxic 
heavy metals from acid mine drainage, limited spawning gravels, obstructions to fish migration, fish 
losses from diversions, and riparian habitat loss. In 1986, the Legislature enacted Senate Bill 1086, 
which called for development of a riparian habitat inventory and an Upper Sacramento River Fisheries 
and Riparian Habitat Management Plan. The final plan contained a conceptual Riparian Habitat 
Restoration Plan recommending two major actions dealing with riparian habitat along the river and its 
major tributaries. It also contained a more specific Fishery Restoration Plan, listing 20 actions to help 
restore the salmon and steelhead fisheries of the river and its tributaries. In September 1989, the 



152 



iBulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Sacramento River Region 



Legislature approved Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 62, declaring a State policy to implement the 
|recommendations of the management plan. 

About half of the proposed restoration actions are now underway, funded by a combination of 
federal, State, and local sources, but progress in obtaining major federal funding has been slow. The 
CVP Improvement Act includes many of the CVP related fishery restoration measures recommended by 
the SB 1086 plan. This Act should accelerate implementation of the major actions needed to restore the 
jupper Sacramento River salmon and steelhead fisheries by providing needed funding. 

; Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District Intake Screen Deficiencies. The GCID has 700,000 AF of prior 
rights supplemented by 120,000 AF of CVP water. In May 1972, DFG constructed a 40 drum rotary 
[screen at the intake to the GCID main pump station. The rotary drum screen is one of the largest ever 
jbuilt, allowing a diversion from the Sacramento River of 3,000 cfs. However, the design performance of 
the screens was never realized because local river bed erosion gradually lowered the water surface. This 
(resulted from the cutoff of a large downstream river bend during the high water of 1970, which dropped 
]the normal water surface elevation at the screen by approximately 3-1/2 feet. The ensuing operational 
[deficiencies caused high juvenile fish mortalities. 

In 1987, GCID and DFG entered into a joint memorandum of understanding to fund an investigation 
Df potential solutions. The engineering firm CH2MHill was selected to perform this investigation. Their 
broposed solution was a new V-type screen combined with gradient restoration in the river. In 1989, the 
p.S. Army Corps of Engineers was directed by special federal legislation to proceed with engineering 
^d design to restore the river hydraulics near the screen to 1970 conditions. The Corps has recently 
Completed an initial design and environmental assessment of a gradient restoration project. 

The listing of the winter run chinook salmon in 1991 required GCID to consult with the National 
|Marine Fisheries Service on operating the existing screen and constructing a new screen. A court order 
|>et requirements for operating the existing screen which limit the amount of water GCID can divert. In 
i:he summer of 1992 a second contractor, HDR Engineering, Inc., was hired to perform a feasibility level 
study of selected screen design alternatives and prepare environmental documentation. 

The CVP Improvement Act of 1992 includes fishery mitigation at the GCID pumping plant in the 
Act's list of mandatory environmental restoration actions. USER will participate with other parties, 
imcluding the Reclamation Board, in implementing the work required by the Act. 

Regional Issues 

Ground Water Export. Individuals and water districts from several counties have recently sold or 
:onsidered selling surface water and ground water to downstream users. As a result, many north valley 
vvater users are concerned about protecting ground water resources from export. Surface water transfers 
:aused considerable controversy in local areas (see Volume I for a more complete discussion of water 
ransfers and the 1991 State Emergency Drought Water Bank). Organized ground water management 
efforts are currently under way in Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Shasta, Tehama, and Yolo counties. 

Endangered Species. Threatened and endangered species are affecting management of the region's 
•vater supplies. While few specific water supply requirements yet have been established for individual 



153 



BuUetin 160-93 Administrative Draft Sacramento River Region 



species, a number of operating restrictions may be considered that will impact the statewide water 
demand balance. For example, the listing of the winter run chinook salmon has had a major impact on 
GCID and ACID operations. Anderson-Cottonwood Irrigation District and other Sacramento River 
water diverters are concerned about the listing of additional fish runs. Additionally, the bank swallow, a 
State threatened species, has limited the bank protection efforts along the Sacramento River. 

Foothill Ground Water. Although most of the foothill areas have abundant surface water supplies, 
several rely heavily on ground water to meet their needs. With many people relocating to foothill and 
mountain regions, there is increasing concern about ground water availability in hard rock areas and the 
potential for contaminating these supplies. In many mountain counties, homes are built on small parcels 
away from regional sewer systems and municipal water supplies. Most of these homes rely on a single 
well for their potable water supply and a septic system to dispose of their sewage. In many areas where 
this development is occurring, there is no readily available alternative water supply if the ground water 
becomes depleted or contaminated. 

In some areas, current development will cause water supply needs to exceed available supplies. 
Downstream areas have already developed the least costly reservoir sites, and a number of recent State 
and federal mandates further limit water development. Financial and other local agency constraints can 
make it virtually impossible for these regions to develop supplies on their own. 

Local Issues 

Sacramento River Water Quality. Water quality in the entire watershed is generally excellent, 
making it the one of the most desirable water sources in the State. However, the system is vulnerable to 
pollution from several sources such as the July 1991 toxic spill into the Sacramento River near Dunsmuir 
from a train derailment. The upper Sacramento River is slowly recovering from that metam sodium spill 
which killed essentially all life for miles of this river system. Native rainbow trout from tributaries are 
redistributing themselves in the river and the smaller benthic organisms are steadily returning to the river. 
DFG continues to closely monitor the river's recovery. Current plans are to keep sport fishing closed 
until there is substantial recovery of the river's historic wild trout population. 

Problems such as turbidity and high pesticide concentrations affect not only the fisheries, but also the 
drinking water supplies. One of the most significant water quality problems on the upper Sacramento 
River is heavy metals loading caused by acid mine drainage from a region of past copper/lead/zinc 
mining above Redding. The major contributor, Iron Mountain Mine, is included in EPA's Superfund 
program, and remedial and water quality enforcement actions have been underway there for many years. 
Acid mine drainage from this region has caused significant fish losses in the Sacramento River. USBR 
operates Spring Creek Debris Dam, upstream of Keswick Reservoir, to control runoff from part of the 
Iron Mountain area. Mine drainage is impounded in the reservoir and released when downstream flows 
are large enough to provide dilution. Sometimes when SCDD is full, releases must be made from Shasta 
Reservoir to provide dilution. This reduces CVP yield but is necessary to protect the fishery. 
Enlargement of SCDD to provide additional reservoir storage has been one of the alternatives considered 
in EPA's remedial plans for Iron Mountain Mine. 



154 



I Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Sacramento River Region 



Discharges from paper mills near Anderson have also caused water quality problems. Other 
problems relate to degraded agricultural return flows, particularly those bearing significant pesticide 
residues. 

North Delta Contract. On January 28, 1981, DWR and North Delta Water Agency signed the North 
Delta Contract. One of the water quality standards in the contract is measured, at Emmaton on Sherman 
Island, which is situated where salinity fluctuates widely in low flow conditions, due to tidal influences. 

The North Delta Contract allows DWR to construct an overland facility as an alternative to meeting 
the Emmaton Standard. The Overland Facility would divert water from Threemile Slough and deliver it 
to other parts of the island where offshore water is of higher salinity. In 1986, however, Sherman Island 
landowners requested that DWR purchase their land instead of building the overland facility. 

The Western Delta Water Management Program was developed to include the landowners' desire and 
to develop Sherman Island into a wildlife refuge. This would: (1) improve levees for flood control; (2) 
[protect Delta water quality; (3) meet water supply and water quality needs of Sherman Island; (4) provide 
i habitat for waterfowl and wildlife; (5) minimize oxidation and subsidence on Sherman Island; (6) protect 
the reliability of the SWP, Contra Costa Canal, and the CVP; (7) protect Highway 160 and utilities; and 
(8) provide additional recreational opportunities. 

DWR has been negotiating land sales with the landowners. To date, DWR owns or has offers 
accepted for about 13 percent of the land on the island. In 1991, as part of these efforts, DWR negotiated 
a draft agreement that had elements of water banking and acknowledgement of the intent to have DWR 
purchase lands. 

El Dorado County Supplies. Currently El Dorado County has problems with distribution, storage, 
and water rights. The 1992 Cleveland fire in El Dorado County destroyed a large portion of the PG&E 
El Dorado canal. The canal supplies about one third of El Dorado Irrigation District's water supply. 
PG&E will repair the damaged portion of the canal. The American River watershed produces ample 
water, but other agencies hold the water rights, leaving El Dorado County deficient. The El Dorado 
County Water Agency and El Dorado Irrigation District have jointly filed for additional water rights from 
the American River Basin. 

El Dorado County Water Agency has issued a final EIR for the El Dorado Project, which will 
jaugment supplies in EID's service area. EDCWA has determined that combining water right permits, 
contractual entitlements and water exchanges, with the construction of water facilities will provide a 
viable supplemental water supply to the year 2020. 

Placer County Distribution. Currently, Placer County lacks sufficient delivery capacity to meet its 
future demands. There is currently no permanent system to deliver American River water supplies to 
western Placer County which has American River water rights, entitlement to water from PG&E's 
Yuba-Bear system, and a CVP contract for American River water with the USER. These supplies are 



155 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Sacramento River Region 



sufficient to meet 2020 needs. The county is studying various delivery systenis to serve western Placer 
County agricultural uses. 

Cloud Seeding DWR initiated a prototype project to augment snowpack by cloud seeding using 
ground based propane dispensers in Plumas and Sierra counties during 1991. These dispensers are 
expected to produce a 10 percent increase in snow depths within an area in the upper Middle Fork 
Feather River Basin during average and dry years. Increased snow depths are projected to result in an 
additional downstream water yield of 22,400 AF in a year of near normal precipitation. The project 
suspends operation when it appears that the year will have a heavy snow pack. By seeding 
approximately 50 percent of all suitable storms, it will take an estimated five years to statistically 
determine the percentage increase in snow depth (and ultimate water yield) produced by the project. 
Environmental monitoring of the effects of this new technology is an important component of the 
program. There has been local resistance to this program because of the possible additional burden on 
Plumas County resulting from increased snow depths. The DWR has committed to pay for any 
additional snow removal costs attribute to seeding. 

Control of Upper Sacramento River Water Temperatures. During the last summer and fall of 
1990-92, extremely low water elevations in Shasta Lake caused Sacramento River water temperatures to 
raise above safe levels for fall and winter run salmon. Large amounts of water from the lowest lake 
intakes, bypassing the generators, had to be released to prevent extreme fish mortalities. These releases 
were expensive and could have been avoided if the dam was equipped with a multi-level temperature 
control structure. Design of such a structure is presently underway but construction is still several years 
away. The estimated cost is $80 million and the funding source will be the CVP Improvement Act. A 
construction contract could be awarded as early as October 1994. 

Butte and Sutter Basins. The water-related problems of the Butte and Sutter basins include fish 
passage and habitat degradation, water quality, flooding and drainage problems, and water rights. The 
issues are complex because of competing uses and the maze-like pattern of water flow. Spring salmon 
runs in the Butte Creek watershed have decreased from around 20,000 in 1960 to less than 500 in 1992. 
The studies completed under SB 1086 toward a Sacramento River Fisheries Management Plan identified 
Butte Creek as a watershed in urgent need of fisheries mitigation work. The Butte and Sutter basins also 
provide a major part of the waterfowl wetland habitat in the Sacramento Valley, but are in need of more 
dependable water supplies. 

This area's greatest water management issue from a local perspective is the widely perceived need for 
a ground water basin management plan. Development of this plan is motivated by fears that other areas 
of the State may try to purchase ground water to the possible detriment of the local economy and rural 
lifestyle. The Butte Basin Water Users Association recently formed to develop a ground water 
management plan which would protect local interests in the area north of the Sutter Buttes. Another new 
organization, the Northern California Water Association, was formed to protect the water rights of 
Sacramento Valley area farmers. 



156 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Sacramento River Region 



Colusa Basin Drainage and Flooding. The Colusa Basin comprises over 1 ,000,000 acres of valley 
. floor and foothill lands in the southwest part of the Sacramento Valley. It includes portions of Glenn, 
Colusa, and Yolo counties. Over 450,000 acres of the valley lands within the basin are normally irrigated 
and it contains about one-third of the total irrigated acreage of the Sacramento Valley. 

The basin has historically experienced flooding, drainage, water quality, and subsidence problems. In 
1984, a task force was created to develop solutions to basin problems following the passage of SB 674. 
This legislation authorized the Colusa Basin Appraisal by DWR which was completed in 1990. In 1987, 
the California Legislature passed the Colusa Basin Drainage District Act which created a multicounty 
district to implement solutions to the area's flooding and drainage problems. 

The Drainage District Act required that an economically feasible initial plan be developed. In 
November 1988, the Board of Directors for the Colusa Basin Drainage District was organized and work 
began on the District's initial plan. The DWR's Colusa Basin Appraisal in May 1990, was used as a 
guideline for implementing the initial plan. The appraisal concluded that the potential for structural 
solutions to Colusa Basin problems is limited and recommended that a management plan be implemented 
to address drainage problems first, then flooding. 

The plan in its present form lacks the necessary support to be adopted through a district election, and 
a vote on the plan is currently not scheduled. The Board plans to consider modifications which could 
broaden the scope of the initial plan to include new district objectives such as water transfers and ground 
water management. The district has worked to establish a Memorandum of Understanding with the three 
counties and Reclamation District 2047 which is now responsible for maintenance of the Colusa Basin 
Drain. Negotiations for these agreements are ongoing but the major area of contention is how much 
private landowners would be assessed to implement the management plan and which landowners should 
be included. 

Water Quality in Clear Lake. The most severe problem in Lake County is the nutrient rich character 
of Clear Lake water. High nutrient levels cause uncontrollable algae growth, with its associated odor and 

' aesthetic problems. Nutrient sources include septic leach lines, sewage treatment plants, and runoff water 
from upland areas. The predominant blue-green algae form thick mats and scums which residents and 
tourists find noxious. Decomposition of the dense algal growths also causes severe dissolved oxygen 
reduction in the water column, which at times kills fish. Lake County received a Clean Lakes grant from 
the U.S. EPA to analyze methods for the control of the nuisance algae. The county contracted with the 
University of California at Davis to conduct this work. A draft report was due in spring 1993. Elevated 
mercury levels have been found in fish from the "Oaks arm" of the lake, prompting DFG to advise 

j against eating fish from the lake. The source of mercury is an abandoned mercury mine at Sulphur Bank 
near Clear Lake Oaks. In late 1992, the U.S. EPA awarded funds to UCD to investigate the significance 
of the mercury problem and develop remedial measures. 

West Delta Program. DWR is implementing a unique land use management program that could 
effectively control subsidence and soil erosion on Sherman and Twitchell islands, while also providing 
significant wildlife/waterfowl habitat values. DWR and DFG have jointly developed the Wildlife 



157 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Sacramento River Region 



Management Plan for Sherman and Twitchell to accomplish this objective. The plan is also designed to 
benefit wildlife species that occupy wetland, upland, and riparian habitat on the islands, and provide 
recreational opportunities for hunting and wildlife viewing. Property acquired and habitat developed 
through DWR's contribution will be available for use as mitigation for impacts associated with ongoing 
DWR Delta water management programs. 

This plan would significantly reduce subsidence by minimizing oxidation and erosion of the peat 
soils on the islands by replacing present farming practices with land use management practices designed 
to stabilize the soil. Such practices range from minimizing tillage to establishing wetland habitat. 

Altering land use practices on Sherman and Twitchell islands could provide up to 13,600 acres of 
managed wildlife and waterfowl habitat and responds directly to the underlying need for additional 
wetlands, as expressed in national and State policies for wetlands enhancement and expansion. Delta 
issues are also discussed in the San Joaquin Region. 

Water Balance 

Water balances were computed for each Planning Subarea in the Sacramento River Region by 
comparing existing and future water demand projections with the projected availability of supply. The 
region total was computed as the sum of the individual subareas. This method does not reflect the 
severity of drought year shortages in some local areas which can be hidden when planning subareas are 
combined within the region. Thus, there could be substantial shortages in some areas during drought 
periods. Local and regional shortages could also be less severe than the shortage shown, depending on 
how supplies are allocated within the region, a particular water agency's ability to participate in water 
transfers or demand management programs (including land fallowing or emergency allocation programs), 
and the overall level of reliability deemed necessary to the sustained economic health of the region. 
Volume I, Chapter 11 presents a broader discussion of demand management options. 

Table SR-12 presents water demands for the 1990 level and for future water demands to 2020 and 
balances them with: (1) supplies from existing facilities and water management programs, and (2) future 
demand management and water supply management options. 

Regional net water demands for the 1990 level of development totaled 1 1 .6 and 1 1.8 MAF for 
average and drought years respectively. Those demands are projected to increase to 12.4 and 12,6 MAF, 
respectively, by the year 2020, after accounting for a 25,000 AF reduction in urban water demand 
resulting from implementation of long-term conservation measures and a 10,000 AF reduction in 
agricultural demand resulting from additional long-term agricultural water conservation measures. 

Urban net water demand is projected to increase by about 485,000 AF by 2020, due to expected 
increases in population; while, agricultural net water demand is projected to decrease by about 278,000 
AF, primarily due to changes in cropping pattems. Environmental net water demands, under existing 
rules and regulations, will increase by 550,000 AF, reflecting increased water allocation to wildlife 
refuges in the Sacramento Valley and increased Yuba River instream flow required recently by the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 



158 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Sacramento River Region 



Average annual supplies were generally adequate to meet average net water demands in 1990 for this 
region. However, during drought, present supplies are insufficient to meet present demands and, without 
additional water management programs, annual drought year shortages are expected to decrease from 
about 784,000 to 761,000 AF by 2020. This decrease is due primarily to reductions in agricultural water 
use. 

There are several actions currently in progress, including implementation of the Central Valley 
Project Improvement Act, that have proposed increases in instream flow for fisheries that could affect the 
availability of supplies for urban and agricultural use in the region. 

With planned Level I programs, drought year shortages would be reduced by 23,000 AF. The 
lemaining 761,000 AF drought shortage requires both additional short-term drought management, water 
transfers and demand management programs, and future long-term Level II options depending on the 
overall level of water service reliability deemed necessary, by local agencies, to sustain the economic 
health of the region. 



■s. 



159 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Sacramento River Region 



Table SR-12. Water Balance 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Demand/Supply 



1990 
average drought 



2020 
average drought 



Net Demand 

Urban -with 1990 level of conservation 

-reductions due to long-term conservation measures (Level I) 
Agricultural 

-reductions due to long-term conservation measures (Level I) 
Environmental 
Other (1) 



745 



809 



6,752 7,308 



3,677 
475 



3,283 
408 



1,255 
-25 

6,483 
-10 

4,227 
438 



1,359 
-25 

7,039 
-10 

3,833 
398 



Total Net Demand 



11,648 11,807 12,367 12,593 



Water Supplies w/Existing Facilities 

Developed Supplies 

Surface Water 

Ground Water 

Ground Water Overdraft 
Subtotal 
Dedicated Natural Flow 



5,812 


5,092 


6,081 


5,377 


2,480 


2,850 


2,497 


3,044 


33 


33 


33 


33 


8,325 


7,975 


8,611 


8,454 


3,323 


2,929 


3,749 


3,355 



Total Water Supplies 



11,648 10,904 12,360 11,809 



Demand/Supply Balance 



-903 



-7 



Remaining Demand/Supply Balance Requiring Short Term Drought 
Management and/or Future Level II Options 



-784 



Future Water Management Options Level I 

Long-term Supply Augmentation 

Reclaimed (2) 

Local 

Central Valley Project 

State Water Project 
Subtotal - Water Management Options Level I 
Ground Water/Surface Water Use Reduction Resulting from Level I Programs 









17 


17 


7 


6 








24 


23 


17 






-761 



(1) Includes conveyance losses, recreation uses and energy production. 

(2) Because of existing reuse within region, reclaimed supplies do not add supply to the region. 



160 



iDraft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 



SAN JOAQUIN RIVER REGION 




El Capitan in Yosemite Valley. 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Joaquin River Region 

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER REGION 

Located in the heart of California, the San Joaquin River Hydrologic Region is bordered on the east 
by the crest of the Sierra Nevada and on the west by the coastal mountains of the Diablo Range. It ex- 
tends from the Delta and the Cosumnes River drainage south to include all of the San Joaquin River wa- 
tershed. It is rich in natural wonders, including the Yosemite Valley, Tuolumne Meadows, Moaning Cav- 
erns, and Calaveras Big Trees. The region comprises about 10 percent of California's land area. (See 
Appendix C for maps of the planning subareas and land ownership in the region.) 

The region is diverse but can be divided into two main topographies and associated climates for dis- 
cussion: (1) the mountain and foothill areas and (2) the valley area. The climates of many of the upland 
areas west of the valley resemble those of foothills. Precipitation in the mountainous areas varies greatly. 
The annual precipitation of several Sierra Nevada stations average about 35 inches. Snowmelt runoff 
from the mountainous areas is the major contributor to local water supplies for the eastern San Joaquin 
Valley floor, whereas the climate of the valley portion of the region is characterized by long hot summers 
and mild winters. Average annual precipitation on the valley floor ranges from 17 inches in the northeast 
to 9 inches in the south. 

Population 

About 5 percent of the State's population lives in the region. From 1980 to 1990, the region's popu- 
lation grew 41 percent, primarily in Merced, Stanislaus, and San Joaquin counties. Communities such as 
Stockton, Modesto, Merced, and Tracy, once valley farm centers, are now major urban centers in the re- 
gion. These communities and their smaller neighboring cities, such as Lodi, Gait, Madera, and Manteca, 
are expected to continue expanding into the mostly agricultural northern San Joaquin Valley. Several 
counties expect their populations to nearly double by 2010. 

Some of this growth is due to the expansion from the San Francisco Bay Area and Sacramento into 
the previously agriculturally based areas. Nine new communities have been proposed for development in 
southern San Joaquin County, two of which were approved, New Jerusalem and Riverbrook, with pro- 
posed populations of 22,000 and 7,000, respectively. As currently proposed, these developments would 
increase the county's population by about 30,000 people and require about 4,000 acres. 



W: Region Characteristics 

y Average Annual Precipitation: 13 inches Average Annual Runoff: 7,933.300 acre-feet 
Land Area: 15,946 square miles 1990 Population: 1,430,200 



161 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Joaquin River Region 



The relatively inexpensive housing available in the area offsets the long commute to Bay Area jobs 
for some San Joaquin County residents. Larger cities such as Stockton and Modesto are industrial and 
commercial centers in their own right. 

In contrast to the large valley urban centers, separated by flat agricultural fields and linked by free- 
ways, the foothills are sprinkled with small communities connected by small two-lane roads. Much of 
the foothill population lives along the old Mother Lode route of the 1 849 Gold Rush, Highway 49. 
Towns such as Jackson, Angels Camp, San Andreas, Sonora, and Oakhurst have grown significantly in 
the last decade. Leading off from the north-south trending Highway 49 is a series of roads that lead to 
Sierra Nevada mountain passes. These mountain roads (Highways 88, 4, 108,120) generally follow east- 
west trending ridges, which are separated by one of the nine major river systems draining the Sierra. The 
economies of mountain communities along these routes depend on tourist and travel industries. These 
communities are also retirement areas for many former Bay Area or Southern California residents. 

The western side of the region, south of Tracy, is sparsely populated. Small farming communities 
provide services for farms and ranches in the area, all relatively close to Interstate 5, the chief north- 
south transportation route in California. 

Historically, the economy of the San Joaquin River Region has been based on agriculture. By far, 
agriculture and food processing are still its major industries. Other major industries include the produc- 
tion of chemicals, lumber and wood products, glass, textiles, paper, machinery, fabricated metal products, 
and various other commodities. Table SJ-1 shows population projections to 2020 for the San Joaquin 
River Region. 

Table SJ-1. Population Projections 

(thousands) 



Planning Subareas 



1990 



2000 



2010 



2020 



Sierra Foothills 
Eastern Valley Floor 
Delta Service Area 
Western Uplands 
East Side Uplands 
Valley East Side 
Valley West Side 
West Side Uplands 
Total 



140 


214 


284 


ii ^^ 


312 


376 


445 


K 536 


156 


229 j 


315 


1 423 


64 


109 ^ 


150 


L-r: ^^^ 


44 


60 j 


66 


HH ^2 


653 


905 1 


1,192 


r 1,489 


61 


82 ^ 


103 


r ^^^ 















1,430 



1,975 



2,555 



3,221 



162 



iBulIetin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Joaquin River Region 

JLand Use 

Much of the Sierra Nevada Range is national forest land, while the San Joaquin Valley is predomi- 

i 

nantly agricultural. In the Sierra Nevada, there are the El Dorado, Stanislaus, and Sierra national forests 

and Yosemite National Park. The valley constitutes about 3.5 million acres, the eastern foothills and 

mountains total 5.8 million acres, and the western coastal mountains comprise 0.9 million acres. 

The national forest and park lands encompass over 2.9 million acres of the region; state parks and 
recreational areas and other state owned property account for about 80,000 acres; Bureau of Land Man- 
agement and military properties occupy some 221,000 and 37,000 acres respectively. Public lands, there- 
foffe, comprise about one-third of the region. 

About 1,956,000 of the region's 10.2 million acres (19 percent) were devoted to irrigated agriculture 
in 1990. Some of the major crops include almonds, alfalfa, pasture, grain, grapes, cotton, and field com. 
Urban land usage in 1990 totaled 295,300 acres. Figure SJ-1 shows land use, along with imports, ex- 
ports, and water supplies for the San Joaquin River Region. 

Water Supply 

About 47 percent of the region's 1990 level water supply comes from local surface sources, while 29 
percent is from imported surface supplies. Ground water provides about 19 percent of the total 1990 lev- 
el average annual water supply for the region. The surface waters of all rivers in the region combine with 
the San Joaquin River in or above the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Located in the Delta are the 
pumping facilities of the federal Central Valley Project, the State Water Project and the Contra Costa Ca- 
nal. The CVP provides much of the water supply (about 63 percent) for the west side of the region's 
valley area. The Hetch Hetchy reservoir system, on the Tuolumne River, provides water to the southern 
San Francisco Bay Area and Peninsula through a system of reservoirs, power plants and aqueducts. The 
East Bay Municipal Utility District receives water from Pardee Reservoir on the Mokelumne River. 
IThis water is conveyed by the Mokelumne Aqueduct to the East Bay MUD's service area, which includes 
Oakland, Berkeley, Richmond, and Walnut Creek. 



163 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Joaquin River Region 



Folsom Lake 

Di version 

1 



Sly Park 
2A 



FoJscm South 

Canal 

31 



Delta Mendota 
Canal 
3,231 

California Aqueduct 
2.588 

Contra Costa 

Canal 

21 



Moke 1 taane 

Aqueduct 

2M 

South Ba 

Aqueduc 

164 




Hetcb ffet 
Aqueduct 
208 



San Felipe Unit 
145 




1?MC - Mendota- 
Pool 
130 
California 
Aqueduct 
and San Luis 
Canal 
4,007 



Friant Kern 

Canal 

1,148 



N 



PRESEiyrr water suppues 

(1,000 AF/Yr.) 

LOCAL SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT 
GROUND WATER PERENNIAL YIELD 
CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT 
STATE WATER PROJECT 

OTHER FEDERAL WATER DEVELOPMENT 
WATER RECLAMATION 
DEDICATED NATURAL FLOW 

WATER SUPPLY 
GROUND WATER OVERDRAFT 
TOTAL 

I Urban Land 
I irrigated Land 
•^- Region Water Transfer 

(l/XXTt of Acr»-FMt pw Ymt) 



20 



Figure SJ-1. San Joaquin River Region 
Land Use, Imports, Exports, and Water Supplies 



164 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Joaquin River Region 



Supply with Existing Facilities 

Surface water systems in the region form a general pattern. A series of reservoirs gather and store 
snowmelt in the upper mountain valleys of the Sierras. Water here is generally used for hydro-generation 
as it is released down river. Some diversion for consumptive use occurs for local communities, but most 
flows are caught downstream in other reservoirs located in the foothills or at the eastern edge of the 
valley floor. Irrigation canals, along with municipal pipelines, commonly carry water from these storage 
facilities. Water released downstream in the river can be picked up for irrigation and other uses on the 
valley floor as it heads for the Delta. Figure SJ-2 shows the region's 1990 level sources of supply. 

Of the 57 major reservoirs in the region, there are 16 with storage capacities greater than 100,000 AF, 
four of which have capacities of 1 MAP or more. Fifteen of these reservoirs were built primarily for 
flood control; however, many of them also have additional storage capacity for water supply and other 
uses included in their design. In addition to federal agencies, local irrigation districts own and operate 
many of the major facilities; most are managed for multipurpose uses. The region's major reservoir sys- 
tems are briefly described in Table SJ-2. 

Table SJ-2. Major Reservoirs 



Reservoir Name 



River 



Capacity (1 ,000 AF) 



Owner 



t New Melones 

! 


Stanislaus 


2,420 


U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 


i 

New Don Pedro 


Tuolumne 


2,030 


Turlock and Modesto Imgation Districts 


Hetch Hetchy 


Tuolumne 


360.4 


City of San Francisco 


Lake McClure 


Merced 


1,024 


Merced Irrigation District 


San Luis 


N/A 


2,040 


USBR and Dept. of Water Resources 


Shaver 


San Joaquin 


135 


Southern California Edison 


Pardee 


Mokelumne 


210 


East Bay Municipal Util. District 


Salt Springs 


Mokelumne 


139 


Pacific Gas & Electric Company 


Millerton 


San Joaquin 


520 


U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 


Edison 


San Joaquin 


125 


Southern California Edison 


Uoyd (Cherry) 


Tuolumne 


268 


City of San Francisco 


Mammoth Pool 


San Joaquin 


123 


Southern California Edison 


Camanche 


Mokelumne 


431 


East Bay Municipal Util. District 


New Hogan 


Calaveras 


325 


U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 


Eastman 


Chowchilla 


150 


U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 


The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation completed New Melones 


in 1979, and the reservoir was initially 


filled in 1983. Although this reservoir 


has an estimated annual additional yield of 1 80,000 AF, none of 


this yield has been delivered yet due to 


a lack of conveyance facilities. To date, Stockton East Water Dis- 


trict has contracted with USER for 75,000 AF of interim water; Central San Joaquin Water District has 


1 




165 


1 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Joaquin River Region 

contracted for 49,000 AF of average and drought year supply and 3 1 ,000 AF of interim water. The facili- 
ties to transport this water may be completed by the end of 1993, and delivery may begin in 1994, de- 
pending on water availability. Water supplies vary by areas in the region, as discussed below. 

Mountain and Foothill Areas. The major mountain and foothill areas of the region include the east 
side Sierra Nevada mountain counties of Mariposa, Tuolumne, Calaveras, Amador, and portions of Al- 
pine and El Dorado. There are dozens of small communities in these counties, generally located along 
Highway 49; most of them, and the sparse agricultural land in the area, receive their water from local sur- ( 
face supplies. In the 1850s, hydraulic mining for gold and other minerals promoted the construction of 
an extensive network of canals and ditches to bring water from main rivers and tributaries to the mine 
sites. When the mining industry waned, power companies, like Pacific Gas and Electric Company, took 
control of many of these facilities. Today, in addition to supplying water to hydroelectric power plants, 
these facilities convey water to many of the small mountain communities. For example, in Amador 
County, the Cosumnes River supplies water to the community of Plymouth and the Mokelumne River 
supplies water to the communities of Jackson and lone. In Calaveras County, water is distributed via 
pipelines and ditches from the Stanislaus and Calaveras Rivers to the communities of Angels Camp, Ar- 
nold, and Jenny Lind. In Tuolumne County, water from the Lyons Reservoir is diverted to several com- 
munities along Highway 108, including Tuolumne, Jamestown, Columbia, and Sonora. Groveland re- 
ceives water from the Hetch Hetchy system. 

In addition to surface water, many of these mountain communities pump ground water from hard 
rock wells and old mines to augment their surface supplies. Ground water generally is no more than 
about 15 percent of the total supply for most of them. Valley Springs in Calaveras County, an exception 
to the general rule, relies entirely on ground water for its water needs. The communities of Plymouth and 
Mariposa had to turn to ground water to supplement surface supplies during the 1976-77 and the 
1987-92 droughts. Also, for many mountain residents who are not connected to a water conveyance sys- 
tem, ground water is their only source. 



166 



bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Joaquin River Region 



4- 



Figure SJ-2. San Joaquin River Region 
Water Supply Sources (Average Conditions) 

1990 



edicated 
Ntural Flow 

5% 



m 




'Irudes imports from: the federal Central Valley Project, and the State Water Project. 
* Includes local supplies and other federal projects 



Valley Area. The nine major river systems feeding into the valley from the Sierra Nevada provide 
more than 50 percent of the total supply. Irrigation districts transport much of the local surface water to 
valley agricultural users. Modesto Irrigation District and Turiock Irrigation District supply both agricul- 
tural and municipal users through the Modesto and Turiock Canals. Other irrigation districts, such as 
Merced, Oakdale, and South San Joaquin, operate similar facilities. The Folsom South Canal used to 
import about 17,000 acre-feet from the American River for cooling at the Rancho Seco Nuclear Power 
Plant, which has been closed. The canal continues to deliver water for agricultural uses in local districts, 
such as Gait Irrigation District. 



167 



Bulletiii 160-93 Administratiye Draft San Joaquin River Region 

Adding to the valley's surface water supply are three major canal systems: the California Aqueduct, 
Delta-Mendoca Canals and Madera Canal. The CVP also delivers water from its Mendota Pool, O'Neil 
Rwrebay, and MiUerton Lake facilities. Only the Oak Flat Water District receives water from the SWP. 
Within the Delta service area, agricultural water users pump directly from Delta sloughs and water 
courses. The City of Stocktoo receives mincM- surface flows frcwm the New Hogan Reservoir via the 
Stockton East Pipeline, and the commonity of Tracy receives about 5,000 acre-feet annually from the 
CVP Delta-Mendota Canal. 

In an average year, about 19 percent, or 1,281,000 acre-feet, of the region's water requirements are 
met by pumping ground water. Agriculture uses about 70 percent of the ground water pumped. The other 
30 percent is used to meet a variety of w ater demands including urban, rural residential, industrial and 
wildlife. On the valley flow, the roajcnrity of communities, industries, and rural residents rely (mi ground 
water as their primary or only source of water supply. Some of the wildlife refiiges in the region may also 
use ground water to supplement their surface water supplies, especially in years of below normal surface 
deliveries. 

The availability of ground water for the region is influenced mainly by water quahty problems. The 
valley floor is essentially one large ground water basin consisting of alluvial sediments. Much of the 
western portion of the valley is underiain by the Corcoran clay, which generally lies at depths between 
100 and 400 feet. The Corcoran clay divides the basin sediments into confined and unconfined aquifers. 
On the west side high total dissolved solids and sulfates, are found in varying degrees in both the con- 
fined and the deeper unconfmed aquifers. East of the San Joaquin River the valley is underlain by older 
less productive sediments. The shallow ground water quality is generally very good here and several wa- 
ter districts have drainage wells that pump into their distribution systems. However, in some areas of the 
central and northeastern portion of the valley, nitrates and organic ccmtaminants have been found, mosth 
localized around a point source. 

Overdraft for 1990 is estimated at about 209,000 acre-feet a year. Areas most affected are found in 
San Joaquin and Madera counties, with an estimated 70,000 and 1 20,000 acre-feet of overdraft respec- 
lively. Jpl 

Roughly 24,000 acre-feet of recycled water from municipal and industrial areas is used annually in 
the region. Table SJ-3 shows water suf^lies with existing facilities and water management programs. 



168 



Bulletin 160-93 Administratnre Draft San Joaquin Rher Regioa 

Table SJ-3. Water Supplies witti Existing Facilities 

and Programs 

(Decision 1485 Operating Criteria for Delta Supplies) 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Supply 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 


•««ag* 








mmw9B 


drou^ 


Miaga 




Surface 


















Local 


3.015 


2337 


3,000 


2.803 


2367 


2,785 


2392 


2301 


Local imports 


























Colorado River 


























CVP 


1.997 


1,389 


2,160 


1.450 


2.171 


1,463 


2.169 


1.463 


Other federal 


155 


32 


155 


32 


155 


32 


155 


32 


SWP 


5 


3 


4 


3 


4 


3 


4 


3 


GrourxJ water 


1,072 


2.127 


1,058 


2.245 


1,081 


2.272 


1372 


2384 


Overdraft 


209 


209 


100 


100 


15 


15 








Reclaimed 


24 


24 


24 


24 


24 


24 


24 


24 


Dedicated natural flow 


330 


247 


330 


247 


330 


247 


330 


247 


Total 


6,807 


6,868 


6,831 


6,904 


6,747 


6341 


6,746 


6354 



Supply with Additional FadUties and Water Management Programs 

The San Joaquin River Region withstood drought conditions by employing several water manage- 
ment options: conservation, exchanges, transfers, and supplementing surface supfrfies with ground water. 
In the \oag run, however, with continued pc^lation growth and shifts in types of water use, the region's 
water resource managers will also look for strategies that increase surface supply reliability and provide 
for additional recharge of ground water basins. Means of improving water quality will have to be buih 
into these strategies. Future water management options are presented in two levels to better reflect the 
status of investigations required to implement them. 

O Level I options are those that have imdergone extensive investigatioa smd envi- 
ronmental analyses and are judged to have a high likelihood of being implement- 
ed by 2020. 

O Level n options are those that could fill the remaining gap between water supply 
and demand. These options require more investigation and alternative analyses. 

Table SJ-4 shows water supplies with Level I water management programs. 



169 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Joaquin River Region 

Table SJ-4. Water Supplies with Additional Level i 

Water Management Programs 

(Decision 1485 Operating Criteria for Delta Supplies) 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Supply 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


Surface 


















Local 


3,015 


2,837 


3,001 


2,804 


2,968 


2,786 


2,992 


2,801 


Local imports 


























Colorado River 


























CVP 


1,997 


1,389 


2,165 


1.450 


2,175 


1,463 


2,173 


1,463 


Other federal 


155 


32 


155 


32 


155 


32 


155 


32 


SWP 


5 


3 


4 


3 


5 


3 


5 


3 


Ground water 


1,072 


2,127 


1,049 


2,239 


1,065 


2,259 


1,050 


2,267 


Overdraft 


209 


209 


100 


100 


15 


15 








Reclaimed 


24 


24 


27 


27 


35 


35 


41 


41 


Dedicated natural flow 


330 


247 


430 


252 


430 


252 


430 


252 


Total 


6,807 


6,868 


6,931 


6,907 


6,848 


6,845 


6,846 


6,859 





















Water Supply Reliability and Drought Water Management Strategies. From 1987 through 1992, 
the San Joaquin River Region, like much of California, endured drought conditions. Many of the cities 
in the region had restricted water use even though ground water is the predominant source of supply for 
the communities in the region. Drought related problems developed, such as increased pumping depths, 
well failures, and accelerated degradation of water quality, but generally, there was no substantial reduc- 
tion in supply. Nevertheless, conservation programs were introduced in nearly all of the communities in 
the region in reaction to the drought. Lack of water metering precludes the monitoring or implementa- 
tion of mandatory rationing in most communities, but a number of other practices have been employed, 
ranging from voluntary water conservation with limitations on outdoor watering to mandatory water ra- 
tioning with little or no outdoor watering. For example, the City of Modesto restricted outdoor water use 
based on several factors: the season, the day of the week, and the time of day. For indoor water use, the 
city relied on voluntary water conservation. The cities of Merced, Tracy, and Turlock had programs simi- 
lar to Modesto. Because of the ability of the east side agencies, supplying urban customers and agricul- 
tural growers, to supplement reduced surface water allocations with ground water, annual crop acreages 
remained fairly stable during the drought. 

The foothill community of Mariposa relies on surface water and was hit hard by the reduced runoff. 
Its water supply comes from a 440-acre-foot water storage reservoir on Stockton Creek. Residents were 
at one point on a strict rationing program that fluctuated with the available water supply. Per capita re- 



170 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Joaquin River Region 

strictions were as low as 100 gallons per day for the first person of a household and 50 gpd for each addi- 
tional person. In comparison, most San Joaquin Valley residents use ground water, and though most ci- 
ties were practicing time of day or day of week outdoor watering restrictions and other conservation 
programs, water consumption averaged about 250 gpcd. 

On the west side of the region, normally about 90 percent of the surface supply is obtained from the 
CVP. Over 60 percent of this amount comes by way of exchange contracts for San Joaquin River water. 
This exchange provides farmers with a good quality water. These contractors received only 75 percent of 
their normal entitlements in 1991 and 1992. 

Those areas on the west side which receive contract water from the Delta-Mendota or San Luis Ca- 
nals experienced much more severe cuts in water supply. During 1991 and 1992, only 25 percent of the 
entitlement amounts were delivered. Many of these areas lacked sufficient ground water pumping capa- 
bilities to fully make up for the cuts. There were substantial reductions in cropped acreage and under 
irrigation of permanent crops, resulting in decreased crop yields. Some State Water Bank water and fed- 
eral hardship water was used primarily to ensure the survival of permanent crops. 

Water Management Options with Additional Facilities. In 1 984, the California Legislature autho- 
rized the proposed Los Banos Grandes reservoir in western Merced County as a facility of the SWP. Los 
Banos Grandes would store water pumped from the Delta through the California Aqueduct during wet 
months, primarily November through March. Stored water would be released during water-short periods 
for use by agencies with contracts for water from the SWP. This 1.73 MAF reservoir will help provide a 
more dependable water supply for the people and farms served by the SWP. (See Volume I, Chapter 1 1 .) 
Although only one water district in the region will benefit directly, the reservoir will provide other indi- 
rect benefits to the area, such as recreational opportunities and supplemental flood protection for the local 
area. 

The Mariposa Public Utility District in Mariposa County is developing the Saxon Creek Water Proj- 
ect, which will bring additional water to the 2,000 residents living within the district. The project in- 
volves tapping the Merced River and delivering water via a pipeline. The project is small, about 900 
acre-feet annually at full development, but important to the community of Mariposa. It will help to pro- 
vide a reliable water supply in an area that is already straining its water resources. 

Water Use 

Agricultural water demand is about 85 percent of the region's total demand of 6.8 million acre-feet. 
Urban demand, which includes urban residential, industry and rural residential, comprise approximately 5 
percent of total demand. Environmental water use for the region's wetlands, and instream fishery require- 



171 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Joaquin River Region 



merits represent about 8 percent of the total water demand. Other water use includes recreation, water 
used for power plant cooling, and water lost during conveyance; this category constitutes about 2 percent 
of total demand. Figure SJ-3 shows net water demand for the 1990 level of development. 



Figure SJ-3. San Joaquin River Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990 Level 



Agricultural 

85% 




Other 

2% 



Environmental 
Instream 

8% 



Urban Water Use 

In 1990, urban applied water demand in the region totaled almost 495,000 AF, an increase of about 
91,000 AF since 1980. This increase was primarily due to an increase in population. Average per-capita 
water use is about 309 gallons per day. Per-capita values range from about 350 gallons per day in Mo- 
desto, one of the larger cities, to 200 gallons per day and less in small communities like Dos Palos on the 



172 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Joaquin River Region 



west side and Riverbank on the east side. Higher per capita water use in communities like Modesto is 
generally due to a high concentration of industries. In the case of Modesto, food processing comprises a 
large segment of the industrial activity. Figure SJ^ shows the 1990 level applied urban water demands 
by sector. Table SJ-5 shows applied water and net urban water demand to 2020. 



Figure SJ-4. San Joaquin River Region 
Applied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990 Levei 



Commercial 

4% 




173 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Joaquin River Region 



Table SJ-5. Urban Water Demand 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Planning Subareas 



1990 2000 2010 2020 

average drought average drought average drought average drought 



Sierra Foothills 


















Applied water demand 


36 


39 


54 


59 


71 


77 


87 


95 


Net water demand 


38 


41 


56 


61 


73 


79 


89 


97 


Depletion 


10 


11 


15 


16 


20 


22 


25 


27 


Eastern Valley Floor 


















Applied water demand 


80 


84 


97 


105 


114 


124 


135 


147 


Net water demand 


80 


84 


97 


105 


114 


124 


135 


147 


Depletion 


23 


24 


27 


30 


32 


35 


39 


42 


Delta Service Area 


















Applied water demand 


35 


37 


50 


54 


65 


71 


85 


92 


Net water demand 


35 


37 


50 


54 


65 


71 


85 


92 


Depletion 


10 


10 


14 


16 


19 


21 


25 


27 


Western Uplands 


















Applied water demand 


37 


38 


45 


46 


51 


53 


59 


57 


Net water demand 


37 


38 


45 


46 


51 


53 


59 


60 


Depletion 


4 


4 


6 


6 


8 


8 


10 


10 


East Side Uplands 


















Applied water demand 


11 


11 


15 


15 


16 


16 


23 


23 


Net water demand 


5 


5 


6 


6 


- 7 


7 


10 


10 


Depletion 


5 


5 


6 


6 


7 


7 


10 


10 


Valley East Side 


















Applied water demand 


279 


280 


378 


381 


493 


497 


605 


610 


Net water demand 


149 


150 


202 


205 


263 


267 


322 


327 


Depletion 


116 


116 


163 


164 


217 


218 


270 


272 


Valley West Side 


















Applied water demand 


17 


17 


24 


24 


29 


29 


36 


36 


Net water demand 


9 


9 


12 


12 


14 


14 


18 


18 


Depletion 


7 


7 


10 


10 


13 


13 


16 


16 


West Side Uplands 
















i 


Applied water demand 


























Net water demand 


























Depletion 


























Total 


















Applied water demand 


495 


506 


663 


683 


839 


867 


1,029 


1,059 


Net water demand 


353 


364 


468 


489 


587 


615 


718 


751 


Depletion 


175 


177 


241 


248 


316 


324 


395 


404 



m 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Joaquin River Region 



Most urban water supply agencies in the region do not meter deliveries to residential customers. 
Generally, commercial and industrial deliveries are metered. Outdoor use probably accounts for about 
one-half of total urban use for most of the region. Warm summers and associated high water require- 
ments for landscaping are the main factors behind this region's urban water use being higher than the sta- 
tewide average. 

Population projections indicate that more than twice as many people would reside in the San Joaquin 
River Region by 2020. Such growth is expected to drive the conversion of some agricultural lands to ur- 
ban development. This may further stretch water supplies in some areas, or just shift water use from agri- 
culture to urban. Given these population increases, urban net water demand could double by 2020. 

Agricultural Water Use 

Agriculture accounts for over 85 percent of the total applied water in the San Joaquin Region. The 

industry can best be described as widely diverse. Major crops in the region (alfalfa, almonds, grapes, 
grain, com, and cotton) encompass over 100,000 acres each. Table SJ-6 shows irrigated crop acreage 
projections for the region to 2020. Table SJ-7 shows 1990 crop acreages and evapotranspiration of ap- 
plied water. Figure SJ-5 shows crop acreages, ETAW, and applied water for major crops. 

Table SJ-6. Irrigated Crop Acreage 

(thousands of acres) 



Planning Subareas 



1990 



2000 



2010 



2020 



Sierra Foothills 
Eastern Valley Floor 
Delta Service Area 
Western Uplands 
East Side Uplands 
Valley East Side 
Valley West Side 
West Side Uplands 
Total 



7 


8 


9 


11 


273 


272 


271 


269 


277 


276 


273 


271 


13 


12 


12 


12 


2 


2 ^ 


2 


2 


1,003 


985 


965 


949 


433 


435 


436 


437 















2,008 



1,990 



1,968 



1,951 



175 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 






San Joaqu 


in River Region 


Table SJ- 


-7. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop 


Irrigated Crop 


Total 

Acres 

(1,000) 


Total ETAW 
(1,000AF) 


Irrigated Crop 


Total 
Acres 
(1,000) 


Total ETAW 
(1,000AF) 


Grain 


182 


130 


Pasture 


228 


704 


Rice 


21 


75 


Tomatoes 


89 


181 


Cotton 


178 


453 


Otiier trucl< 


133 


164 


Sugar Beets 


64 


157 


Almonds/pistachios 


245 


513 


Corn 


181 


342 


Other deciduous 


147 


380 


Other field 


121 


153 


Vineyard 


184 


364 


Alfalfa 


226 


665 


Citrus/olives 


9 


16 




Total 


2,008 


4,296 















Estimates of future agricultural water use were generally based on the 1990 unit use values. There 
may be room for some minor improvements in irrigation efficiencies; however increased efficiencies 
would only slightly reduce the overall agricultural water use. Double cropping accounted for about 
52,700 acres in 1990, a decrease of about 35 percent since 1980. The double cropped acres represent less 
than 3 percent of the irrigated acreage. Table SJ-8 shows agricultural water demands to 2020. 



■; 



176 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Joaquin River Region 



Acres (X 1 ,000) 



Acre-Feet (X 1 ,000) 




1,200 



960 



720 



480 



240 







Grain Corn Pasture Grapes 

Cotton Alfalfa Almond/Pistachio 

■Acreage METPW ■Applied Water 



Figure SJ-5. 1990 San Joaquin River Region 

Acreage, ETAW, and Appiied Water for 

Major Crops 



177 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Joaquin River Region 



Table SJ~8. Agricultural Water Demand 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Sierra Foothills 


















Applied water demand 


21 


25 


23 


27 


26 


35 


30 


35 


Net water demand 


21 


25 


23 


27 


26 


35 


30 


35 


Depletion 


15 


17 


16 


19 


20 


25 


21 


25 


Eastern Valley Floor 


















Applied water demand 


888 


1,040 


852 


998 


825 


948 


811 


948 


Net water demand 


874 


1,028 


803 


988 


765 


904 


751 


903 


Depletion 


637 


747 


628 


735 


619 


715 


612 


715 


Delta Service Area 


















Applied water demand 


739 


830 


719 


805 


694 


774 


681 


755 


Net water demand 


690 


772 


673 


749 


650 


721 


638 


705 


Depletion 


552 


620 


542 


606 


532 


591 


522 


578 


Western Uplands 


















Applied water demand 


40 


47 


38 


44 


36 


42 


34 


40 


Net water demand 


43 


49 


40 


46 


38 


44 


37 


42 


Depletion 


30 


35 


29 


34 


28 


32 


27 


31 


East Side Uplands 


















Applied water demand 


7 


7 


7 


7 


7 


7 


7 


7 


Net water demand 


4 


4 


4 


4 


4 


4 


4 


4 


Depletion 


4 


4 


4 


4 


4 


4 


4 


4 


Valley East Side 


















Applied water demand 


3,193 


3,366 


3,059 


3,230 


2,926 


3,086 


2,841 


3.013 


Net water demand 


2,840 


2,995 


2,726 


2,881 


2,608 


2,757 


2,533 


2,691 


Depletion 


2,340 


2,468 


2,271 


2.398 


2,200 


2,326 


2,138 


2,269 


Valley West Side 


















Applied water demand 


1,413 


1,445 


1,357 


1,392 


1,306 


1,338 


1,264 


1,287 


Net water demand 


1,312 


1,349 


1,272 


1,277 


1,233 


1,235 


1,198 


1,196 


Depletion 


1,139 


1,171 


1,113 


1,111 


1,085 


1,082 


1,057 


1,054 


West Side Uplands 


















Applied water demand 


























Net water demand 


























Depletion 


























Total 


















Applied water demand 


6,301 


6,779 


6,054 


6,502 


5,820 


6,230 


5,668 


6,084 


Net water demand 


5,783 


6,222 


5,541 


5,972 


5,324 


5,700 


5,191 


5,577 


Depletion 


4,718 


5,063 


4,604 


4,908 


4,489 


4,776 


4,382 


4,677 



178 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Joaquin River Region 

Over the past 20 years, agricultural net water demand in the region has fluctuated, primarily as a re- 
sult of changing crop patterns. For example, rice acreage normally planted near the City of Modesto has 
nearly disappeared due to the recent water shortages. Rice has been replaced by sugar beets and cotton, 
which require less water. In some areas, sugar beets have been replaced with other crops due to disease. 
Another factor is the trend of using low-volume irrigation systems in new plantings of orchards and vine- 
yards. Some mature plantings are being converted to these systems as well. 

A gradual decrease of about 10 percent in agricultural net water demand is predicted over the next 30 
years. The majority of this reduction is expected in the Valley East Side and Valley West Side planning 
subareas. About one-third of this decrease is attributed to reduced plantings due to urbanization. The 
region's irrigated crop acreage is expected to decrease by almost 60,000 acres (3 percent), mostly in the 
I Valley East Side PSA. The rest of the decrease in net water demand is primarily due to changing crop 

I trends and slight increases in irrigation efficiencies. 

I 

1 

i Environmental Water Use 

The region contains wildlife refuges, wetlands, and stretches of rivers that are designated Wild and 

Scenic under the California Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The Grasslands area in western Merced County 
■ is an important stop along the Pacific Flyway for migrating waterfowl. In addition to the Grasslands 

area, there are ten other major wetlands that contribute to the region's environmental water demands. 
I Water for conserving these wildlife habitats accounts for about 3 percent of the region's total net water 
r demand. Refuges also provide areas for recreational use, a habitat for native vegetation, and flood and 

erosion control. Table SJ-9 summarizes projected wetland water needs for the region. 

Instream flows are waters flowing in a natural stream channel providing vital support for fisheries. 

Four rivers in the region, the Mokelumne, Merced, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne, have significant instream 

flow requirements. (See Volume I, Chapter 8.) The region's annual water requirement for instream flows 

is 318,000 AF. In addition, the following minimum instream flows are required. At Merced Falls on the 

I Merced River, 3 cubic feet per second is required for the minimum flow through the fish ladder. Below 

t 

[New Exchequer Dam on the Merced River, DFG requires annual flow release of 180 to 220 cfs during 

I November 1 to April 1, plus spring flushing flows. Table SJ-10 summarizes environmental instream 

; needs for the region. 



179 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Joaquin River Regioi 



Table SJ-9. Wetlands Water Needs 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Wetlands 



San Luis 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



1990 2000 2010 2020 

average drought average drought average drought average drought 



13 
10 

10 



» 



13 
10 
10 



19 
14 

14 



19 
14 
14 



19 
14 
14 



19 
14 
14 



19 
14 
14 



IMerced 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



^3f 
10 ^ 

10 i 



13 
10 
10 



16 
12 
12 



16 
12 
12 



16 
12 
12 



16 

12 

12 



16 
12 
12 



Volta 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



10 
8 

8 



10 
8 
B 



16 
12 

12 



16 
12 

12 



16 
12 
12 



16 
12 
12 



16 
12 
12 



Los Banos 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



17 

13 
13 



17 
13 
13 



25 
19 
19 



25 
19 
19 



25 
19 
19 



25 
19 
19 



25 
19 
19 



25 
19 
19 



Los Banos-Wolfson 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



Kesterson 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



10 

7 
7 



10 
7 
7 



10 

7 
7 



10 
7 
7 



10 

7 
7 



10 
J7 
7 



Grassland 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



125 
91 
91 



125 
91 
91 



180 
135 
135 



180 
135 
135 



180 
135 
135 



180 
135 
135 



180 
135 
135 



180 
135 
135 



East Grassland 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



38 
30 
30 



38 
30 
30 



38 
30 

30 



38 
30 
30 



38 
30 
30 



38 
30 
30 




Kesterson Mitigation 



Applied water 








62^ 


62 


62 


62 


62 1 


Net water 








46 


46 


46 


46 


46 1 


Depletion 








46 


46 


46 


46 


46 1 



180 



>BuIletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 










San Joaquin River Region 




Table SJ 


-9 


. Wetlands Water Needs (continued) 












(thousands of acre- 


-feet) 










Wetlands 




1990 2000 
average drought average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Delta 




















Applied water 






40 


40 40 


40 


40 


40 


40 


40 


Net water 






40 


40 40 


40 


40 


40 


40 


40 


1 Depletion 






7 


7 7 


7 


7 


7 


7 


7 


Total 




















' Applied water 






266 


266 413 


413 


413 


413 


413 


413 


Net water 






211 


211 321 


321 


321 


321 


321 


321 


Depletion 






178 


178 288 


288 


288 


288 


288 


288 


Table SJ- 


10. 


Environmental Instream Water Needs 












(thousands of acre - 


-feet) 










stream 




1990 2000 
average drought average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


\ Mokelumne River 




















* Applied Water 






14 


14 14 


14 


14 


14 


14 


14 


! Net Water 






14 


14 14 


14 


14 


14 


14 


14 


Depletion 




























Merced River 



Applied Water 


84 


67 


84 


67 


84 


67 


84 


67 


Net Water 


84 


67 


84 


67 


84 


67 


84 


67 


Depletion 


























. Stanislaus River 

1 



















Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



110 


98 


110 


98 


110 


98 


110 


98 


110 


98 


110 


98 


110 


98 


110 


98 



























Tuolumne River 



Applied Water 


122 


68 




122 


68 


122 


68 


122 


68 


Net Water 


122 


68 




122 


68 


122 


68 


122 


68 


Depletion 




























Total 




















Applied Water 


330 


247 




330 


247 


330 


247 


330 


247 


Net Water 


330 


247 




330 


247 


330 


247 


330 


247 


Depletion 




























1 






181 















Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Joaquin River Region 

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the California Department of Fish and Game are currently ne- 
gotiating environmental regulations for rivers in the Sierra Nevada. The conclusion of these negotiations 
will determine the magnitude and the scheduling of releases required for environmental uses. An interim 
agreement, requiring releases from New Melones to the Stanislaus River to fall within the range of 
98,300 to 302,100 AF annually has already been set. Further agreements will undoubtedly be reached 
requiring changes in water use practices. 

The California Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1972 provides for the preservation of the natural water- 
course and character of certain rivers in the State. In the San Joaquin River Region portions of the Tuo- 
lumne and Merced rivers are designated wild and scenic. The upper stretch of the Tuolumne River, be- 
low Hetch Hetchy Reservoir and above New Don Pedro Reservoir, was designated wild and scenic in 
1984. In 1992, a bill was passed designating an eight-mile stretch of the Merced River from Briceburg 
to Bagby as wild and scenic. Much of the river was already given this status in 1987. In addition to pro- 
tecting the river from development, the 1992 bill allows the county to proceed with the Saxon Creek Wa- 
ter Project, providing a reliable water supply to the community of Mariposa. Waterways designated as 
wild and scenic are protected by law from the construction of dams or diversion structures that would 
alter the natural free-flowing character of these rivers. The Saxon Creek Project involves pumping water 
from the Merced river at times when flows are high enough that the waterway would not be adversely 
affected. The region's current environmental net water demands are about 530,000 AF annually; this is 
expected to increase by 21 percent to 651,000 AF annually by 2020. 

Other Water Use 

Recreation in the national forests and Yosemite National Park includes camping, hiking, snow ski- 
ing, white water rafting, hunting, bike riding, rock climbing, and spelunking, to name only a few activi- 
ties. An estimated 4 million visitors from all over the world toured Yosemite in 1992. 

San Luis, New Melones, and New Don Pedro reservoirs, and Lake McClure are just four of the re- 
gion's many public access reservoirs that provide facilities for boating, swimming, water skiing, wind 
surfing, and fishing. Near the City of Los Banos, in western Merced County, is the Grasslands area 
where several public and private wildlife refuges provide areas for waterfowl hunting, fishing and nature 
study. Figure SJ-6 shows water recreation areas in the San Joaquin River Region. 



Water used in the region's recreation areas amounted to 4,500 AF in 1990. Most of it was distrib- 
uted to campgrounds for drinking water and sanitation. Other minor usage in the region includes water 
for cooling, 20,000 AF annually. Recreational and cooling water uses together make up about 1 percent 
of the total regional demand. Table SJ-1 1 shows the total water demand for the region. 



182 



I 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Joaquin River Region 



Leg end 
Water Recreation Area 
Hydroelectric Power Plant 
Federal Wild and Scenic River 





N 



1. Silver Lalce 

2. Caples L^ke 

3. Woods Lalce 

4. Lower Bear River Reservoir 

5. Salt Springs Reservoir 

6. Blue Lakes Alpine County 

7. Lake Amador 

8. Highland Lake 

9. Rancho Seco Park 

10. Lake Camanche 

11. Pardee Reservoir 

12. Calaveras Big Trees 

13. Hartley Lake 

14. Pinecrest Lake 

15. Franks Tract S.R.A 

16. New Hogan Reservoir 

17. New Melones Reservoir 

18. Cherr/ l^ke 

19. Lake Tulloch 

20. Woodward Reservoir R.P. 



21. Clifton Court Forebay R.A. 

22. Bethany Reservoir S.R.A. 

23. Caswell Memorial S.P. 

24. Modesto Reservoir R.P. 

25. New Don Pedro Reservoir 

26. La Grange R.P. 

27. Yosemite National Park 

28. Turlock Lake S.RJ\. 

29. Lake Mcclure 

30. Lake McSwain 

31. George Hatfield S.R.A. 

32. McConnell S.R.A 

33. Lake Yosemite 

34. Fremont Ford S.RA 

35. Eastman Lake 

36. Bass Lake 

37. O'Neill Forebay R.F. 

38. San Luis Reservoir S.R.A. 

39. Los Banos Reservoir R.F. 

40. Millerton Lake S.RA 

41. Little Panoche Reservoir R.F. 



Figure SJ-6. San Joaquin River Region 
Water Recreation Areas 



183 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Joaquin River Region 



Table SJ- 11. Total Water Demands 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Category of Use 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 

average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Urban 


















Applied water 


495 


506 


663 


683 


839 


867 


1,029 


1,059 


Net water 


353 


364 


468 


489 


587 


615 


718 


751 


Depletion 


175 


177 


241 


248 


316 


324 


395 


404 


Agricultural 


















Applied water 


6,301 


6,779 


6,054 


6,502 


5,820 


6,230 


5,668 


6,084 


Net water 


5,783 


6,222 


5,541 


5,972 


5,324 


5,700 


5,191 


5,577 


Depletion 


4,718 


5,063 


4,604 


4,908 


4,489 


4,776 


4,382 


4,677 


Environmental 


















Applied water 


596 


513 


743 


660 


743 


660 


743 


660 


Net water 


541 


458 


651 


568 


651 


568 


651 


568 


Depletion 


178 


178 


288 


288 


288 


288 


288 


288 


Other (1) 




I 










w, 




Applied water 


24 


24 


36 


36 


48 


48 


48 " 


48 


Net water 


130 


130 


172 


142 


186 


156 


186 


156 


Depletion 


84 


84 


84 


84 


84 


84 


84 


84 


Total Demands 


















Applied water 


7,416 


7,802 


7,496 


7,881 


7,450 


7,805 


7,488 


7,851 


Net water 


6,807 


7,174 


6,832 


7,171 


6,748 


7,039 


6,746 


7,052 


Depletion 


5,155 


5,502 


5,217 


5,528 


5,177 


5,472 


5,149 


5,453 


(1) includes conveyance losses, 


recreational uses, 


and energy projects 































Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 

Each area of the San Joaquin River Region has its own set of geographic and demographic conditions j 
which present several water management issues. For example, during the 1987-92 drought, the Valley 
West Side planning subarea experienced severe shortages, primarily due to cutbacks in Central Valley 
Project water deliveries. This predominantly agricultural area receives more than 87 percent of its total 
water supply from the CVR The cutbacks prompted nine water supplying agencies in the PSA to pur- 
chase a total of 2,630 AF in 1992 from the State Drought Water Bank. For the most part, the municipal 
and industrial water demands are met by pumping ground water, and these demands have been met satis- 1 
factorily. However, meeting the demands during the drought increased pumping costs and accelerated 
ground water deterioration in some areas. 

Legislation and Litigation 

Statutes and court decisions have influenced water allocation and use in the San Joaquin River Re- 
gion considerably. An overview of the major statutes and proceedings follows. 

184 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Joaquin River Region 

Bay-Delta Proceedings. In 1978, the State Water Resources Control Board's Water Rights Decision 
1485 set water quality and outflow standards for the Delta and put forth rules for operating water projects 
affecting the San Francisco Bay and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. There are several regulatory ac- 
tions currently affecting the Bay /Delta, which are discussed in Volume I, Chapters 2 and 10. 

South Delta Water Agency Lawsuit. In July 1982, SDWA filed a lawsuit claiming that SWP and 
CVP operations harmed their agricultural production by causing low water levels, poor water quality, and 
poor circulation. In October 1986, DWR, USBR, and SDWA signed an agreement solidifying a frame- 
work for settling the litigation. As a result of the agreement, during 1986 through 1992, DWR imple- 
mented operational criteria regarding Clifton Court gate openings, completed dredging and installed si- 
phons in Tom Paine Slough, and constructed the Middle River barrier to improve water levels, 
circulation, and quality within parts of the SDWA area. 

Continuing negotiations resulted in a draft long-term contract in 1990. The contract commits the 
three agencies to constructing and operating three permanent barriers in Middle River, Old River near 
Tracy, and Grant Line Canal, after a period of testing. 

Delta Levees. More than 1,000 miles of levees act as the only barriers between land and water in the 
Delta. Behind these earthen walls lie over half a million acres of agricultural land and valuable wildlife 
Ihabitat, many small communities, numerous roads, railroad lines, and utilities. With each passing year, 
^^he promise of protection provided by these levees grows weaker. The Delta islands, which commonly 
lie 10 to 15 feet below sea level and are composed mainly of highly organic (peat) soils, are constantly in 
danger of land subsidence and seepage. 

The original levees were constructed in the late 1800s with heights of about 5 feet and founded on the 
i 
'soft, organic Delta soils. Due to continued subsidence of the levees and island interiors, it was necessary 

to continually add material to maintain freeboard and structural stability. Over the last century, the levees 

have significantly increased in size and are now between 15 to 25 feet high. 

Several active faults, for example, the Antioch, Greenville, and Coast Range Sierra Nevada Boundary 
Zone faults, are located west of the Delta and are capable of delivering moderate to large shaking. There 
has been on-going concern about the potential for liquefaction of the levees and of the foundation materi- 
als on some islands. However, there is no record of a levee failure resulting from earthquake shaking, 
meaning the levee system has not really been tested for earthquake shaking. Several studies indicate 
there would probably be levee damage or failure induced by earthquake shaking within the next 30 years. 
Further investigations are needed to better define the expected performance of the levees. 



185 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Joaquin River Region 

Delta levees are classified as either "project" or "nonproject." Project levees are part of the Sacra- 
mento River Flood Control Project. Mostly found along the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers, they are 
maintained to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers standards and generally provide dependable protection. 
Nonproject, or local, levees (65 percent of Delta levees) are those constructed and maintained to varying 
degrees by island landowners or local reclamation districts. Most of these levees have not been brought 
up to federal standards and are less stable, increasing the area's chances of flooding. 

The Delta Levee Subventions Program, originally known as the "Way Bill" program, began in 1973. 
The bill authorized funding, which grew from $200,000 annually in the 1970s to $2 million annually in 
the 1980s for levee maintenance and rehabilitation costs, with up to 50 percent reimbursement to local 
agencies. 

Since 1980, 17 islands have been partially or completely flooded, costing roughly $100 million dol- 
lars for recovering property and completing repairs. As a result of 1986 floods, the Delta Flood Protec- 
tion Act of 1988, Senate Bill 34, was enacted. It provides $12 million a year for 10 years for the long 
standing Delta Levees Subventions Program and for developing special flood control programs to protect 
eight western Delta islands and the communities of Walnut Grove and Thornton. 

Senate Bill 34 was enacted partly because of a commitment the State made in its 1983 Hazard Miti- 
gation Plan for the Delta. (Hazard Mitigation Plans are required by the Ffederal Emergency Management 
Agency). The plan recommended an increase in funding to the Subventions program to aid the districts 
in maintaining and upgrading their levees to minimum standards until a major federal levee rehabilitation 
project could be implemented. Through SB 34, legislative intent for funding the Delta Subventions pro- 
gram increased to up to $6 million a year and allows up to 75 percent reimbursement to the local agen- 
cies for their levee work. The other $6 million is for implementing special flood control projects. Recent 
activities include planning and design of major levee rehabilitation projects on Twitchell Island and Neu 
Hope Tract, repair of threatened levee sites on Sherman Island, Twitchell Island, Bethel Island, and Webb 
Tract, and other special projects and studies to determine the causes of Delta land subsidence. On 
Twitchell Island, a five-mile reach of levees along the San Joaquin River has been significantly up- 
graded. 

In 1991, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DWR, and the Reclamation Board signed an agreement 
to work further toward solving Delta flood control and environmental problems. The agreement calls for 
a six-year special study that will define the extent of federal interest in implementing a long-term flood 
control plan for the Delta. The study will attempt to find long-term solutions to Delta problems after SB 
34 lapses in 1999. 



186 



; Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Joaquin River Region 



San Joaquin River Management Program. The San Joaquin River Management Program was 

{created to address the needs of the San Joaquin River system. Existing conditions on the San Joaquin 

! 

^ River do not fully satisfy present water supply, water quality, flood protection, fisheries, wildlife habitat, 

and recreational needs. Continuing present river management practices would further deteriorate the riv- 
er system, adversely affecting all users. On September 18, 1990, the Governor signed Assembly Bill 
3603 (now Chapter 1068, 1990 statutes), which charges SJRMP with the following: 

O Provide a forum where information can be developed and exchanged to provide 
for the orderly development and management of the water resources of the San 
Joaquin River system. 

O Identify actions which can be taken to benefit legitimate uses of the San Joaquin 
River system. 

I O Develop compatible solutions to water supply, water quality, flood protection, 

fisheries, wildlife habitat, and recreation needs. 

Regional Issues 

West-Side Drainage Problem. On the west side of the region, several hundred acres of land are un- 

'derlain by shallow, semi-impermeable clay layers that prevent water from percolating downward. Inade- 

.quate drainage and accumulating salts have been long-standing problems in this area of the valley. With 

f 

ithe importation of irrigation water from northern California during the last 20 years, the problem has in- 
ftensified. Where water tables are high, subsurface drainage is necessary to remove and dispose of the 
(water. 

In 1984, the San Joaquin Valley Drainage Program was established as a joint federal-State effort o 
^investigate drainage and drainage-related problems. In 1990, the SJVDP published its recommended 
'plan for managing the west side drainage problem, and at the end of 1991, a Memorandum of Under- 
'standing was executed that allows federal and State agencies to coordinate activities for implementing the 
plan. Work on this program is ongoing. 

Ground Water Quality — Radon. Concentrations of radioactive elements in ground water vary wide- 
ly throughout the Sierra Nevada. Radon is a radioactive gas generated by naturally occurring uranium 
[deposits in the earth's crust. Radon is not a problem in surface water because the gas is released to the 
latmosphere. It can be found in outdoor air and can seep into homes through basements or foundations. 
3round water can also release the odorless radon gas when residents wash dishes or the laundry, or when 
hey shower. Inhalation of radon's decay products increases the risk of lung cancer. 

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, radon is the second leading cause of lung 
:ancer in the United States. In October 1990, DWR published Natural Radioactivity in Ground Water of 



187 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Joaquin River Region 

the Western Sierra Nevada, which reported the quality of water sampled from 20 wells in the mountain 
and foothill areas of Mariposa and Madera counties. The highest concentrations of radon, uranium, and 
radium are found in wells drilled in granitic rock, while lower concentrations are associated with meta- 
morphic rock formations. A notable radon and uranium "hot spot" in the region is located near Bass 
Lake in Madera County. Granitic rock formations can be found in Alpine, Amador, Calaveras, El Dora- 
do, and Tuolumne counties. 

Water Balance 

Water balances were computed for each Planning Subarea in the San Joaquin River Region by 
comparing existing and future water demand projections with the projected availability of supply. The 
region total was computed as the sum of the individual subareas. This method does not reflect the severi- 
ty of drought year shortages in some local areas, which can be hidden when planning subareas are com- 
bined within the region. Thus, there could be substantial shortages in some areas during drought periods. 
Local and regional shortages could also be less severe than the shortage shown, depending on how sup- 
plies are allocated within the region, a particular water agency's ability to participate in water transfers or 
demand management programs (including land fallowing or emergency allocation programs), and the 
overall level of reliability deemed necessary to the sustained economic health of the region. Volume I, 
Chapter 1 1 presents a broader discussion of demand management options. 

Table SJ-12 presents water demands for the 1990 level and for future water demands to 2020 and 
balances them with: (1) supplies from existing facilities and water management programs, and (2) future 
demand management and water supply management options. 

Regional net water demands for the 1990 level of development totaled 6.8 and 7.2 MAP for average 
and drought years respectively. Those demands are projected to decrease slightly to 6.7 and 7.1 MAP, 
respectively, by the year 2020, after accounting for a 20,000 AF reduction in urban water demand result- 
ing from implementation of long-term conservation measures and a 20,000 AF reduction in agricultural 
demand resulting from additional long-term agricultural water conservation measures and land retire- 
ment. 

Urban net water demand is projected to increase by about 365,000 AP by 2020, due to expected in- 
creases in population; while, agricultural net water demand is projected to decrease by about 590,000 AF. 
primarily due to lands being taken out of production due to ubanization of irrigated lands and land retire- 
ment in areas with poor drainage conditions on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. Environmental 
net water demands, under existing rules and regulations, will increase 1 10,000 AP over the next 30 years, 
reflecting increased supplies for managed wetlands resulting from implementation of the Central Valley 
Project Improvement Act. However, there are severed actions currently in progress, including further im- 
plementation of the CVPIA, that have proposed increases in instream flow for fisheries that will affect 
the availability of supplies for urban and agricultural use now and in the future. 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Joaquin River Region 

Urban and environmental water demands will increase over the next 30 years, but the agricultural 
water demand will decrease significantly causing total net water demand for the region to decrease for 
both average and drought conditions. The majority of the decrease will come from the southern half of 
the region. 

Future average annual supplies are expected to continue to meet average net water demands in the 
San Joaquin Region. However, during drought conditions, substantial shortages occur at the 1990 level 
of development, as was evident during the 1987-1992 drought. Drought year shortages are projected to 
decrease at the 2020 level of development due to reduced water demands and Level I surface water aug- 
mentations. 

Two planning subareas in the region rely heavily on ground water to supplement surface supplies to 
meet demands. Consequently, these areas are in significant overdraft. Eastern Valley Floor PSA has 89,000 
AF of overdraft, with 70,000 AF in San Joaquin County. Valley East Side PSA has 1 20,000 AF of over- 
draft, mostly in Madera County. 

In both planning subareas, water demand is expected to shift, like the rest of the region, from agriculture 
to urban over the next 30 years. This change in net water demand will result in about a 6 percent decrease in 
overall agricultural and urban demand by 2020. 

The Eastern Valley Floor PSA will soon receive supplies from New Melones reservoir. Two area water 
districts have contracts with USER for 155,000 AF, 106,000 AF interim and 49,000 AF average and 
drought year, of New Melones Project water. Distribution and conveyance facilities are nearly completed. 
With this additional surface supply, this PSA could rely less on ground water pumping thereby reducing or 
eliminating ground water overdraft. 

Agricultural and urban net water demands in the Valley East Side PSA are expected to decrease 148,000 
AF by 2020. Existing surface and ground water supplies should meet future demands. Ground water over- 
draft could also be reduced or eliminated in this planning subarea. 

The Valley West Side PSA supplies are mainly imported from the Delta by the CVP. Changes in 
CVP Delta supplies will affect the Valley West Side's ability to meet future demands. 



189 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



San Joaquin River Region 



Table SJ-12. Water Balance 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Demand/Supply 


1990 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Net Demand 










Urban -with 1990 level of conservation 


353 


364 


738 


771 


-reductions due to long-term conservation measures (Level 1) 


-- 


— 


-20 


-20 


Agricultural 


5,783 


6,?22 


5,215 


5,601 


-reductions due to long-term consen/ation measures 


-- 


— 


-28 


-20 


-reductions due to land retirement in poor drainage areas of San 






-4 


-4 


Joaquin Valley (Level 1) 










Environmental 


541 


458 


651 


568 


Other (1) 


130 


130 


186 


156 


Total Net Demand 


6,807 


7,174 


6,746 


7,052 


Water Supplies w/ExIsting Facilities Under D-1485 for Delta Supplies 










Developed Supplies 










Surface Water 


5,196 


4,285 


5,344 


4,324 


Ground Water 


1,072 


2,127 


1,072 


2,284 


Ground Water Overdraft 


209 


209 








Subtotal 


6,477 


6,621 


6,416 


6,606 


Dedicated Natural Flow 


330 


247 


330 


247 


Total Water Supplies 


6,807 


6,868 


6,746 


6,855 


Demand/Supply Balance 





-306 





-197 


Future Water Management Options Level 1 (2) 










Long-term Supply Augmentation 










Reclaimed (3) 






17 


17 


Local 












Central Valley Project 






4 





State Water Project 






1 





Subtotal - Water Management Options Level 1 






22 


17 


Ground Water/Surface Water Use Reduction Resulting from Level 1 Programs 






-22 


-17 


Remaining Demand/Supply Balance Requiring Short Term Drought Management 
and/or Future Level 11 Options 







-197 



(1) Includes conveyance losses, recreation uses and energy production. 

(2) Protection of fish and wildlife and a long-term solution to complex Delta problems will determine the feasibility of several 
water supply augmentation proposals and their water supply benefits. 

(3) Because of existing reuse within this region, reclaimed water does not add supply to the region. 

With planned Level I options, drought year shortages would not change; however, ground water use 
would be reduced by nearly 250,000 AF by 2020 and consequently long-term ground water overdraft 
would also be eliminated for this region. 

The remaining drought shortage requires both additional short-term drought management, water 
transfers and demand management programs, and future long-term Level II options depending on the 



19» 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Joaquin River Region 

overall level of water service reliability deemed necessary, by local agencies, to sustain the economic 
health of the region. In the short-term, some areas of this region that rely on the Delta exports for all or a 
portion of their supplies face great uncertainty in terms of water supply reliability due to the uncertain 
outcome of a number of actions undertaken to protect aquatic species in the Delta. For example, in 1 993, 
an above normal runoff year, environmental restrictions limited CVP deliveries to 50 percent of con- 
tracted supply for federal water service contractors from Tracy to Kettleman City. Because ground water 
is used to replace much of the shortfall in surface water supplies, limitations on Delta exports will exacer- 
bate ground water overdraft in this region. 

* * * 




191 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft San Joaquin River Region 



192 



j>rtft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 



TULARE LAKE REGION 




Carrots growing in the southern San Joaquin Valley near Wheeler Ridge. 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft Tblare Lake Region 

TULARE LAKE REGION 

The TUlare Lake Region includes the southern San Joaquin Valley and tributary Sierra Nevada and 
Coast Range from the southern limit of the San Joaquin River watershed to the crest of the Tehachapi 
Mountains. It stretches from the Sierra Nevada Crest in the east to the Coast Range in the west. Many 
small agricultural communities dot the eastern side of the valley, and the rapidly growing cities of Fresno 
and Bakersfield anchor the region, which encompasses almost 10 percent of the State's total land area. 
(See Appendix C for maps of the planning subareas and land ownership in the region.) 

Four main areas make up this mostly agricultural region: the western side of the San Joaquin Valley 
floor, the Sierra Nevada foothills on the region's eastern side, the central San Joaquin Valley floor, and 
the Kem Valley floor. The major rivers in the region, the Kings, Kaweah, Tule and Kern, begin in the 
Sierras and generally flow east to west into the valley. They are sustained by snow melt from the upper 
elevations. The Kem River follows a more north-south alignment for much of its path. All of them 
terminate on the valley floor in lakes or sinks; water does not find its way to the ocean from the basin, as 
it once did under natural conditions, except in extremely wet years. There is a considerable drainage area 
on the west and south sides of the valley, but scant rainfall has not produced water development there. 

The region's climate varies between valley and foothill areas. The valley areas experience mild 
springs and hot, dry summers. Winters are typically cold with some temperatures below freezing, but 
snowfall is rare. In some parts of the valley, thick tule fog is common at times during the winter. 
Climate in the foothills is typical of mountainous foothill areas. Winters and springs are cold with 
snowfall at higher elevations. 

Most of the region's runoff is stored for summer water supply to the drier valley floor areas. In most 
years, imported water from northern California supplements local supplies to meet the region's high 
agricultural water demand. 

Population 

Population in the region increased substantially in the 1980s, led by 50- to 60-percent growth in the 

Fresno, Bakersfield, and Visalia-Tulare urban areas. Fresno's population, which had one of the highest 
growth rates among large metropolitan areas in the United States during the 1980s, grew by more than 60 
percent— from 217,000 in 1980 to 354,000 in 1990. A high birth rate contributed to this growth and 

Jt Region Characteristics 

i:^ Average Annual Precipitation: 14 inches Average Annual Runoff: 3.313,500 acre-feet 

• Land Area: 16,518 square miles 1990 Population: 1,554.000 



193 




Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



Tblare Lake Region 



Water Supply 

The main local surface water supplies in the Tulare Lake Region come from Sierra Nevada rivers. 
Imported water is by way of the federal Central Valley Project's Delta-Mendota Canal and Friant-Kem 
Canal, and the State Water Project's California Aqueduct, which enters the region as part of the Joint-Use 
Facilities with the CVP's San Luis Unit. Ground water pumping meets the remaining water demands. 
Figure TL-2 shows the region's 1990 level sources of supply. 

Supply with Existing Facilities 

Local surface supplies on the western side of the region are limited to flood flows into the Tulare 

lakebed from the Kings, Tule, and Kaweah rivers. Excess flows from the Kings River flow through 
Fresno Slough to the Mendota Pool. Local supplies from snow melt and runoff in Sierra Nevada 
systems are more plentiful than imported sources in the central portion and eastern edge of the valley, but 
not as reliable throughout the year. Major reservoirs in the region are listed in Table TL-2. Table TL-3 
shows water supplies with existing facilities and water management programs. 

Table TL-2. Major Reservoirs 



Reservoir Name 


River 


Capacity (1 ,000 AF) 


Owner 


Courtright 


Helms Creek 


123 


Pacific Gas & Electric Co. 


Wishon 


Kings 


118 


Pacific Gas & Electric Co. 


Pine Flat 


Kings 


1,000 


U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 


Terminus 


Kaweah 


143 


U.S. "Army Corps of Engineers 


Lake Success 


Tule 


82 


U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 


Lake Isabella 


Kern 


568 


U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 



Mountain and Foothill Areas. Cities in the Sierra Nevada foothills often have less dependable 
drought supplies than valley communities. In many foothill areas, local surface water connections or 
rights are not available. Ground water is limited to small pockets of water formed from runoff trickling 
into fissures in the rock strata. During drought years, the ground water in the fissures is scarcely 
replenished and urban water supplies in foothill areas are often exhausted. A few cities, such as Lindsay 
in eastern Tulare County and Orange Cove in eastern Fresno County, receive imported surface water 
through the CVP's Friant-Kem Canal. 



196 



T 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



TUlare Lake Region 



Table TL-3. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities 

and Programs 

(Decision 1485 Operating Criteria for Delta Supplies) 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Supply 



1990 2000 2010 2020 

average drought average drought average drought average drought 



Surface 

Local 

Local imports 

Colorado River 

CVP 

Other federal 

SWP 
Ground water 
Overdraft 
Reclaimed 

Dedicated natural flow 
Total 



2,347 


1,240 


2,347 


1,240 


2,347 


1,240 


2,347 


1.240 





B- ^ 












































2,704 


1,288 


2,704 


1,288 


2,704 


1,288 


2,704 


1,288 


243 





243 





243 





243 





1,226 


847 


1,043 


692 


965 


622 


967 


625 


1,391 


4,209 


1,440 


4.223 


1,439 


4,204 


1,375 


4,129 


341 


341 


350 


350 


320 


320 


280 


280 


63 


63 


63 


63 


63 


63 


63 


63 



























8,315 7,988 8,189 7,656 8,080 7,737 7,979 7,625 



197 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



"Rilare Lake Region 



Figure TL-2. Tulare Lake Region 

Water Supply Sources (Average Conditions) 

1990 level 




Local Surface 

Water** 

31% 



Total Imports* 

47% 




^Indudes imports from: the federal Central Valley Project and the State Water Project. 
**Local surface water includes other federal projects in the region. 



Valley Area, Many valley cities, including Fresno and Bakersfield, rely on ground water for urban 
use, occasionally obtaining supplemental supplies from local surface water and some imported water. 
Fresno, for example, uses ground water for its main urban supply. Fresno also purchases local Kings 
River water and imported water from the Friant-Kem Canal and replenishes ground water through local 
recharge basins. In Bakersfield, the Kern County Water Agency treats CVP Cross Valley Canal water to 
supplement its urban ground water supply (26 TAF in 1991, more than 10 percent of its municipal and 
industrial supply). In isolated parts of the valley's westem side, smaller cities like Aveneil, Huron, and 
Coalinga rely on imported surface water from the San Luis Canal for their municipal demands. 



198 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft T^,^^ La,^^ ^^^^ 

The SWP, through San Luis Reservoir and the California Aqueduct, provides an average of 1 .2 
million acre-feet of surface water yearly to the region during normal years. The U.S. Bureau of 
iReclamation supplies an average of 2.7 MAF during normal years from the CVP via the Delta-Mendota 
Canal, the Friant-Kem Canal, the Madera Canal, and the San Luis Canal of the CVP/SWP San Luis 
Joint-Use Facilities. The Friant-Kem and the Madera canals receive water from Millerton Lake and the 
San Joaquin River; the Delta-Mendota Canal and the Califomia Aqueduct divert water from the 
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. 

The region covers four major ground water basins and part of a fifth basin; three are overdrafted. The 
valley floor is mostly one large ground water basin that consists of alluvial sediments. In the western 
half to three quarters, the Corcoran clay layer, which generally lies at depths of 300 to 900 feet, divides 
the basin into two aquifers. South of the Kem River, the Corcoran horizon drops below well depths but 
other clay layers provide some confinement. On the eastern side of the valley, both north and south of 
jthe Kem County line, older formations are tapped by wells that usually exceed 2,000 feet in depth. A 
Ismail ground water subbasin, with little hydraulic connection to the main aquifers, exists on the western 
jside of Fresno, Kings, and Kem counties from Coalinga to Lost Hills. Two other small subbasins in 
Kem County are separated from the main basin by the White Wolf and Edison faults. Productive aquifers 
jwith good quality water are the general rule, except in the Tulare Lake area where lakebed clays yield 
I little water, along the extreme eastem edge of the region where shallow depth to granite limits aquifer 
! yields, and along the westem side where quality is poor. 

The Kings-Kaweah-Tule River Planning Subarea accounts for just over 50 percent of net water 
demand of the Tulare Region. Supplies for the KKTR PSA are split three ways: local surface provides 
about 39 percent, imported water provides 30 percent, and ground water provides 3 1 percent. Reductions 
I in Delta diversions will influence this PSA only slightly, since only about 225,000 AF of its supplies 
come from the Delta. On the other hand, the San Luis West Side and Kem Valley Floor PSAs will be 
heavily affected by CVP and SWP reduced deliveries. The SLWS meets over 90 percent of its demand 
with imported water, especially CVP water from the Delta. With future CVP deliveries unknown and 
limited available ground water and local surface supplies, the SLWS could have problems meeting future 
demand. Although ground water and local surface supplies are available, the KVF PSA could face 
similar problems as the SLWS PSA; more than 60 percent of its demand is met by imported water. 
Changes in SWP deliveries from the Delta would have the most effect in this PSA. 

The City of Bakersfield operates a 2,800-acre recharge facility southwest of Bakersfield where the 
city and some local water agencies recharge surplus Kem River and occasionally, SWP and Friant-Kem 



199 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft Tulare Lake Region 

Canal water; this water then is "banked" and withdrawn in drier years. The recharge facility is one of the 
largest single areas in California and during wet years, more than 100,000 AF of water may be recharged. 

The reclaimed water for the region includes 42,300 AF from the Kings-Kaweah-Tule rivers areas 
and 17,100 AF from the Kern Valley Floor area. In both areas, the main source of reclaimed water is 
treated urban waste water (sewage), mainly from Fresno and Bakersfield. In other areas, minor amounts 
of reclaimed water also come from urban wastewater treatment. 

Supply with Level I Water Management Programs 

Future water management options are presented in two levels to better reflect the status of 
investigations required to implement them. 

O Level I options are those that have undergone extensive investigation and environmental analyses 
and are judged to have a high likelihood of being implemented by 2020. 

O Level II options are those that could fill the remaining gap between water supply and demand. 
These options require more investigation and alternative analyses. 

Some of the water management options available to the region include increasing local reservoir 
storage by raising existing dam heights and encouraging more urban water conservation while protecting 
water quality in city wells. 

Water Supply Reliability and Drought Water Management Strategies. During drought, as surface 
supplies dwindle and carryover storage in reservoirs is not replaced, ground water pumping increases 
tremendously. The number of new wells drilled during the recent drought (1987-92) more than doubled 
compared to normal periods. 

Along the eastern side of the region, the ability to make up deficits by ground water pumping was 
crucial to sustaining agricultural production during the drought. Allotments from the Friant-Kem Canal, 
which delivers CVP water along the eastern side of the region from Fresno County to Kern County, were 
greatly decreased in the last drought. Some growers who receive Friant-Kem Canal water along the 
eastern side of the region were not able to pump enough to make up the deficiencies. In these cases, 
permanent crops did not receive full irrigations and yields suffered. State Water Project agricultural 
contractors received only 50 percent of their normal delivery in 1990 and then the next two years 
received no delivery at all. 

Although ground water pumping in western Fresno County reached all time highs during the 
1987-92 drought, unprecedented since the arrival of CVP and SWP water, growers still could not affordj 
to pump enough water to make up for the surface water deficiencies from reductions in CVP and SWP 
water. As a consequence, some acreage was fallowed. The situation was even worse in western Kern 



200 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft -Rilare Lake Region 




bunty, where ground water is not generally available. Some water was obtained from the State Drought 
Water Bank to ensure the survival of permanent crops in 1991. Still, over 125,000 acres were fallowed in 
1991 due to lack of water. 

Some well problems have been experienced in the region's urban areas. These have primarily been 
an aggravation of already existing quality problems. Most communities enacted water use restriction 
ordinances during the current drought, generally including time-of-day watering and odd-even-day 
watering, a prohibition of driveway or other paved surface washing, and water waste patrols. 

Water Management Options with Existing Facilities. Due to their hot climates, Fresno and 
Bakersfield have had relatively high per capita water use. As a result of continued urban growth and 
stricter federal drinking water standards, which have closed some wells with high pesticide levels, Fresno 
will have problems meeting its future urban water demand. To address this problem, the City of Fresno 
is preparing a ground water management plan to ensure the reliability of existing supplies. Among its 
efforts, Fresno established a water reclamation district that ponds storm runoff in recharge basins 
throughout the metropolitan area. The district could also pond additional surplus surface water when it is 
available. With proper management and some enhancement, the recharge basins can be used to meet 
Fresno's growing water demands. 

DWR, in cooperation with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, is assisting local water agencies and 
districts in developing conservation plans that will be required of all CVP water users in the future 
because of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act. With proper conservation 
planning, local agencies may better be able to deal with shortages of imported water during drought 
periods. 

Water Management Options with Additional Facilities. For future agricultural needs along the 
eastern half of the central San Joaquin Valley area, the Tule River Association wants to increase the 
reservoir capacity of Lake Success on the Tule River by 28,000 acre-feet. The extra capacity would be 
used for flood control and better irrigation scheduling during summer months. Construction would be 
completed by 2000, if approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. This project is in the planning 
stage. 

The Kaweah-St. Johns Rivers Association also has a project in the planning stages that could raise 
the height of Terminus Dam on Lake Kaweah and add 43,000 acre-feet of flood control capacity and 
off-basin storage of Kaweah River water by 1999. Projects like the conservation program started by the 
Orange Cove Irrigation District will probably be more common in the future as area farmers look to 
conservation rather than new water sources to alleviate shortages. OCID plans to replace 98 miles of 



201 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft -j^,^^ Lake Region 



40-year-old pipelines to reduce leakage losses and add six regulating reservoirs and new metering 
equipment to make water delivery totals more precise. 

Farmers on the Kern Valley floor will benefit from water transfers and banking of the Kern Water 
Bank Project when it is completed. Water districts and the SWP will be able to divert surplus water in 
wet years to recharge basins in the KWB project area, where the water will be stored in a vast 
underground aquifer. In dry years, users will be able to withdraw banked water from KWB to 
supplement SWP and other project deliveries. 

Local supplies should remain at the 1990 level since there are no firm plans yet to increase reservoir 
capacity for the region. As surplus SWP supplies decline and urban water demand increases, increased 
ground water pumping will probably continue to make up the difference. 

By the year 2010, SWP deliveries to the region are predicted to stabilize as the Los Banos Grandes 
Reservoir is completed and the Kern Water Bank is implemented at its fiill capacity. (See Volume I, 
Chapter 1 1 for detailed discussions of these programs.) Deliveries from the CVP are shown as 
remaining the same. Although the Central Valley Project Improvement Act will probably reduce 
agricultural water supplies to the region, its effects on future CVP deliveries are, as yet, unpredictable. 
Local surface supplies should remain at 1990 levels. Table TL^ shows water supplies with additional 
Level I water management programs. 



202 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



Iblare Lake Region 



Table TL-4. Water Supplies with Level I Water Management Programs 

(Decision 1485 Operating Criteria for Delta Supplies) 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Supply 



1990 2000 2010 2020 

average drought average drought average drought average drought 



Surface 


















Local 


2,347 


1.240 


2,347 


1,240 


2,347 


1,240 


2,347 


1,240 


Local imports 


























Colorado River 


























CVP 


2,704 


1,288 


2,704 


1,288 


2,704 


1,288 


2,704 


1,288 


Other federal 


243 





243 





243 





243 





SWP 


1,226 


847 


1,127 


876 


1,251 


762 


1,253 


753 


Ground water 


1,391 


4,209 


1,455 


4,135 


1,364 


4,277 


1,266 


4,179 


Overdraft 


341 


341 


240 


240 


80 


80 


55 


55 


Reclaimed 


63 


63 


74 


74 


92 


92 


111 


111 


Dedicated natural flow 


























Total 


8,315 


7,988 


8,190 


7,853 


8,081 


7,739 


7,979 


7,626 



If no additional capacity is added to the SWP and the CVP, water users in the region will probably 
rely more on ground water pumping as urban demands increase. Very little new agricultural land is 
expected to be brought into production, since most available productive agricultural land is already in 
use. 



203 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft ^^j^^ Lake Region 



Water Use 
Most water use in the Tulare Lake Region is used for irrigated agriculture. In a normal year, irrigated 
agriculture uses roughly 8 MAF, about 95 percent of the region's total water use; this is the largest 
agricultural demand for water of any hydrologic region in California. Municipal and industrial needs are 
about 215,000 acre-feet annually. Wildlife refiiges and other nature areas account for one-third of one 
percent of the region's water needs. Agriculture will continue to be the major water user in the region in 
the future. However, as the population grows, municipal and industrial use will increase considerably. 
Figure TL-3 shows net demand for the 1990 level of development. 

Municipal and industrial net water use is expected to increase 87 percent due to large population 
increases throughout the region, while agricultural water use may decline slightly (6 percent) as farm 
irrigation efficiencies increase and some agricultural land is converted to urban land. The total net water 
use for the region is projected to decrease 2 percent by 2020. 



204 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



Tblare Lake Region 



1 



Figure TL-3. Tulare Lake Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990ievei 



Agricultural 

95% 




vironmental 
(Wetlands) 
0.4% 



Urban Water Use 

Total urban applied water for the region was 523,000 acre-feet in 1990; the 1990 urban net water use 
for the region was 215,000 AF. The Sierra Nevada foothill area (Uplands planning subarea) had a net 
water use of about 6,000 acre-feet (1990). Since the mid-1980s, urban water use has declined in the 
central San Joaquin Valley floor and on the western side of the valley floor, but it has increased in the 
other areas. Table TL-5 shows urban applied and net water demand to 2020. 



205 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



T\ilare Lake Region 



Table TL-5. Urban Water Demand 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Uplands 


















Applied water demand 


12 


12 


18 


18 


26 


26 


35 


35 


Net water demand 


7 


7 


7 


9 


10 


10 


14 W 


!: 14 


Depletion 


5 


5 


6 


7 


9 


9 


13 


13 


Kings- Kaweah -Tula 


















Applied water demand 


319 


319 


432 


432 


547 


548 


694 


694 


Net water demand 


134 


134 


181 


181 


230 


230 


290 


290 


Depletion 


92 


92 


139 


139 


187 


187 


248 


248 


San Luis West Side 


















Applied water demand 


10 


10 


14 


14 


16 


16 


18 


18 


Net water demand 


4 


4 


6 


6 


7 


7 


7 


7 


Depletion 


3 


3 


4 


4 


5 


5 


6 li 


6 


Western Uplands 


















Applied water demand 


2 


2 


2 


2 


3 


3 


4 


4 


Net water demand 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


2 


2 


Depletion 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


2 


2 


Kern Valley Floor 


















Applied water demand 


180 


180 


250 


250 


299 


299 


365 


365 


Net water demand 


70 


70 


97 


97 


116 


116 


141 


141 


Depletion 


53 


53 


80 


80 


99 


99 


124 


124 


Total Urban 


















Applied water demand 


523 


523 


716 


716 


891 


892 


1,115 


1,115 


Net water demand 


215 


215 


292 


294 


364 


364 


454 


454 


Depletion 


154 


154 


230 


231 


301 


301 


393 


393 



The average per-capita daily water use within the Tulare Lake Region is about 301 gallons. Water 
use in the foothills was 202 gpcd, while that of the Kern Valley floor was 374 gpcd. The region has a 
fairly high urban water consumption rate due to its hot summers, which cause greater demand for 
drinking, cooling, and landscaping water. Additionally, the per capita consumption number in the Kern 
Valley area represents an average of many urban areas and water districts that may have high industrial 
water use due to petroleum refining and production. 

Municipal water use in valley cities represents up to 80 percent of total M&I net water use. About 60 
percent of the total municipal and industrial net use occurs outdoors; landscaping accounts for 90 percent 



206 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft "nilare Lake Region 

i 
of this percentage and swimming pools the remaining 10 percent. Indoor water use (for drinking, 

washing, and cooking) accounts for 40 percent of total municipal and industrial net water use. Both 

Fresno and Bakersfield have a high per capita water use, about 280 and 330 gpcd, respectively. Both 

cities have water use regulations and water education programs to promote water conservation. Figure 

TL-4 shows the 1990 level applied urban water demands by sector. 

For the year 2020, municipal and industrial applied water is expected to increase in the Tulare Lake 
Region due to population increases in Fresno and other cities. The population for the valley and the 
foothills will more than double by 2020. Per capita water consumption in the central San Joaquin Valley 
(Kings-Kaweah-Tule rivers planning subarea) floor area is expected to decline because of 
implementation of water conservation measures. On the Kern Valley floor, per capita use should 
decrease, while use in the foothills should average about 190 gallons. Per capita water use on the western 
side of the valley floor should average about 225 gallons. 



207 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



TXiIare Lake Region 



Figure TL-4. Tulare Lake Region 
Applied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990 level 



Governmental 

3% 




Agricultural Water Use 

Irrigated agriculture accounts for more than 95 percent of the 1990 level water use in the Tulare Lake 
Region. Many different crops are grown throughout the region. In the future, however, urbanization and 
increasingly higher costs for water could reduce the variety and acreages of crops and thus ultimately, 
agricultural water use. Figure TL-4 shows 1990 crop acreages, evapotranspiration, and applied water for^ 
major crops. 

Climate, water supply, and salt buildup in the soils may limit the crops that can be grown profitably 
throughout the region. Most good irrigable land with access to dependable imported or local surface 



208 



bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



I\ilare Lake Region 



Vater has been developed. Crop acreages have generally declined in the region over the last decade, due 
the limited availability of water and a drop in demand due to the sluggish economy. Cotton acreages, 
or example, declined from 1989 to 1992. Its price dropped from about 75 cents per pound in the late 
1980s to about 50 cents per pound in 1992. In addition to decreased demand for cotton, the drought 
leduced SWP deliveries along the western side of the region. Table TL-6 shows irrigated crop acreage 
[jrojections to 2020. Table TL-7 shows 1990 evapotranspiration of applied water by crop. 

j Table TL-6. Irrigated Crop Acreage 

(thousands of acres) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 


Uplands 




8 


9 


9 


9 


Wngs-Kaweah-Tule 




1,721 


1,667 ■ 


1,618 


1,565 


San Luis West Side 




620 


620 J 


618 


621 


Western Uplands 







mm 


sB' 


Kern Valley Floor 




863 


863 


869 


866 


Total 




3,212 


3,159 


3,114 


3,061 


Table TL- 


-7. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop 


Irrigated Crop 


Total 
Acres 
(1,000) 


Total ETAW 
(1,000AF) 


Irrigated Crop 


Total 
Acres 
(1,000) 


Total ETAW 
(I.OOOAF) 


Grain 


297 


294 


Pasture 


44 


141 


Rice 


1 


3 


Tomatoes 


107 


245 


Cotton 


1,029 


2,569 


Other truck 


204 


275 


Sugar Beets 


35 


91 


Almonds/pistachios 


164 


392 


Com 


100 


199 


Other deciduous 


177 


470 


Other field 


135 


262 


Vineyard 


393 


817 


Alfalfa 


345 


1,045 


Citrus/olives 


181 


344 




Total 


3^12 


7,147 



209 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



Ibiare Lake Region ' 



1,200 



Acres (X 1 ,000) 



Acre-Feet (X 1 ,000) 



900 



600 



300 








3,600 



2,700 



1,800 



900 



Grain Cotton Alfalfa Grapes 

■Acreage ^ETAW ■Applied Water 



Figure TL-5. 1990 Tulare Lake Region 

Acreage, ETAW, and Appiied Water for 

Major Crops 



210 



^Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft Tblare Lake Region 

The average year applied water and net water demands were derived from irrigated acreages by 
[applying water use factors for average year conditions. The unit use factors reflect local conditions of 
climate and cultural practices. Applied water amounts vary with the source of water supply (surface or 
ground water and the type of water year). During drought years, there will be a need for additional 
irrigation to replace water normally supplied by rainfall and to meet higher than normal 
evapotranspiration demands. 

Applied water use amounts can be reduced with more efficient irrigation management. Farmers in 
some areas are practicing these techniques. On the western side of the San Joaquin Valley they are using 
more sprinkler irrigation and less flood or furrow irrigation. In 1990, less than half of the irrigated land 
was flood irrigated, where only five years ago, farmers irrigated over 60 percent of the land in the area 
with flood methods. Now, many use sprinklers and drip irrigation, especially on truck crops where small 
applications of water early in the growing season are highly beneficial. Also, almost all new plantings 
of trees and vines are on drip or trickle systems. 

In the central San Joaquin Valley much of the citrus growing area of the region, which converted to 
drip irrigation years ago, is now moving towards highly efficient microjet irrigation through 
microsprinklers. About half of all new plantings of table grape vineyards are on drip irrigation and some 
existing vineyards have changed from furrow to drip irrigation. Finally farmers throughout the area are 
improving irrigation management based on better knowledge of evapotranspiration requirements and soil 
moisture content. Table TL-8 shows agricultural water demand projections for the Tulare Lake Region 
to 2020. 



211 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



Iblare Lake Region I 



Table TL-8. Agricultural Water Demand 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Planning Subareas 



1990 2000 2010 

average drought average drought average drought 



2020 
average drought 



Uplands 


















Applied water demand 


29 


29 


29 


29 


29 


29 


29 


29 


Net water demand 


20 


20 


20 


20 


20 


20 


20 


20 


Depletion 


20 


20 


20 


20 


20 


20 


20 


20 


Kings - Kaweah -Tule 


















Applied water demand 


5,205 


5,393 


4,971 


5,149 


4,793 


4,960 


4,600 


4,757 


Net water demand 


4,065 


4,211 


3,910 


4,049 


3,777 


3,911 


3,635 


3,760 


Depletion 


4,039 


4,182 


3,884 


4,021 


3,752 


3,884 


3,611 


3,734 


San Luis West Side 


















Applied water demand 


1,695 


1,721 


1,685 


1,700 


1,665 


1,684 


1,665 


1,693 


Net water demand 


1,514 


1,532 


1,496 


1,514 


1,467 


1,484 


1,459 


1,476 


Depletion 


1,514 


1,532 


1,496 


1,514 


1,467 


1,484 


1,459 


1,476 


Western Uplands 
















^tfi 


Applied water demand 




















^ 


^Sl 


Net water demand 























~^B 


Depletion 























^ 


Kern Valley Floor 


















Applied water demand 


2,684 


2,706 


2,621 


2,640 


2,588 


2,608 


2,539 


2,5S 


Net water demand 


2,304 


2,323 


2,257 


2,275 


2,238 


2,255 


2,195 


2,21; 


Depletion 


2,304 


2,323 


2,257 


2,275 


2,238 


2,255 


2,195 


2,21 


Total 
















■ 


Applied water demand 


9,613 


9,848 


9,305 


9,518 


9,075 


9,281 


8,833 


9,039 


Net water demand 


7,903 


8,086 


7,682 


7,858 


7,501 


7,670 


7,309 


7,468 


Depletion 


7,877 


8,057 


7,657 


7,830 


7,477 


7,643 


7,285 


7,442 



Environmental Water Use 

Wetlands in the region are mainly freshwater wetlands that provide habitat for migratory waterfowl. 

In Fresno County, the Mendota Wildlife Area had a 1990 water demand of 29,650 acre-feet for 
development of the refuge's 10,851 acres. Existing water supplies (supplies that are available and can be 
delivered in an average year) can provide about 18,000 AF of water annually. Recently, the refuge 
received an average of 23,000 AF. Water in the Mendota Wildlife Area is fairly reliable since the refuge 
is a regulating basin for the Delta-Mendota Canal. 



212 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft TXilare Lake Region 

In Kern County, the Kern National Wildlife Refuge, also a habitat for migratory waterfowl, needs an 
annual water supply of 25,000 acre-feet for management of its 2,800 acres of natural wetlands. 
However, the refuge has no firm supplies and usually relies on surplus SWP water and ground water. In 
an average water year, the refuge receives about 10,000 AF of water. 

In Tblare County, the Pixley National Wildlife Refuge has a water demand of 6,000 acre-feet for 
development of its 5,100 acres, used for migratory waterfowl. However, the refuge has no firm supplies 
and relies on flood flows from Deer Creek and ground water from recharge basins in the Pixley Irrigation 
District. Consequently, the refuge received an average of only 1,280 acre-feet of water in recent years. 

Besides these refuges, there are 2,879 acres of privately managed wetlands in the region, including 
duck clubs, nature preserves owned by nonprofit organizations, and rice lands. In normal water years, an 
estimated 6,910 acre-feet is supplied to the duck clubs. In the Tulare lakebed area, most of the original 
wetlands surrounding the old Tulare Lake have been drained for agriculture. Evaporation ponds 
established to deal with agricultural drainage disposal are potentially hazardous to migrating waterfowl. 
Additional wetlands habiiat could be built to deal with these problems, but a firm supply of water is 
necessary. Table TL-9 shows wetland water needs to 2020. 



213 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



Tlilare Lake Region 



Table TL-9. Wetlands Water Needs 
(thousands of acre -feet) 

1990 2000 2010 2020 " 

average drought average drought average drought average drought 



Wetlands 



Kern 


















Applied water 


10 


10 


25 1 


25 


25 


25 


25 


25 


Net water 


8 


8 


19 II 


19 


19 


19 


19 


19 


Depletion 


8 


8 


19 1 


19 


19 


19 


19 


19 


PIxley 


















Applied water 


1 


1 


6 E 


6 


6 


6 


6 


6 


Net water 


1 


1 


4 If; 


4 


4 


4 


4 


4 


Depletion 


1 


1 


4 1 


4 


4 


4 


4 


4 


Mendota WA 


















Applied water 


23 


23 


30 


30 


30 


30 


30 


30 


Net water 


17 


17 


22 


22 


22 


22 


22 


22 


Depletion 


17 


17 


22 


22 


22 


22 


22 


22 


Tulare Basin 






il;:: 










w 


Applied water 


7 


7 


7 1; 


7 


7 


7 


7 


1 


Net water 


5 


5 


5 ■:: 


5 


5 


5 


5 


f 


Depletion 


5 


5 


5 1 


5 


5 


5 


5 


5 


Total 






i 












Applied water 


41 


41 


68 ^ 


68 


'68 


68 


68 


68 


Net water 


31 


31 


50 


50 


50 


50 


50 


50 


Depletion 


31 


31 


50 


50 


50 


50 


50 


50 



Another environmental water consideration involves the water conveyance facilities in the region. 
Certain endangered species, such as the San Joaquin kit fox and the blunt-nosed leopard lizard, are using 
the canals, flood control channels, and banks of the California Aqueduct for habitat as native vegetation 
grows around the facilities. DWR monitors these areas to prevent maintenance operations from 
disturbing these species and their habitat. DWR's Kern Water Bank in western Kern County will provide 
wetlands and refuges for endangered species as part of its overall program. Of the 20,000 acres that will 
be used for the Kern Water Bank, several thousand acres will be used for wildlife needs. 

Other Water Use 

Kings Canyon National Park and Sequoia National Park together use about 500 acre-feet of water 
annually for drinking water and other domestic uses. The parks obtain most of their water from ground 
water wells and local surface water diversions from the upper Kings River. During the 1987-92 drought. 



214 



JBulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft ^^,3^^ La,^^ R^g.^^ 

some campgrounds in Kings Canyon and Sequoia that relied on wells were closed for part of the camping 
jscason due to low ground water levels. 

Some water use in recreation areas can be described as indirect usage. Along the California 
Aqueduct, there are many specially designated areas for fishing that include easy access from area roads 
and vehicle parking areas. In the Tulare Lake Region, there are five fish access areas; Three Rocks, 
[uron, Kettleman City, Lost Hills, and Buttonwillow. In the foothills, three major lakes (Pine Lake, 

:e Success, and Isabella Lake) have recreation areas that are used for fishing, boating, camping, and 
(ther recreational uses. Both the fish access and the recreation areas show reduced use during drought 
{periods and low flow months. 

During normal years, white water rafting is a popular activity on the Kings and Kern rivers. The 
Kings River supports white water rafting above Pine Flat Reservoir for the experienced rafters while the 
river below the reservoir is satisfactory for beginners. The Kern River has expert-level white water 
rafting and kayaking above Isabella Reservoir while below the reservoir, beginners as well as experts can 
practice their white water rafting. Stretches of the upper Kings and Kern rivers have been declared wild 
and scenic by federal legislation. The Kings River is designated as such on both the middle and south 
fork of the upper portion above Mill Rat Creek. The Kern River is designated wild and scenic on both 
the north and south fork of the upper portion above Isabella Reservoir. 

The many reservoirs and lakes throughout the Tulare Lake Region support many recreational 
lactivities including fishing, camping, hiking, water skiing, and boating. Courtright and Wishon 
•reservoirs on the Kings River have native trout fisheries, camping, and hiking on the trails of the John 
jMuir and Dinkey Lakes wilderness areas. Also, Pine Flat Reservoir on the Kings, Lake Isabella on the 
Kern, and Lake Kaweah on the Kaweah River are popular recreational areas in the region. Figure TL-6 
shows water recreation areas in the region. Table TL-10 shows the total water demand for the region. 




215 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



'Hilare Lake Region 



Table TL-10. Total Water Demands 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Category of Use 



1990 2000 2010 

average drought average drought average drought 



2020 
average drought 



Urban 


















Applied water 


523 


523 


716 


716 


891 


892 


1,115 


1,115 


Net water 


215 


215 


292 


294 


364 


364 


454 


454 


Depletion 


154 


154 


230 


231 


301 


301 


393 


393 


Agricultural 


















Applied water 


9,613 


9,848 


9,305 


9,518 


9,075 


9,281 


8,833 


9,039 


Net water 


7,903 


8,086 


7,682 


7,858 


7,501 


7,670 


7,309 


7,468 


Depletion 


7,877 


8,057 


7,657 


7.830 


7,477 


7,643 


7,285 


7,442 


Environmental 


















Applied water 


41 


41 


68 


68 


68 


68 


68 


68 


Net water 


31 


31 


50 


50 


50 


50 


50 


50 


Depletion 


31 


31 


50 


50 


50 


50 


50 


50 


Other (1) 




















Applied water 


102 


102 


102 


102 


102 


102 


102 




102 


Net water 


166 


166 


166 


166 


166 


166 


166 




166 


Depletion 


166 


166 


166 


166 


166 


166 


166 




166 


Total 


















Applied water 


10,279 


10,514 


10,191 


10,404 


10,136 


10,342 


10,118 


10,323 


Net water 


8,315 


8,498 


8,190 


8,367 


8,081 


8,249 


7,979 


8,138 


Depletion 


8,227 


8,407 


8,103 


8,277 


7;994 


8,160 


7,893 


8,050 


(1) Other includes conveyance losses, 


recreational i 


jses, and energy production 










Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 






Each area of the Tulare Lake Region has its owr 


I set of geographic 


; and demographic 


conditions that 


have led to varied water supply ( 


circumstances. Fon 


example, 


the foothill cities 


along the eastern 


edge of 


the region experienced severe water shortages in the recent drought. However, the Fresno area managed 


to meet most of its water needs. 


In addition to these 


problems 


5, water resource managers 


in the region 


must consider court rulings, changes in laws, and contracts or 


agreements when 


1 planning 


;and 




implementing water resource management programs 












i 

1 






216 


- 













Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



Iblare Lake Region 




Legend 
ater Recreation Area 
rdroelectric Power Plant 
ideral Wild and Scenic River 



N 

i 



10 20 30 



WATER RECREATION 
AREAS 

. Pine Flat Lake RA. 

Avocado Lake Park 

Fair^ Fish Access 

Three Rocks Fish Access 

Huron Fish Access 

6. Kettiennan City Fish Access 

7. Ketdeman City Aquatic S.RA 

8. Lost Hills Rsh Access 

9. Buttonwillow Fish Access 

10. Buena Vista Aquatic RA. 

11. Lake Kaweah RA 

12. Success Lake RA. 

13. Isabella Lake RA 



Figure TL-6. TUIare Lake Region 
Water Recreation Areas 



217 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft •I\ilare Lake Region 



Contracts and Agreements 

In western Kem County, 85 percent of the land related SWP water entitlements of the Devil's Den 
Water District have been bought by the Castaic Lake Water Agency, which has transferred the water to 
the South Coast Region for urban use in the Santa Clarita urban area. The transfer resulted in the loss of 
some seasonal agricultural jobs and more than 20 full-time agricultural positions within the district. 
State planners in the future will be faced with this situation again, as metropolitan areas seek alternative 
water supplies. The needs of urban residents will have to be balanced against the potential loss of 
agricultural jobs and of agricultural production capacity brought on by the reallocation of water. 

The final environmental impact report for the Arvin-Edison Water Exchange Program, involving an 
agreement between MWDSC and the Arvin-Edison Water Storage District, is scheduled for 1993. 
Arvin-Edison is a Central Valley Project contractor in southeastern Kem County. Its CVP water is 
delivered through the California Aqueduct by arrangement with the State. According to the proposed 
contract, MWDSC will help construct Arvin-Edison 's partially completed distribution system and 
deliver a portion of its SWP water in wet years for use in Arvin-Edison 's replenishment programs. In 
return, MWDSC will receive some of Arvin-Edison's CVP water during dry years. Through this 
proposed agreement, MWDSC expects to store as much as 135,000 AF per year of SWP water in the 
southern San Joaquin Valley. During wet periods, MWDSC could accumulate a storage account of up to 
800,000 AF. In dry periods, the program would make roughly 100,000 AF per year available for 
MWDSC. In another exchange program, MWDSC negotiated with Kem County Water Agency to store 
SWP supplies in the Semitropic Water Storage District's ground water basin. (See Volume I, Chapter 
11.) 

Regional Issues 

Population Growth. One of the most important issues in the Tulare Lake Region is whether to allow j 
growth and development to continue at its current rate or location or restrict urban development to 
preserve prime agricultural land, wetlands and other wildlife habitat. Although converting agricultural 
land to urban use increases water use slightly (less than 1 acre-foot per acre annually), urban water use 
may require higher water quality and water supplies must be reliable. 

For example, Fresno and surrounding towns draw ground water from the same basin. As Fresno has 
expanded into former agricultural areas, it has encountered degraded ground water, in some places by 
pesticide contamination from DBCP and other farm chemicals used before the 1980s. This degraded 
water quality has shifted dependence to wells that produce good quality water. Urban growth in Fresno is j 
also occurring in outlying areas at higher elevations than many older portions of the city. These new 



218 



{Bulledn 160-93. Administrative Draft T^,^^ Laj^^ ,j^g.^„ 

suburbs have switched from the surface water supplies used by agriculture to new ground water wells. 
The urban ground water demand has created a fast drawdown of the aquifer, which has increased the 
depth to ground water, raised the cost of pumping, and decreased water quality because the lower 
elevation parts of the city draw in poorer quality water from the agricultural regions. 

Finally, converting agricultural land to urban use tends to diminish natural recharge of ground water 
basins because of the nonporous nature of concrete and asphalt used in urban areas. While Fresno has 
existing recharge facilities, it may raise development taxes to finance more recharge basins to protect 
current levels of ground water in the city. 

Ground Water Overdraft Problems. Agriculture, in areas with no surface water supply and good 
quality ground water, has overdrafted ground water basins where long-term replenishment is inadequate 
to maintain the water table, inducing subsurface flow from adjacent districts. Such an area exists along 
the valley trough in Fresno County and affects adjacent districts. Other overdraft areas are in the 
subbasin around Coalinga and in Westlands Water District, where subsidence occurs during droughts. 
Overdraft also occurs in Kern County. 

Subsidence has stabilized in western Fresno County and southern Kern County except during 
droughts. No data has been available for Tulare County since 1970. Canals and wells have required 
repair because of the effects of subsidence. 

Reliability of Supplies in Foothill and Mountain Communities. In foothill and mountain areas, 
some urban water needs are met by ground water. However, the ground water is found in thin layers of 
alluvial sediments and in underlying hard rock. Recharge to these underground reservoirs is very slow 
and during the recent drought, some foothill communities relied on imported surface water to supplement 
their supplies. 

Orange Cove is a typical foothill community that relies on imported water delivered through the 
Friant-Kem Canal as its most economical alternative to limited ground water supplies, especially during 
drought periods. Ground water in the foothills can be scarce and expensive to extract. During severe 
drought conditions in 1990, Orange Cove allowed people to use only 125 gpcd. A water transfer enabled 
the city to relax this standard during 1991 . Small foothill towns like Orange Cove will need greater 
priority to water during droughts to prevent future severe rationing. 

Water supply is often more limited in mountain communities than in valley or foothill cities in the 
region. Wofford Heights in eastern Kern County is a typical mountain community. Although Lake 
Isabella is nearby, the Arden Water Company would have to install almost 40 miles of pipeline to provide 
service and it can't afford the connection. During the recent drought, seven of Wofford Heights' 10 



219 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft Tulare L^^e Region 

existing wells went dry and had to be abandoned. Arden Water Company was able to drill 3 new wells, 
but it had to drill 450 to 500 feet. Previous wells had only been drilled to 300 feet. The sites for the new 
wells were carefully chosen to intersect two or more pockets of water, and Arden built new above-ground 
storage tanks to provide more dependable deliveries during droughts. 

Reliability of Supplies for Wildlife. Many of the region's environmental needs, including 
maintenance of the Mendota Wildlife Area, the Kern National Wildlife Refuge, and various duck clubs 
and wetlands, require firm water supplies that are now unavailable. The CVP water supplied to the 
Mendota area and the surplus water supplied to the Kern Refuge are usually the only water available. 
The duck clubs and wetlands have relied partly on tail water from upstream sources. 



•I 



Local Issues 

Drinking Water in Fresno. As a result of continued urban growth and stricter federal drinking water 
standards, more than 40 wells have been closed in the region. As mentioned earlier, these wells have a 
high level of DBCP or other contaminants, including trichloroethylene. Because of these well closings 
and future strict EPA requirements that the water be tested for a wide variety of chemical contaminants, 
the City of Fresno could have problems meeting its future urban water demand. 

In addition, during past years, Fresno did not have to chlorinate its municipal supply because of its 
high quality ground water in storage under the city. With recent EPA standards for coliform and other 
bacteria levels, Fresno has begun to chlorinate the municipal water supply at the wellheads. Although the 
city expects no problems with trihalomethanes, a byproduct of chlorination often found in chlorinated 
surface water, there have been some complaints about the taste and smell of the chlorinated water. As 
urban development continues, Fresno may attempt to supplement its ground water supply with surface 
water from the Friant-Kem Canal and the Kings River, which could affect agriculture in dry years. 

Arroyo Pasajero. DWR is currently seeking solutions to flood problems threatening the California 
Aqueduct near the intersection with a natural drainage channel called Arroyo Pasajero. The aqueduct, 
completed in 1967, formed a barrier to arroyo water and sediment flow. By design, arroyo runoff was 
retained in a 1 ,900-acre ponding basin and periodically discharged into the aqueduct through four inlet 
gates. The runoff for the arroyo was found to be greater than anticipated. After a 1980 investigation 
determined that arroyo runoff was also raising asbestos levels in aqueduct water, concerns were voiced J^ 
over possible health risks associated with consuming water containing high levels of asbestos. DWR hi 
been studying methods of managing arroyo runoff without discharging it into the aqueduct. A 
non-structural method of routing arroyo discharge is being considered and environmental studies are 
underway. 



220 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft "nilare Lake Region 

Agricultural Drainage. On the western side of the valley, where ground water quality is marginal to 
unusable for agriculture, farmers use good quality surface water when it is available; this allows the 
aquifer to fill and causes drainage problems. The high water table is exacerbated by clay-rich soils that 
slow drainage in some areas. Poor quality ground water in the unconfined aquifer in Westlands Water 
District is increasing by about 1 10,000 acre-feet per year. In Kem County, west of the California 
Aqueduct, the few available wells also show rising water levels. This marginal to poor quality ground 
water has reached plant root zones in many areas along the western side and must be removed by drains 
if agriculture is to continue in these areas. 

Westside Ground Water Quality. Most naturally occurring, poor quality ground water is found along 
the region's western side. Total dissolved solids, sulfate, boron, chloride, and selenium limit the 
usefulness of ground water in this area. Several contaminants are present, including pesticides, 
petroleum products, and industrial solvents. One of the pesticides, dibromochloropropane (DBCP), is 
also found over large areas on the eastern side of the valley. Concentrations of DBCP (which the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency banned in 1 977) are declining but are still above acceptable limits in 
many areas. Rising levels of nitrates have been found in numerous wells in rural areas. Many of them 
contain nitrate levels above the maximum contaminant level for nitrates in drinking water. 

Water Balance 

Water balances were computed for each Planning Subarea in the Tulare Lake Region by comparing 
existing and future water demand projections with the projected availability of supply. The region total 
was computed as the sum of the individual subareas. This method does not reflect the severity of 
drought year shortages in some local areas which can be hidden when planning subareas are combined 
within the region. Thus, there could be substantial shortages in some areas during drought periods. 
Local and regional shortages could also be less severe than the shortage shown, depending on how 
supplies are allocated within the region, a particular water agency's ability to participate in water transfers 
or demand management programs (including land fallowing or emergency allocation programs), and the 
overall level of reliability deemed necessary to the sustained economic health of the region. Volume I, 
Chapter 1 1 presents a broader discussion of demand management options. 

Table TL-1 1 presents water demands for the 1990 level and for future water demands to 2020 and 
balances them with: (1) supplies from existing facilities and water management programs, and (2) future 
demand management and water supply management options. 

Regional net water demands for the 1990 level of development totaled 8.3 and 8.5 MAF for average 
and drought years respectively. Those demands are projected to decrease to 8.0 and 8.1 MAF, 



221 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft Tblare Lake Recion I 

respectively, by the year 2020, after accounting for a 20,000 AF reduction in urban water demand 
resulting from implementation of long-term conservation measures, a 90,000 AF reduction in 
agricultural demand resulting from additional long-term agricultural water conservation measures, a 
120,000 AF reduction due to land retirement on the west side of the region. 

Urban net water demand is expected to increase by about 100 percent by 2020, due to expected 
increases in population; while, agricultural net water demands is projected to decrease by about 10 
percent, primarily due to lands being taken out of production due to poor drainage conditions on the west 
side of the San Joaquin Valley. Environmental net water demands, under existing rules and regulations, 
will increase by 19,000 AF. However, there are several actions currently in progress, including 
implementation of the Central Valley Improvement Act, that have proposed increases in instream flow for 
fisheries that will affect the availability of supplies for urban and agricultural use. 

Average annual supplies, including about 340,000 AF overdraft, were generally adequate to meet 
average net water demands in 1990 for this region. However, during drought, present supplies are 
insufficient to meet present demands and, without additional water management programs, drought year 
annual shortages are expected to remain at nearly 510,000 AF. 

With planned Level I options, overall ground water use could be reduced by 330,000 and 175,000 AF 
during average and drought years, respectively. The net effect of improved surface water deliveries 
would be to reduce long-term ground water overdraft in this region. 

The remaining drought shortage of about 512,000 AF by 2020 requires both additional short-term 
drought management, water transfers and demand management programs, and other future long-term 
Level II options depending on the overall level of water service reliability deemed necessary, by local 
agencies, to sustain the economic health of the region. In the short-term, some areas of this region that 
rely on the Delta exports for all or a portion of their supplies face great uncertainty in terms of water 
supply reliability due to the uncertain outcome of a number of actions undertaken to protect aquatic 
species in the Delta. For example, in 1993, an above normal runoff year, environmental restrictions 
limited CVP deliveries to 50 percent of contracted supply for federal water service contractors from 
Tracy to Kettleman City. Because ground water is used to replace much of the shortfall in surface water 
supplies, limitations on Delta exports will exacerbate ground water overdraft in this region. 



222 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft 



Iblare Lake Region 



Table TL-11. Water Balance 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Demand/Supply 



1990 2020 

average drought average drought 



Net Demand 

Urban -with 1990 level of conservation 215 215 

-reductions due to long-term conservation measures (Level I) — — 

Agricultural 7,903 8,086 

-reductions due to long-term conservation measures (Level I) — — 

-land retirement in poor drainage areas of San Joaquin Valley (Level I) — — 

Environmental 31 31 

Other (1) 166 166 



474 


474 


-20 


-20 


,487 


7,646 


-90 


-90 


-88 


-88 


50 


50 


166 


166 



Ibtal Net Demand 



8,315 8,498 7,979 8,138 



Water Supplies w/Existing Facilities Under D-1485 for Delta Supplies 

Developed Supplies 

Surface Water 

Ground Water 

Ground Water Overdraft 
Subtotal 
Dedicated Natural Flow 



6,583 


3,438 


6,324 


3,216 


1,391 


4,209 


1,375 


4,129 


341 


341 


280 


280 


8,315 


7,988 


7,979 


7,625 














8,315 


7,988 


7,979 


7,625 



Total Water Supplies 



Demand/Supply Balance 



-510 



-0 -513 



Future Water Management Options Level I (2) 

Long-term Supply Augmentation 

Reclaimed (3) 

Local 

Central Valley Project 

State Water Project 
Subtotal - Water Management Options Level I 
Ground Water/Surface Water Use Reduction Resulting from Level I Programs 



48 





286 

334 

-334 








128 

176 

-175 




Remaining Demand/Supply Balance Requiring Short Term Drought Management BHHK -0 -512 

and/or Future Level 11 Options 

(1) Includes conveyance losses, recreation uses £und energy production. 

(2) Protection of fish and wildlife and a long-term solution to complex Delta problems will determine the feasibility of several water 
supply augmentation proposals and their water supply benefits. 

(3) Because of existing reuse within this region, reclaimed water does not add supply to the region. 



223 



Bulletin 160-93. Administrative Draft T^l^re Lake Region 



224 



ift of The California Water Plan Update 



Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 



NORTH LAHONTAN REGION 




Emerald Bay on Lake Tahoe. 



f' 



Ulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Lahontan Region 

j NORTH LAHONTAN REGION 

The eastern drainages of the Cascade Range and the eastern Sierra Nevada, north of the Mono Lake 
, ainage, make up the North Lahontan Region. The region forms part of the western fringe of the Great 
asin, a large landlocked drainage that includes most of Nevada and northern Utah, and stretches about 
() miles from the Oregon border to the southern boundary of the Walker River drainage in Mono 
unty. At its widest part, the region measures about 60 miles across; it narrows to scarcely 5 miles in 
crvsL County. Its land area represents less than 4 percent of the State's total land area. The topography 
generally mountainous and rugged with large desert valleys between mountain ranges in the north and 
irrow alpine valleys in the south. (See Appendix C for maps of the planning subareas and land 
A nership in the region.) 

The region comprises two planning subareas: the northern most is the Lassen Group PSA, which 
eludes the Modoc and Lassen county portions of the region, plus a small comer of northeastern Sierra 
ounty that drains to Honey Lake. The southern PSA is the Alpine Group from mid-Sierra county to 
ar Mono Lake, which includes Lake Tahoe and the Truckee, Carson, and Walker River drainages. The 
iountain crests forming the western boundary of the region range up to elevation 11,000 feet. The 
mited amount of valley land in the Alpine PSA is primarily pasture land above elevation 5,000 feet 
ong the Carson and Walker Rivers. 

Annual precipitation is as much as 70 inches at the crest of the Sierra Nevada, closest to Lake Tahoe 
id as little as 4 inches at the Nevada boundary in Surprise Valley and in the Honey Lake Basin. The 
jgion's streams flow either to Nevada or to intermittent lakes in California. Natural runoff of the 
reams and rivers averages around 1.8 million acre-feet per year of which about three-quarters comes 
cm the region's southern portion. 

opulation 

Almost 65 percent of the 78,000 residents in the North Lahontan Region live in the Truckee-Tahoe 

asin, where the largest community is the City of South Lake Tahoe with a 1990 population of 21,600. 
he main population center of the Lassen subarea is Susanville, the county seat of Lassen County, with 
,279 residents. Also located in the region are Bridgeport, the county seat of Mono County, and 
larkleeville, the county seat of Alpine County, which has a total county population of 1,100. Population 
J quite sparse between these towns, consisting of ranches and tourist and service centers primarily along 

Region Characteristics 
Average Annual Precipitation: 32 inches Average Annual Runoff: 1 ,842,000 acre-feet 
Land Area: 3,890 square miles Population: 78,000 



225 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Lahontan Region 

Highway 395. Only about one-fourth of one percent of California's people live in the region. Table 
NL-1 shows population projections to 2020 for the North Lahontan Region. 



Table NL-1. Population Projections 
(thousands) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 


1 assen Group 
Alpine Group 


25 
53 


32 
63 


36 
71 


39 

79 


Total 


78 


95 


107 


118 



Land Use 

Much of the North Lahontan Region is national forest land. The major privately owned lands are in 

the valley areas of Modoc and Lassen counties. Relatively small portions of the Truckee-Tahoe area and 
the Carson and Walker river basins are in private ownership, but those small areas are of considerable 
economic significance. 

Cattle raising is the principal agricultural activity in the region, although the acreage of irrigated land 
is relatively small (less than 4 percent of the region's land area). Pasture and alfalfa are the dominant 
irrigated crops. About 70 percent of the irrigated land is in Modoc and Lassen counties, and most of the 
remainder is in the Carson and Walker river valleys in Alpine and Mono counties. 

Tourism and recreation are the principal economic activities in the Truckee-Tahoe area and the 
surrounding mountains. On a typical summer day, the number of recreationists within the Tahoe Basin 
may equal the number of full-time residents. A similar but smaller peak in the number of recreationists 
visiting the basin occurs during the winter sports season. Figure NL-1 shows land use, along with 
imports, exports, and water supplies for the North Lahontan Region. 



I 



226 



Ijlletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Lahontan Region 



PRESENT WATER 8UPPUE8 

(1,000 AF/Yr.) 



Moon Lake 

Ditch 

11 



WATER SUPPLY 
GROUND WATER OVERDRAFT 
TOTAL 



Legend 
UrtMn Land 
Inigated Land 



LASSEN GROUP 




LOCAL SURFACE WATER DEVEPLOMBTT 
GROUND WATER PERENNIAL YIELD 
IIMPORTS BY LOCAL 
WATER RECLAMATION 



120 

a 




Region Water Transfer 
(xjaaar* <* Aa«-FMt pw ymi) 



Figure NL-1. North Lahontan Region 
Land Use, Imports, Exports, and Water Supplies 



227 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Lahontan Region 



Water Supply 

About 74 percent of the region's 1990 level water supply comes from surface sources. Ground water 
supply amounts to 23 percent. Throughout most of the North Lahontan Region, water development has 
been carried out on a modest scale by local interests, with many projects built in the late 1800s. In the 
northern portion of the region, these developments include numerous small reservoirs which retain winter 
runoff for summer irrigation. Among the more notable is the Moon Lake project . It imports about 
3,000 acre-feet per year from the South Fork Pit River drainage for irrigation in the Madeline Plains area. 
The Lassen Irrigation District developed three small reservoirs in the Susan River drainage beginning in 
1891 — McCoy Flat reservoir. Hog Flat reservoir, and Lake Leavitt. Figure NL-2 shows the region's 
1990 level sources of supply. 



Figure NL-2. North Lahontan Region 

Water Supply Sources (Average Conditions) 

1990 Level 



Local Surface Water 

74% 




Imports 



228 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Lahontan Region 

Supply with Existing Facilities 

One of the most cost-effective storage structures ever built is a small dam at the outlet of Lake 
Tahoe. This 14-foot-high dam, constructed in the 1870s, controls the upper 6.1 feet of the lake and 
creates up to 732,000 AF of storage capacity. The Lake Tahoe Dam is operated by the Truckee-Carson 
Irrigation District and controlled by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation under an easement from Sierra 
Pacific Power Company. Its operations are supervised by the federal watermaster under the Orr Ditch 
Decree. Similar outlet dams constructed on natural lakes during the 1930s increased storage at 
Independence Lake by 18,000 AF and at Donner Lake by 10,000 AF. These dams are operated by Sierra 
Pacific Power Company. Table NL-2 lists major reservoirs in the region. 

Federal water storage projects in the region include Stampede Reservoir, Boca Reservoir , and 
Prosser Creek Reservoir. These three USBR reservoirs were constructed on tributaries of the Truckee 
River, primarily to provide water supply for service areas in Nevada, downstream flood protection, and 
local recreation. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers completed the 20,000 AF Martis Creek Dam in 
1971; this single-purpose structure provides flood protection for the Reno-Sparks area. Operations 
criteria for these projects are changing, mostly due to water requirements of the cui-ui and Lahontan 
cutthroat trout. The cui-ui is classified as endangered and the Lahontan cutthroat as threatened under 
the federal Endangered Species Act. 

Table NL-2. Major Reservoirs 

Reservoir Name River Capacity (1 ,000 AF) Owner 

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 



Stampede 


Little Truckee 


227 


Boca 


Little Truckee 


41 


Prosser Creek 


Prosser Creek 


30 


Lake Tahoe 


Truckee 


732 


Bridgeport 


E. Walker 


43 


Martis Creek Dam 


Martis Creek 


20 



Walker River Irrigation District 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 



An average of about 2,000 AF per year is exported from the Tahoe Basin to the South Fork American 
River in conjunction with a power development that began in 1876. Another 7,000 AF is diverted from 
the Little Truckee River for irrigation use in Sierra Valley (Feather River Basin of Sacramento River 
Region). Much of the supply from the Truckee, Carson, and Walker rivers is reserved for use by Nevada 
interests under various water rights settlements and agreements. 

Ground water supplies meet many of the municipal and industrial water needs throughout the 
northem portion of the region. In the North Lahontan portions of Lassen and Modoc counties, nearly 
120,000 AF is pumped annually. The City of Susanville derives its municipal supplies from Cady and 



229 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Lahontan Region 

Bagwell Springs and from ground water. Municipal water supply in the Lake Tahoe basin comes from a 
combination of surface and ground water. Some systems divert directly from the lake, some from 
tributary streams or springs, and some use wells. Municipal supplies in the Tnickee River Basin 
downstream of Lake Tahoe are almost entirely from ground water; the largest purveyor is the 
Truckee-Donner Public Utility District. 

Both alluvial basins and hard rock areas in the region contain ground water. The major basins in the 
north include Long, Honey Lake, Secret, Willow Creek, and Surprise Valleys and the Madeline Plains. 
Cross basin ground water flow is limited by geologic faults between basins. Well yields are greatest in 
alluvial sand and gravel and from buried basalt flows. Some wells yield greater than 3,000 gallons per 
minute. 

Yields from hard rock wells are usually low but are generally sufficient for domestic uses. Ground 
water quality in the north ranges from excellent to poor. Wells that obtain their supply from lake deposits 
can have high levels of boron, arsenic, and fluoride and high adjusted sodium absorption ratio. Some 
domestic wells in the Standish area of Honey Lake Valley have iirsenic levels above safe drinking water 
standards. The total ground water in storage within the Lassen Subarea is estimated to be about 5 MAP. 

The major ground water basins in the Alpine Group PSA include the Bridgeport, Antelope, Carson, 
and Martis valleys, as well as the Tahoe Basin. Ground water recharge occurs primarily from infiltration 
of snow melt and precipitation while discharge from the basins occurs mainly from streams flowing east 
into Nevada. The estimated total ground water pumping from these basins is 12,300 AF annually. There 
is some agricultural ground water pumping in Antelope Valley, however most occurs on the Nevada side 
of the basin. Ground water pumping in the hard rock area occurs at scattered locations throughout the 
subarea but is most heavily relied on in the area east of Martis Valley. Yields from these hard rock wells 
are usually low but sufficient to provide domestic or livestock supplies. Although pumping and ground 
water level information within the subarea is limited, there are no reported instances of basin overdraft so 
current pumping is probably within the perennial yield. The total ground water in storage is estimated at 
1 .8 MAP, and the water quality in the Alpine Group PSA is usually good. 

Some municipal wells in the Lake Tahoe Basin produce water high in uranium, radon^jor^^ 
radionuclides. Elevated levels of uranium or radon, or both, may occur in ground water in other areas of 
the PSA given the granitic rocks and sediments from which ground water is produced. Some test wells 
on the west side of the Lake Tahoe Basin produce poor quality water that contains high concentrations of 
arsenic. Elevated levels of arsenic and other constituents have been found in ground water near areas of 
geothermal activity along the front of the Sierra Nevada. High levels of boron and fluoride have been 
/reported in ground water in parts of the Antelope Valley. 



230 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Lahontan Region 



Table NL-3 shows water supplies with existing facilities and water management programs. 

Table NL-3. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities and Programs 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Supply 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Surface 


























Local 


383 




338 


378 




340 


371 




340 


378 




344 


Local imports 


3 




3 


3 




3 


3 




3 


3 




3 


Colorado River 


































CVP 


































Other federal 























B 










SWP 


































Ground water 


120 




146 


128 




154 


138 




165 


147 


If 


173 


Overdraft 





























1m' 





Reclaimed 


8 




8. 


8 




8. 


8. 




8. 


8. 




8 


Dedicated natural flow 


































Total 


514 


Misf 


495 


517 




505 


520 




516 


536 




528 



Supply with Additional Facilities and Water Management Programs 

Future water management options are presented in two levels to better reflect the status of 
investigations required to implement them. 

O Level I options are those that have undergone extensive investigation and environmental analyses 
and are judged to have a high likelihood of being implemented by 2020. 

O Level II options are those that could fill the remaining gap between water supply and demand. 
These options require more investigation and alternative analyses. 

In the North Lahontan Region water supplies are not expected to change to year 2020. Irrigated 
agriculture is already constrained by economically available water supplies, with a small amount of 
agricultural expansion expected in areas that can support minor additional ground water development. 
Similarly, the modest needs for additional municipal and industrial supplies can be met by minor 
expansion of present surface systems or by increased use of ground water. No significant additional 
Level I or Level 11 surface water development in the region is anticipated. 

Table NL^ shows water supplies with additional Level I water management programs. Since there 
no planned Level I water management programs, the table is identical to Table NL-3. 

About 5,000 AF of reclaimed waste water is exported out of the Tahoe Basin by South Tahoe Public 
dlity District for agricultural use in the Carson River watershed. Tnickee Tahoe Sanitation Agency 



231 



meet changing or higher priority needs within the basins. In California, this has meant acquisit 
some agricultural land and water rights for environmental needs throughout the basin and for m 
needs downstream in Nevada. 

In the Walker River basin, agricultural supplies may be supplemented by increasing use of 
water and conjunctive use in areas such as Antelope Valley. Water conservation for agricultural 
(that is, ditch lining and soil moisture controlled irrigation scheduling) may become increasing! 
important as more water rights are sold or otherwise transferred to urban and environmental use 



232 




Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Lahontan Region 



Water Use 

The 1990 level annual net water use within the North Lahontan Region is about 514,000 AF per year, 
of which about 90 percent is for irrigated agriculture. Most of the 37,000 AF of municipal and industrial 
use takes place in the Susanville and Tahoe-Truckee areas. Despite the importance of recreation in the 
region's economy, the water needs of recreation are a minor component of total water use. The principal 
wildlife water needs are those of the State's Honey Lake and Willow Creek wildlife areas in southern 
I I Lassen County, and instream flows. 

The primary users of ground water in the Alpine subarea are the municipalities in the Lake Tahoe 
Basin and Martis Valley, and to a lesser extent in Bridgeport Valley. Figure NL-3 shows net water 
demand for the 1990 level of development. 



Figure NL-3. North Lahontan Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990 Level 




Environmental 

(Wetlands) 

3% 



I 



233 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Lahontan Region 



Urban Water Use 

Population projections indicate that by 2020, the region's population will increase by 51 percent over 
1990 levels. Most people will still be located in the Alpine subarea. Average daily per-capita water use is 
about 421 gallons. In the two planning subareas, use ranges from 607 gallons per capita daily in the Lassen 
Group to 337 gpcd in the Alpine Group. The significantly larger per-capita use in the northern PSA is due 
to high-water-use industry (mostly energy production — cogeneration and geothermal) , which accounts 
for about half of the urban water use in this area. Per capita use values for areas such as the Tahoe Basin are 
distorted as well because they are based on permanent population while a substantial share of the water use 
is by tourists and temporary residents. Figure NL-^ shows the 1990 level applied urban water demands by 
sector. 



Figure NL-4. North Lahontan Region 
Applied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990 Level 




234 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Lahontan Region 



Table NL-5 shows applied water and net urban water demand through 2020. Urban water use is not 
expected to increase proportionately with population due to water saving techniques employed with new 
construction and other water conservation measures. 

Table NL-5. Urban Water Demand 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Lassen 


























Applied water demand 


17 




17 


19 




19 


20 




20 


21 




21 


Net water demand 


17 




17 


19 




19 


20 




20 


21 




21 


Depletion 


7 




7 


8 




8 


9 




9 


9 




9 


Alpine 


























Applied water demand 


20 




21 


23 




24 


26 




27 


29 




30 


Net water demand 


20 




21 


23 




24 


26 




27 


29 




30 i 


Depletion 


7 




8 


9 




9 


10 




10 


12 




12 


Total 


























Applied water demand 


37 




38 


42 




43 


46 




47 


50 




51 


Net water demand 


37 




38 


42 




43 


46 




47 


50 




51 


Depletion 


14 




15 


17 




17 


19 




19 


21 




21 



The recent drought forced Susanville to pump more ground water to supplement reduced surface water 
supplies. The State Department of Corrections is planning to expand the Susanville Correctional Center to 
double its capacity from 4,000 to a maximum of 8,000 inmates. As a result, the area's water demand is 
expected to increase. The city is requiring the developer of one large subdivision to produce a water supply 
for its project that is independent of existing city sources. Present plans are to meet this demand with 
ground water supplies. 

Agricultural Water Use 

Total irrigated land within the North Lahontan Region in 1990 was 161,000 acres, an increase of about 

seven percent since 1980. Table NL-6 shows irrigated crop acreage projections for the region. The 
number of irrigated acres in the region is expected to increase slightly over the next three decades. Table 
NL-7 shows 1990 crop acreages and evapotranspiration of applied water. Figure NL-5 shows 1990 crop 
acreages, evapotranspiration, and applied water for major crops. 



235 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Lahontan Region 



Table NL-6. Irrigated Crop Acreage 

(thousands of acres) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 




Lassen Group 
Alpine Group 


120 
41 


122 
41 


125 
41 


128 
41 


T 


Total 


161 


163 


166 


169 





Table NL- 


7. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop19 


Irrigated Crop 


Total 

Acres 

(1,000) 


Total ETAW 
(1,000AF) 


Irrigated Crop 


Total 

Acres 

(1,000) 


Total ETAW 
(1,000AF) 


Grain 
Rice 


6 10 
1 2 


Pasture 110 233 
Other truck 1 2 


Alfalfa 


43 


103 


Total 161 350 



Table NL-8 summarizes 1990 and projected agricultural water demand in the region. The applied 
water values were derived by applying unit water use factors to the irrigated acreages in the region. 
Applied water amounts vary according to crop, soil type, and cultural practices. During drought years, 
there is an increased need for additional irrigation to replace water normally supplied by rainfall and to 
meet higher than normal evapotranspiration demands. 



-^ 



Table NL-8. Agricultural Water Demand 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Lassen 


























Applied water demand 


344 




380 


352 




389 


362 




400 


371 




409 


Net water demand 


294 




316 


299 




322 


306 




329 


316 




340 


Depletion 


270 




301 


277 




308 


285 




317 


291 




324 


Alpine 


























Applied water demand 


178 




207 


171 




200 


163 




191 


165 




193 


Net water demand 


166 




195 


159 




188 


151 




179 


153 




181 


Depletion 


108 




125 


108 




125 


108 




125 


108 




125 


Total 


























Applied water demand 


522 




587 


523 




589 


525 




591 


536 




602 


Net water demand 


460 




511 


458 




510 


457 




508 


469 




521 


Depletion 


378 




426 


385 




433 


393 




442 


399 




449 



236 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Lahontan Region 



120 



Acres (X 1 ,000) 



100 



Acre-Feet (X 1 ,000) 




Grain Alfalfa Pasture 

■Acreage MET fK\N ■Applied Water 



Figure NL-5. North Lahontan Region 
1990 Acreage, ETAW, and Applied Water for Major Crops 



360 



300 



240 



180 



120 



60 







237 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Lahontan Region 

Most of the area irrigated by surface water in the region has hmited water storage facilities, so it is 
dependent on snow melt and spring and summer rainfall. Portions of the region that are irrigated by ground 
water, or a combination of ground and surface water, have a more stable water supply. Flood irrigation of 
pasture is expected to be shifted almost entirely to sprinkler irrigation in the near future. Irrigation 
efficiencies will increase slightly because of operating costs, water shortages, and improved irrigation 
practices. 

Madeline Plains has shown a rapid growth in irrigated alfalfa acreage. During the past eight years, 
alfalfa acreage has increased from 300 to over 10,000 acres. Wild rice is a new crop to the area, and there 
were 500 acres of it planted in 1 990. Much of the increase in irrigation can be attributed to an innovative 
method of collecting winter runoff in a large sump in a closed basin, then using it, in conjunction with 
ground water, for irrigation. 

Environmental Water Use 

The principal environmental water use in the region is for wetlands near Honey Lake. The Honey Lake 

Wildlife Area in southern Lassen County consists of the 4,271 -acre Dakin Unit and the 3,569-acre 
Fleming Unit. The two units provide important habitat for several threatened or endangered species, 
including the bald eagle, sandhill crane, bank swallow, and peregrine falcon. These wildlife areas have 
winter storage rights from the Susan River from November 1 until the last day of February. The HLWA 
also operates eight wells, each producing between 1,260 and 2,100 gallons per minute. In an average year, 
the HLWA floods 3,000 acres by March 1 for waterfowl brood habitat. 

In 1989, the California Department of Fish and Game purchased the 2,714-acre Willow Creek Wildlife 
Area in Lassen County to preserve existing wetlands and increase the potential for waterfowl production 
and migration habitat. About 2,000 acres are wetland and riparian habitats. The endangered bald eagle and 
sandhill crane inhabit this area. In addition to the Honey Lake and Willow Creek Wildlife Areas, 
Department of Fish and Game operates the Doyle Wildlife Area, also located in the Honey Lake Basin. 
This wildlife area is preserved as dryland winter range for deer and requires less water than the Honey Lake 
or Willow Creek areas. Table NL-9 summarizes projected wetlands water needs for the region. 



238 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Lahontan Region 



Table NL-9. Wetlands Water Needs 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Wetlands 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Honey Lake 




















Applied water 


14 


14 


14 




14 


14 




14 


14 14 


Net water 


14 


14 


14 




14 


14 




14 


14 14 


Depletion 


14 


14 


14 




14 


14 




14 


14 14 


Willow Creek 


















^^^ 


Applied water 


3 


3 


3 




3 


3 




3 


3 3 


Net water 


3 


3 


3 




3 


3 




3 


3 3 


Depletion 


3 


3 


3 




3 


3 




3 


3 3 


Total 


1 
















^Hi 


Applied water 


17 


17 


17 




17 


17 




17 


17 17 


Net water 


17 


17 


17 




17 


17 




17 


17 , 17 


Depletion 


17 


17 


17 




17 


17 




17 


17 17 



LI 



DFG is concerned about maintaining instream flows and reservoir levels in the California portions of 
the Carson and Walker river basins. Portions of these rivers are protected by the California Wild and 
Scenic Rivers Act. In conjunction with American Land Conservancy, a private land trust organization, 
DFG has been acquiring lands and water rights at Heenan Lake in the upper watershed of the East Fork 
Carson River. This small reservoir, formerly used to supply irrigation water for lands in Nevada, is now 
being used by DFG to raise Lahontan cutthroat trout to stock in other locations throughout the Sierras. 
Parts of the upper Carson River are managed by DFG as wild trout waters, where stocking of hatchery 
fish is not allowed. Recreational trout fishing is a popular activity on both the upper Carson and Walker 
Rivers. 

Bridgeport Reservoir on the East Walker River near the California-Nevada border was the site of a 
recent significant State Water Resources Control Board action on water requirements for the trout fishery. 
This reservoir supplies water to agricultural lands in Nevada. The operation of the reservoir during the 
recent drought caused a fishery resource to decline in the river downstream. As part of ensuing legal 
actions, instream flow releases and other conditions were imposed on reservoir operation. The Board's 
modifications to the permits for Bridgeport Reservoir are being challenged in litigation in the U.S. 
District Court in Nevada. 

ler Water Use 

By far, the heaviest concentration of recreation use in the North Lahontan Region occurs within the 
ce Tahoe Basin. Recreation development in other areas of the region is limited due to the relatively low 



239 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Lahontan Region 

population density and their remoteness. Roughly half of the visitors to this region come from the San 
Francisco metropolitan area, about 30 percent from the Los Angeles metropolitan area, and 15 percent from 
out-of-state. 

Public recreation areas include 3 national forest districts, 12 Bureau of Land Management recreation 
complexes, 7 State parks, and 6 county parks. There are more than 30 major private recreation areas, which 
include ski resorts, golf courses, resorts, and marinas. 

Several natural waterways in the region provide access for fishing, swimming, boating, hiking, and 
picnicking. River touring, a popular sport in California, is a common activity in the Truckee, Carson, East 
Fork Carson, West Walker, and East Walker rivers. Figure NL-6 shows water recreation areas in the 
region. 



240 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Lahontan Region 



OREGON 



Leg end 
A Water Recreation Area 
• Hydroelectric Power Plant 
■••• State Wild and Scenic River 

WATER RECREATION AREAS 

1. Donner Memorial S.P. 

2. Kings Beach S.RA 

3. Tahoe S.RA 

4. Sugar Pine Point S.P. 

5. D.L Bliss S.P. 

6. Emerald Bay S.P. 

7. GrovM- Hot Springs S.P. 




Figure NL-6. North Lahontan Region 
Water Recreation Areas 



241 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Lahontan Region 



Current visitor attendance to the region is estimated at 12 million visitor days annually. Total 
consumptive water use for recreation in the region is small, estimated at 500 to 2,000 acre-feet per year. 
Table NL-1 shows the total water demands for this region. 

Table NL-10. Total Water Demands 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Category of Use 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Urban 


















H 


Applied water 


37 




38 


42 


43 


46 


47 


50 


--^' 51 


Net water 


37 




38 


42 


43 


46 


47 


50 


51 


Depletion 


14 




15 


17 


17 


19 


19 


21 


21 


Agricultural 




















Applied water 


522 




587 


523 


589 


525 


591 


536 


602 


Net water 


460 




511 


458 


510 


457 


508 


469 


521 


Depletion 


378 




426 


385 


433 


393 


442 


399 


449 


Environmental 




















Applied water 


17 




17 


17 


17 


17 


17 


17 


17 


Net water 


17 




17 


17 


17 


17 


17 


17 


17 


Depletion 


17 




17 


17 


17 


17 


17 


17 


17 


Other (1) 




















Applied water 




























Net water 




























Depletion 




























Total 




















Applied water 


576 




642 


582 


649 


588 


655 


603 


670 


Net water 


514 




566 


517 


570 


520 


572 


536 


589 


Depletion 


409 




458 


419 


467 


428 


478 


437 


488 


(1) includes conveyance losses, 


recreational uses 


>, and 1 


energy production 











Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 

The principal water-related issues in the North Lahontan Region center around interstate water 
allocations, population growth, limitations of existing water supply systems, protection of water quality, 
and management of ground water. 

Legislation and Litigation 

Interstate River Issues. Years of disputes over the waters of the Truckee and Carson rivers finally 

led to congressional enactment of the Truckee-Carson-Pyramid Lake Water Rights Settlement Act in 

1990. The act makes an interstate allocation of the waters between California and Nevada, provides for 

the settlement of certain Native American water rights claims, and provides for water supplies for 



242 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Lahontan Region 



l» 



specified environmental purposes in Nevada. The act allocates to California: 23,000 AF annually in the 
Lake Tahoe Basin; 32,000 AF annually in the Truckee River Basin below Lake Tahoe; and water 
corresponding to existing water uses in the Carson River Basin. Provisions of the Settlement Act, 
including the interstate water allocations, will not take effect until several conditions are met, including 
negotiation of the Truckee River Operating Agreement required in the act. 

DWR and SWRCB staff have represented California interests in negotiating the Truckee River 
Operating Agreement. DWR is a lead agency with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service in developing the Environmental Impact Report/Statement for the agreement. A 
major purpose of the TROA is to establish detailed river operations procedures to meet the goals laid out 
in the act. It may also address some aspects of implementing California's water allocation. Issues of 
concern to California include implementation of surface and ground water allocations, including the 
amount of water charged for snow-making at ski resorts and allocations for operation of Truckee River 
storage facilities to protect lake and instream beneficial uses. 

j Present-day operatiqns of the Truckee, Carson, and Walker Rivers are governed in large part by 
i existing federal court water right decrees administered by court-appointed watermasters. The interstate 

nature of the rivers, combined with the long history of disputes over water rights, has created a complex 
! system of river management criteria. On the Carson River for example, it took the federal court 55 years 

to sort out the water rights and issue the Alpine Decree, which governs operation of the river today. 

Regional Issues 

Population Growth. Growth has long been a major issue in the Tahoe Basin and strict controls have 
been adopted by local agencies under the lead of the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency. These controls 
have been very effective. For example, the City of South Lake Tahoe grew by only 4 percent in the 
1980s. 

Population of the Lassen County portion of the region increased by nearly 30 percent over the past 
decade. A major contributor to this growth was the construction of the California Correctional Center — 
Susanville, which houses about 4,000 prisoners and employs a staff of about 1 ,000. This growth and the 
1987-92 drought have revealed the limits of local surface water supplies. There is increasing interest in 
assuring that water will be available to meet urban needs without reducing agricultural supplies or 
overdrafting ground water. State proposals to double the capacity of the correctional facility led to 
intense local debate in 1991 . One of the principal issues was the growth-inducing impact of the proposal 
and the resulting increased pressure on existing water supplies. The question was eventually put on the 
ballot, and a substantial majority of the voters approved the expansion. Recent water quality issues have 
arisen regarding the municipal supply for the City of Susanville (potential contamination of spring 



243 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Lahontan Region ' 

supplies by urban development located upslope) and the nearby resort subdivision at Eagle Lake, where 
there is apparent contamination from septic tank discharge. i 

The Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board has been concerned about ground water 
contamination and eutrophication at Eagle Lake since 1982. Numerous studies, including one completed j 
by DWR in October 1990, have shown widespread bacterial contamination in domestic wells in this area. 
Blooms of noxious species of algae appear to be increasing in frequency in the lake in response to 
nutrient enrichment, suspected to result from increased residential development in the basin. The 
Regional Board issued Cease and Desist Orders in 1991 requiring subdivision residents to abandon use of 
septic tanks. The State Water Resources Control Board was petitioned by residents of Spalding Tract and 
Stones-Bengard subdivisions for relief from these orders, and the Board agreed to allow formation of a 
septic system maintenance district in lieu of a regional waste water collection system. The Regional 
Board will be establishing guidelines for formation of this district and monitoring requirements to ensure 
that ground water contamination does not continue. 

Further development, west of Susanville, has been constrained by concerns expressed by the City of 
Susanville and the Regional Board over septic tank leachfield effluent contaminating ground water. 
Local interests assume ground water in the area contributes to flows at Cady Springs, a major source of 
drinking water for Susanville, and studies are under way. ^ 

Reno Water Supplies. Although not strictly a California issue, local interests in the northern part of 
the region have been apprehensive about the Reno area's aggressive quest for additional water supplies. 
In the late 1980s, the Silver State Plan triggered concerns as far north as Modoc County (over 150 miles 
north of Reno). The plan envisioned constructing a pipeline north nearly to the Oregon border to tap 
ground water basins, some of which extend across the California-Nevada line. More recently, the 
proposed Truckee Meadows Project generated concerns about depletion of ground water supplies (see 
below). 

Ground water management is closely related to the issue of water supply for the Reno area. Concern 
over protecting local ground water resources has led to establishment of formal ground water 
management mechanisms in the Honey Lake and Long Valley basins in Lassen and Sierra counties. 
Similar arrangements are being considered in Surprise Valley and the pending interstate allocation 
establishes limits on ground water withdrawals in the Lake Tahoe and Truckee River basins. At present, 
neither the Honey Lake nor Long Valley ground water management districts is active, but either can be 
activated whenever a need is perceived. 

Water Quality. There is a potential for future ground water pollution in those areas where 
single-family septic systems have been installed in high density subdivisions, especially in the hard rock 



244 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Lahontan Region 

areas. Water quality has also become a greater issue for many surface water systems around Lake Tahoe. 
The recent drought dropped lake levels to all-time lows and left some system intakes in shallow water. 
In addition, the 1986 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act are forcing many of the smaller private 
systems to consolidate or change ownership since they are unable to afford the new monitoring and 
treatment requirements of the amended act. South Tahoe Public Utility District, the largest water 
purveyor in the basin, is also experiencing some difficulty in planning to meet these requirements. 

Truckee Meadows Ground Water Transfer Project. In the mid-1980s, a plan for the Truckee 
I Meadows Project was developed to export ground water from Nevada's portion of Honey Lake Valley 
' ground water basin to the Reno area. Applications were filed with the Nevada State Engineer to transfer 
about 23,000 acre-feet per year. Concerns about the transfers and possible side effects resulted in a 1987 
agreement among DWR, the State of Nevada, and the U.S. Geological Survey to jointly determine the 
ground water flow system in eastern Honey Lake Valley. When the USGS study was completed, the 
Nevada State Engineer opened hearings in the summer of 1990 regarding applications to transfer ground 
water from Honey Lake Valley to the Reno area. The Nevada State Engineer ruled that only about 13,000 
acre-feet could be transferred from the basin. Currently, the Truckee Meadows Project developers are 
completing an Environmental Impact Statement for the 80-mile pipeline to transfer ground water. 
Lassen County and the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe have challenged the State Engineer's decision in a 
Nevada Court. 

Long Valley Ground Water Transfers. In the late 1980s, there was a proposal to export about 3,000 
acre-feet per year from Long Valley to the Reno area. The project developers were asked to submit an 
application to the Long Valley Ground Water Management District for a permit to export ground water 
from the district. To date, the project proponents have not filed an application. 

Water Balance 

Water balances were computed for each Planning Subarea in the North Lahontan Region by 
comparing existing and future water demand projections with the projected availability of supply. The 
region total was computed as the sum of the individual subareas. This method does not reflect the 
severity of drought year shortages in some local areas, which can be hidden when planning subareas are 
combined within the region. Thus, there could be substantial shortages in some areas during drought 
periods. Local and regional shortages could also be less severe than the shortage shown, depending on 
how supplies are allocated within the region, a particular water agency's ability to participate in water 
transfers or demand management programs (including land fallowing or emergency allocation programs), 
and the overall level of reliability deemed necessary to the sustained economic health of the region. 
Volume I, Chapter 1 1 presents a broader discussion of demand management options. 



245 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Lahontan Region 

Table NL-1 1 presents water demands for the 1990 level and for future water demands to 2020 and 
balances them with: (1) supplies from existing facilities and water management programs, and (2) future 
demand management and water supply management options. 

Regional net water demands for the 1990 level of development totaled 0.51 and 0.57 MAF for 
average and drought years respectively. Those demands are projected to increase to 0.54 and 0.59 MAF, 
respectively, by the year 2020. Urban net water demand is projected to increase by about 13,000 AF, 
primarily due to expected increases in population, while agricultural net water demand remains 
essentially level. Environmental net water demands are also expected to remain level out to 2020. 

Average annual supplies are generally adequate to meet average net water demands in this region out 
to the year 2020. However, during drought, present supplies are insufficient to meet present demands of 
irrigated agricultural lands, and, without additional water management programs, annual drought year 
shortages are expected to continue to be about 62,000 AF. 

This drought year shortage of about 61,000 AF was reflected in reduced surface water supplies 
available for irrigation primarily in Alpine, Mono, Lassen, and Modoc counties during the recent 
drought. There are no major water management programs planned for this region. Plans for augmenting 
supplies for the Reno-Sparks area, such as ground water import from California, could affect future 
supplies in the region. Future water management programs depend on economic viability of new water 
management programs and the overall level of water service reliability deemed necessary by local 
agencies to sustain the economic health of the region. 



246 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



North Lahontan Region 



Table NL-11. Water Balance 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Demand/Supply 



1990 2020 

average drought average drought 



Net Demand 

Urban -with 1990 level of conservation 

-reductions due to long-term conservation measures (Level I) 
Agricultural 

-reductions due to long-term conservation measures (Level i) 
Environmental 
Other (1) 



37 

460 

17 




38 

511 

17 




50 



469 



17 





6 

17 




I Total Net Demand 



514 



566 



536 



589 



Water Supplies w/ExIstIng Facilities 

Developed Supplies 

Surface Water 

Ground Water 

Ground Water Overdraft 
Subtotal 
Dedicated Natural Flow 



394 


349 


389 


355 


120 


146 


147 


173 














514 


495 


536 


528 















Total Water Supplies 



514 



495 



536 



528 



Demand/Supply Balance 



-1 



-61 



Future Water Management Options Level I 

Long-term Supply Augmentation 

Reclaimed 

Local 

Central Valley Project 

State Water Project 
Subtotal - Water Management Options Level I 
Ground Water/Surface Water Use Reduction Resulting from Level I Programs 



(1) Includes conveyance losses, recreation uses and energy production. 



Remaining Demand/Supply Balance Requiring Short Term Drought management -61 

and/or Future Level 11 Options 



* * * 



247 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft North Lahontan Region 



248 



I Draft of The California Water Plan Update 



Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 



SOUTH LAHONTAN REGION 



!#■ 




One of many tufa towers in Mono Lake 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft South Lahontan Region 

SOUTH LAHONTAN REGION 

The South Lahontan Region encompasses the area from the mountain divide north of Mono Lake to 
the divide south of the Mojave River, which runs through the Mojave Desert, It is bordered on the east 
by the Nevada state line and on the west by the crest of of the Sierra Nevada. 

The region is a closed basin with many desert valleys that contain central playas, or dry lakes, 
especially in the south. The north portion is dominated by the Sierra Nevada and the White-Inyo 
Mountain Ranges. In the south are smaller mountain ranges with broad alluvial fans. Other prominent 
topographic features in the region include Mt. Whitney (the highest mountain in the contiguous 48 states, 
with an elevation of 14,495 feet), the Mono volcanic tableland. Death Valley (the lowest point at 
elevation 282 feet below mean sea level), and the Owens Valley. (See Appendix C for maps of the 
planning subareas and land ownership in the region.) 

Average annual precipitation for the region's numerous valleys ranges between 4 and 10 inches. 
Depending on location, variations above and below this range do occur. For example. Death Valley 
receives only 1 .9 inches annually. The Sierra Nevada Mountains can receive up to 50 inches annually, 
with much of it in the form of snow. In some years, the community of Mammoth Lakes can have snow 
accumulations of more than 10 feet. 

Population 

In 1990, the South Lahontan Region's population was almost 6(X),000, about 2 percent of 

California's total. Although not densely populated, the region contains some of the fastest growing urban 
areas in California, including the cities of Lancaster and Palmdale in the Antelope Valley of Los Angeles 
County and the Victor and Apple valleys of San Bernardino County. Many of the new residents in these 
valleys are workers who have accepted a long commute to employment centers in the greater Los 
Angeles area in exchange for affordable new homes. Future population growth in the region will 
probably be concentrated in the vicinity of these locations. Major local employment includes the 
aerospace industry at Palmdale Airport and Edwards Air Force Base. Bishop, Ridgecrest, and Barstow 
are the other important centers in the region. The City of Ridgecrest's continued growth will be tied to 
the economic conditions of the nearby China Lake Naval Weapons Center and mining operations at 
Searles Lake. 

^ Region Characteristics 

I' Average Annual Precipitation: 8 inches Average Annual Runoff: 1.334,000 acre-feet 

^ Land Area: 32,907 square miles 1990 Population: 599,900 



249 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Lahontan Region 



While the identified growth centers will probably continue to expand, there is little reason to expect 
much population growth elsewhere in the region. The Owens Valley and eastern Sierra area should 
remain sparsely populated, with the string of small communities serving recreationists and travelers along 
U.S. Highway 395. Barstow, a services center for railroads and travelers, is strongly tied to the U.S. 
Army's Fort Irwin. It has grown modestly in recent years. Most of the other towns and communities in 
this portion of the region are highway service centers or farm service centers. Table SL-1 shows 
population projections to 2020 for the South Lahontan Region. 

Table SL-1. Population Projections 

(thousands) 



Planning Subareas 



1990 



2000 



2010 



2020 



Mono -Owens 
Death Valley 
Indian Wells 
Antelope Valley 
Mojave River 



25 
1 

48 
260 
265 




35 

1 

108 

738 

547 




43 

1 

141 

986 

748 



Total 



599 



1,(K)3 



1,429 



1,919 



Land Use 

Public lands constitute about 75 percent (14 million acres) of the region's area. Much of this land is 
national monument and scenic areas, national forests, and military reservations. 

About 1 percent of the 18.6 million acres in the South Lahontan Region is used for urban and 
agricultural activities. In 1990, urban and suburban land uses occupied about 170,000 acres; a 21 percent 
increase from 1980. Over 80 percent of this increase was in urban acreage concentrated in the Antelope 
and Mojave River Valleys. The only other area showing much urban growth was the Indian Wells Valley. 
Much of this increase was associated with construction of new single and multiple-family dwellings. 
Modest increases are associated with new commercial services and light industry. Industries supporting 
the region's economy include the military, recreation and tourism, travelers' services, agriculture, and 
mining. These industries should remain strong in the future. 

About 61,000 acres is irrigated crop land (less than one percent of the region's total land area). 
Multiple cropping is not generally practiced in the region. Most of the irrigated acreage is in the 
Mono-Owens planning subarea where roughly 30,000 acres are irrigated. This PSA includes the Owens 
Valley, the Crowley Lake area northwest of Bishop, and the Hammil and Fish Lake valleys. Alfalfa and 
pasture are the primary crops. 



250 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft South Lahontan Region 

i 

WK Moderate levels of irrigated agriculture subsist in the Mojave River, Antelope, and Indian Wells 
1 valleys. Most of the activity and acreage produces alfalfa, pasture grass, or deciduous fruit. Figure SL-1 
i shows land use, along with imports, exports, and water supplies for the South Lahontan Region. 



251 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Lahontan Region 



PRESENT WATER SUPPUE8 

(1,000 AF/Yr.) 



LOCAL SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT 
GROUND WATER PERENNIAL YIELD 
STATE WATER PROJECT 
WATER RECLAMATION 
DEDICATED NATURAL FLOW 

WATER SUPPLY 
GROUND WATER OVERDRAFT 
TOTAL 



CaJi fornia 

Aqueduc t 

1,357 



Call fornia 
Aqueduct 

(East Se 

West Branch) 

1,290 



Urban Land 

Irrigated Land 

Region Water Transfer 

(1,000't or Acre-Fart per Ymt) 




57 
227 

68 

2 

128 

483 
72 

565 



Los Angeles |VAr*^**'^~^*~"~^ 
N Aqueduc t 
380 



10 20 30 



Figure SL-1. South Lahontan Region 
l^nd Use, Imports, Exports, and Water Supplies 



252 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Lahontan Region 



Water Supply 

Historically, the South Lahontan Region has relied mostly on ground water, the mainstay of many of 
the local urban and farming communities in the early part of the century. Natural surface water supplies, 
such as the Mono Lake tributaries, the Owens River, and the Mojave River, also contribute to the 
domestic and agricultural supplies. Table SL-2 lists the major reservoirs of the region. Figure SL-2 
shows the shows the region's 1990 level water supplies. 



Figure SL-2. South Lahontan Region 

Water Supply Sources (Average Conditions) 

1990 Level 




Re- 
claimed 
.4% 



253 



Bulletiii 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Lahontan Region i 



Table SL-2. Major Reservoirs 



Reservoir Name 



River 



Capacity (1,000 AF) 



Owner 



Saddlebag Lake 
Gem Lake 
Grant Lake 
South Lake 
L^e Crowley 
Tinemaha 
Haiwee 
Lake Silverwood 



Lee Vining Creek 

Rush Creek 

Rush Creek 

South Fork Bishop Creek 

Owens 

Owens 

Rose Valley 

West Fork Mojave 



11 
17 
48 
13 
183 
16 
41 
73 



Southern California Edison Co. 
Southern California Edison Co. 
Los Angeles Dept. Water & Power 
Southern California Edison Co. 
Los Angeles Dept. Water & Power 
Los Angeles Dept. Water & Power 
Los Angeles Dept. Water & Power 
Department of Water Resources 



In 1913 and 1970, the first and second Los Angeles aqueducts were completed and began conveying 
water from the Mono-Owens area to the City of Los Angeles. The combined carrying capacity of both 
aqueducts amounts to 780 cubic feet per second. Court-ordered restrictions on diversions from the Mono 
Basin and Owens Valley have reduced the amount of water the city can receive and have brought into 
question the reliability of the Mono-Owens supply for Los Angeles. (See the Legislation and Litigation 
section under Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management.) As demand continues to grow, the 
decreased diversions have forced the City of Los Angeles to become more dependent on other sources. 

In the 1970s, the Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency began receiving deliveries of State Water 
Project water and recharging the valley's ground water basin. Ground water levels in some portions of the 
basin are reported to have risen 40 feet or more since the introduction of SWP water. 

Supply with Existing Facilities 

Table SL-3 shows water supplies with existing facilities and water management programs. Ground 
water is the only source of domestic and agricultural water in the Death Valley and Indian Wells planning 
subareas. Very little, if any, of the surface water flow in these PSAs is used for other than natural ground 
water recharge. The Antelope Valley receives over 66 percent of its domestic and agricultural water 
supply from the State Water Project, with the remainder drawn from ground water and local surface 
supplies. The Mono-Owens and Mojave River PSA's rely on both surface and ground water supplies to 
meet demands. 



254 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Lahontan Region 



Table SL~3. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities 

and Programs 

(Decision 1485 Operating Criteria for Delta Supplies) 

(thousands of acre-feet) 



Supply 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Surface 


























Local 


57 




44 


57 




44 


57 




44 


57 




44 


Local imports 







H| 


























Colorado River 







n 


























CVP 







Hb 


























Other federal 







Hi 


























SWP 


69 




^p 


165 




101 


163 




98 


163 




98 


Ground water 


227 




256 


189 




274 


221 




271 


263 




270 


Overdraft 


72 




72 


36 




36 


71 




71 


71 




71 


Reclaimed 


2 




2 


2 




2 


2 




2 


2 




2 


Dedicated natural flow 


128 




122 


128 




122 


128 




122 


128 




122 


Total 


555 




550 


577 




579 


642 




608 


684 




607 



Ground water is extremely important in supplying water to the region. As many as 47 distinct 
ground water basins covering thousands of square miles have been identified in the South Lahontan 
Region. Storage capacities vary by basin, but combined basin capacities in both the Mojave River and 
and Antelope Valley PSAs, for example, total about 70 MAF each. Usable storage is significantly less 
'but provides the major, if not the only, water source in most areas. Water quality also varies and this 
I influences water supply. Basins are recharged through percolation from irrigation return flow, natural 
stream flow, and intermittent stream flow from snowmelt, depending on location. 

Natural runoff, carried by numerous streams on the eastern slopes of the Sierras, is about 1 .3 MAF 
annually in average years. Estimated projected average year deliveries to the City of Los Angeles are 
about 425,000 AF a year for 2000 to 2020. Under drought conditions, deliveries are projected to be 
208,000 AF a year for 2000 to 2020. 

Supply with Additional Facilities and Water Management Programs 

Future water management options are presented in two levels to better reflect the status of investiga- 
tions required to implement them. 

O Level I options are those that have undergone extensive investigation and envi- 
ronmental analyses and are judged to have a high likelihood of being implement- 
ed by 2020. 



255 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft South Lahontan Regioo 



O Level II options are those that could fill the remaining gap between water supply 
and demand. These options require more investigation and alternative analyses. 

Table SL-4 shows water supplies with Level I water management programs. 

Table SL-4. Water Supplies with Level I Water Management Programs 

(Decision 1485 Operating Criteria for Delta Supplies) 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Supply 


1990 




2000 




2010 




2020 






average 


drought 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


Surface 


























Local 


57 




44 


57 1 




44 


57 




44 


57 




44 


Local imports 










i 























Colorado River 










j 

























CVP 










1 

























Other federal 










j 

























SWP 


69 




54 


174 \ 




127 


194 




151 


195 




152 


Ground water 


227 




256 


191 




217 


196 




241 


240 




269 


Overdraft 


72 




72 


25 




25 


71 




71 


71 




71 


Reclaimed 


2 




2 


2 ! 




2 


2 




2 


4 




4 


Dedicated natural flow 


128 




122 


128 




122 


128 




122 


128 




122 


Total 


555 




550 


577 




537 


648 




631 


695 




662 



The larger urban and agricultural areas of the South Lahontan Region — Owens Valley, Victorville, 
Hesperia, and Antelope Valley — have several water management optionsYor the future, including: 
formation of ground water management agencies or replenishment districts; reclamation of brackish 
ground water; desalination; and institution of conjunctive use operations to make more efficient use of 
surface and ground water supplies. 

Most of the water demands are being met with ground water and local surface water, and several of 
the ground water basins are in overdraft. SWP water is being delivered to residents in the Antelope 
Valley and, in 1995, the Mojave Water Agency after completion of the Morongo Pipeline. Also, a 
feasibility study is being initiated for the Mojave Water Agency's proposed Mojave River Pipeline to the 
City of Barstow and the community of Newberry Springs. More on this water management plan can be 
found in the Legislation and Litigation section later in this chapter. 

Water Use 

Estimated 1990 level annual net water use within the South Lahontan Region is about 555,000 AF 
per year. Irrigated agriculture accounts for 52 percent of the region's 1990 level net water use, while 
urban use amounts to about 22 percent, and environmental and other water use account for 26 percent. 



256 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Lahontan Region 



Net water use for urban and agricultural purposes in the South Lahontan Region increased by almost 4 
i percent between 1980 and 1990. By 2020, net water demand for the region is projected to climb an 

additional 32 percent because of continued expansion of urban centers. Figure SL-3 show net water 
i demand for the 1990 level of development. 



Figure SL-3. South Lahontan Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990 Level 




Other 

3% 



257 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft South Lahontan Region! 

Since the 1970s, population in some urban centers in Antelope, Mojave River, Apple, and Victor 
valleys has increased dramatically. Urban development alone in the Antelope and Mojave River Valleys 
increased net water use by almost 125 percent since 1980. 

Urban Water Use 

Population projections indicate that by 2020, the regions population will increase by over 300 
percent from the 1990 level. Medium-sized cities such as Lancaster, Palmdale, and Barstow will 
continue to expand; however, development in the rest of the region will be sporadic. 

Total municipal and industrial applied water use in 1990 was about 188,000 AF, an increase of about 
98 percent from the 1980 level of 95,000 AF. Urban net water demand is projected to increase by almost 
200 percent by 2020. Most of the increase in new water use will be in the residential category, while 
increases in water use related to business and manufacturing services will be modest. Figure SL-4 shows 
the 1990 level applied urban water demand by sector. 

Normalized 1990 per capita water use for the region was 280 gallons daily. However, daily per 
capita use ranged from 124 gallons for the Death Valley PSA to 503 gallons for the Mono-Owens PSA. 
Possible reasons for the relatively high per capita values in the Mono-Owens area are the large numbers 
of tourists (greatly exceeding the residential population). In Death Valley, there is little outdoor 
residential water use, which accounts for the relatively low per capita use value for the area. 



258 




Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Lahontan Region 



Figure SL-4. South Lahontan Region 
Appiied Urban Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990 Level 




Industrial 

5% 



In 1990, the Antelope Valley and Mojave River PSAs combined accounted for about 86 percent of 
the region's total urban applied water, while the Mono-Owens and Indian Wells PSAs accounted for the 
remaining 14 percent. Applied regional water demands for urban use are projected to climb to almost 
[50,000 AF by 2020, an increase of 194 percent over the 1990 level. Table SL-5 shows applied water 

urban water demand to 2020. 



259 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Lahontan Region 





Table SL 


-5. Urban Water Demand 










(thousands of acre- 


-feet) 










Planning Subareas 


1990 
average drought 


2000 

average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Mono -Owens 


















Applied water demand 


14 


15 


16 


17 


19 


20 


24 


24 


Net water demand 


8 


8 


9 


9 


11 


11 


13 


14 


Depletion 


8 


8 


9 


9 


11 


11 


13 


14 


Death Valley 


















Applied water demand 


























Net water demand 


























Depletion 


























Indian Wells 


















Applied water demand 


12 


12 


18 


19 


27 


28 


36 ; 


37 


Net water demand 


7 


7 


10 


11 


15 


16 


20 i 


''A 21 


Depletion 


7 


7 


10 


11 


15 


16 


20| 


■1 


Antelope Valley 


















Applied water demand 


66 


68 


122 


126 


180 


186 


243 


250 


Net water demand 


45 


46 


83 


86 


123 


126 


165 


170 


Depletion 


45 


46 


83 


86 


123 


126 


165 


170 


Mojave River 










, 






"^±£1^1 1 


Applied water demand 


95 


98 


136 


140 


183 


189 


247 


"W' 


Net water demand 


63 


64 


89 


92 


120 


124 


162 


167 


Depletion 


63 


64 


89 


92 


120 


124 


162 


187 


Total 


















Applied water demand 


187 


193 


292 


302 


409 


423 


550 


565 


Net water demand 


123 


125 


191 


198 


269 


277 


360 


372 


Depletion 


123 


125 


191 


198 


269 


277 


360 


372 



Agricultural Water Use 

Agricultural average annual net water use is expected to decline from the 1990 level of 290,000 AF 
to 231,000 AF annually by 2020. This decrease of planted and harvested crop acres in the region is due 
to urbanization and land going out of production for economic reasons. The only area that registered an 
increase in planted acres was the Owens-Mono PSA. The area projected to undergo the most significant 
transformation is the Antelope Valley PSA. Between 1990 and 2020, the projected irrigated acres for this 
PSA is expected to decrease from slightly less than 10,000 to 1,000 acres. Other PSAs are expected to 



260 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Lahontan Region 



experience less dramatic decreases. Table SL-6 shows irrigated crop acreage projections for the region. 
Table SL-7 shows 1990 crop acreages and evapotranspiration of applied water. 

Table SL-6. Irrigated Crop Acreage 

(thousands of acres) 



Planning Subareas 



1990 



2000 



2010 



2020 



Mono-Owens 
Death Valley 
Indian Wells 
Antelope Valley 
Mojave River 



29 

2 

4 

11 

15 



29 
2 
3 
2 

14 



29 
2 
3 

1 

14 




Total 




61 


50 


49 


48 


Table SL-7. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop 


Irrigated Crop 


Total 
Acres 
(1,000) 


Total ETAW 
(1,000AF) 


Irrigated Crop 


Total 

Acres 

(1,000) 


Total bl AW 
(1,000AF) 


Grain 1 l 

' Other field 1 2 

Alfalfa 34 147 

Pasture 19 83 


Other truck 2 3 
Other deciduous 4 8 


Total 61 244 


Figure SL-5 shows 
region. Table SL-8sho 
. indicate the region's tots 
2020. 


the 1990 crop 
ws projections 
d agricultural 


acreage, ETAV 

of agricultural 

applied water v 


/, and applied water for 
water demands to 2020 
vill decrease by about 2C 


the major crops in the 

for this region. Projections 

) percent between 1990 and 



261 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Lahontan Region 



80 



Acres (X 1 ,000) 



60 



40 



20 







Acre-Feet (X 1 ,000) 




Alfalfa Pasture 

■Acreage MEJAVJ ■Applied Water 



Figure SL-5. South Lahontan Region 
1990 Acreage, ETAW, and Applied Water for IMajor 

Crops 



240 



180 



120 



60 







262 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Lahontan Region 



Table SL-8. Agricultural Water Demand 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Planning Subareas 



1990 2000 2010 2020 

average drought average drought average drought average drought 



Mono-Owens 

Applied water demand 
Net water demand 
Depletion 



161 
147 
147 



165 
150 
150 



156 
144 
144 



160 
147 

147 



156 
144 
144 



160 
147 

147 



156 
144 
144 



160 
147 
147 



Death Valley 

Applied water demand 
Net water demand 
Depletion 



10 
9 
9 



10 
9 
9 



10 
9 
9 



10 
9 
9 



10 
9 
9 



10 
9 
9 



10 
9 
9 



10 
9 
9 



Indian Wells 


















Applied water demand 


18 


18 


17 


17 


17 


17 


17 


17 


Net water demand 


17 


17 


15 


15 


15 


15 


15 


15 


Depletion 


17 


17 


15 


15 


15 


15 


15 


15 


Antelope Valley 


















Applied water demand 


49 


49 


9 


9 


5 


5 


3 


3 


Net water demand 


47 


47 


8 


8 


4 


mmJ 


3 


3 


Depletion 


47 


47 


8 


8 


4B 


Hp 


3 


3 


Mojave River 


















Applied water demand 


79 


79 


74 


74 


70 


70 


67 


67 


Net water demand 


70 


70 


66 


66 


63 


63 


60 


60 


Depletion 


70 


70 


66 


66 


63 


63 


60 


60 


Total 












:| 


c*%^ 


^9 


Applied water demand 


317 


321 


266 


270 


258 


262 


253 


257 


Net water demand 


290 


293 


242 


245 


235 


238 


231 


234 


Depletion 


290 


293 


242 


245 


235 


238 


231 


234 



Environmental Water Use 

Spring runoff and snowmelt from the eastern Sierra Nevada create a unique ecological setting in the 
Mono Lake and Owens Valley areas. Preserving a balance between environmental, agricultural, and 
domestic water needs of the Mono-Owens area and those of the Los Angeles area is a vital concern in the 
region. This situation is discussed under Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management later in this 
chapter. The Mono Lake and Owens River average annual instream requirements are about 73,000 and 
55,000 AF respectively and drought year requirements are 67,000 and 55,000 AF respectively. There are 
no wetlands water requirements in the South Lahontan Region. Table SL-9 shows environmental 
instream water needs for the region. 



263 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Lahontan Region 



Table SL-9. Environmental Instream Water Needs 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Stream 



Mono Lake 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



1990 2000 2010 2020 

average drought average drought average drought average drought 



73 


67 


73 


67 


73 


67 


73 


67 


73 


67 


73 


67 


73 


67 


73 


67 


73 


67 


73 


67 


73 


67 


73 


67 


55 


55 


55 


55 


55 - 


■V 


55 


55 


55 


55 


55 


55 


55 


55 


55 


55 


























128 


122 


128 


122 


128 


122 


128 


122 


128 


122 


128 


122 


128 


122 


128 


122 


73 


67 


73 


67 


73 


67 


73 


67 



Owens River 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



Total 

Applied Water 
Net Water 
Depletion 



Other Water Use 

Other water uses in the region include energy production and water used at recreation facilities for 

public service, showers, toilets, and watering some limited landscaping. Power plant cooling water 
accounted for about 6,000 AF of the regional water use in 1990, of which 4,000 AF were used in the 
Mojave River PSA, 1,000 AF in the Antelope Valley PSA, and 1,000 AF in'the Indian Wells PSA. Water 
used at recreation facilities during 1990 was 3,000 acre-feet. 

Water-related recreation in the region includes fishing and skiing, and recreational areas offer 
opportunities for camping and hiking. For instance, Crowley Lake, located about 25 miles northwest of 
Bishop, is operated to provide optimum environmental and recreational benefits, as well as to provide 
water and power to the Los Angeles Aqueduct system. Fishing, camping, water skiing, sailing, and 
water jet skiing are among the recreational activities prevalent. Figure SL-6 shows water recreation areas 
in the region. Table SL-10 shows the total water demands for this region. 



264 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Lahontan Region 



Water Recreation 
Hydroelectric Power 



Silverwood 




10 20 X 



Figure SL-6. South Lahontan Region 
Water Recreation Areas 



265 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Lahontan Region 



Table SL-10. Total Water Demands 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Category of Use 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 
average drought 


Urban 


















Applied water 


187 


- 193 


292 


302 


409 


423 


550 


565 


Net water 


123 


125 


191 


198 


269 


277 


360 


372 


Depletion 


123 


125 


191 


198 


269 


277 


360 


372 


Agricultural 


















Applied water 


317 


321 


266 


270 


258 


262 


253 


257 


Net water 


290 


293 


242 


245 


235 


238 


231 


234 


Depletion 


290 


293 


242 


245 


235 


238 


231 


234 


Environmental 


















Applied water 


128 


122 


128 


122 


128 


122 


128 


122 


Net water 


128 


122 


128 


122 


128 


122 


128 


122 


Depletion 


73 


67 


73 


67 


73 


67 


73 


67 


Other (1) 


















Applied water 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


Net water 


14 


14 


16 


15 


16 


15 


16 


15 


Depletion 


14 


14 


16 


15 


16 


15 


16 


15 


Total 
















4 


Applied water 


641 


645 


695 


703 


804 


816 


940 


953 


Net water 


555 


554 


577 


580 


648 


652 


735 


743 


Depletion 


500 


499 


522 


525 


593 


597 


680 


688 


(1) includes conveyance losses, 


recreational uses, and energy production 











Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 

The 1987-92 drought raised several water management issues in the South Lahontan Region. In 
1991, retail urban water agencies in the region implemented ordinances requesting that their customers 
reduce their overall demand. Reductions ranged from 10 to 25 percent. Most agricultural operations 
were generally not hindered, as ground water supplies were generally adequate to meet demands. 
However, the City of Los Angeles cut back its deliveries to growers and ranchers in the Owens Valley, 
which resulted in a minor decline in planted and harvested acreage and yield. In addition, some alfalfa 
acreage in the Antelope Valley was fallowed so ground water supplies could be used to irrigate deciduous 
fruit orchards that were affected by reduced supplies from the State Water Project. The ground water was 
pumped into the California Aqueduct and transported to the orchards. 



266 



Bulletin 16(^93 Administrative Draft South Lahontan Region 

Legislation and Litigation 

Of the many factors influencing water resource management, legislation and litigation have 
significantly changed water supply management in the South Lahontan Region. Several court cases have 
altered water diversions and ground water pumping in the region. A few of the landmark cases are 
described here. 

Owens Valley Area. At the turn of the century, the City of Los Angeles faced a severe shortage of 
water due to a growing urban population. In 1913, the City of Los Angeles completed its first aqueduct 
from Owens Valley to the City of Los Angeles. This aqueduct has a carrying capacity of 480 cubic feet 
per second. Due to increased population and industries in Los Angeles, a second aqueduct was com- 
pleted in 1970 with a capacity of 300 cfs. The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power diverts both 
surface and ground water from the Owens Valley and surface water from the Mono Basin. 

In 1972, the County of Inyo filed suit against the City of Los Angeles, claiming that increased 
ground water pumping for the second aqueduct was harming the Owens Valley environment. The 
County of Inyo asked that LADWP's ground water pumping be analyzed in an Environmental Impact 
Report in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. 

Since 1984, the City of Los Angeles and Inyo County have spent about $5 million to determine the 
effects of ground water pumping on native vegetation. Together with the U.S. Geological Survey, the 
two parties gathered the data needed to formulate a long-term ground water management plan and 
Environmental Impact Report. Within the scope of these studies, numerous enhancement and mitigation 
projects were implemented. Revegetation and irrigation of certain wildlife habitats and recreation areas 
constituted the bulk of these projects. 

As of August 1, 1989, the parties reached agreement on the long-term ground water management 
plan for the Owens Valley. However, the EIR has been rejected by the Third District Court of Appeals in 
Sacramento, which required a more comprehensive environmental assessment of the agreements. The 
highlights of the agreement are: 

O Formation of a technical group and a standing committee to oversee all opera- 
tions pertaining to water and how its use affects the environment in the Owens 
Valley and adjacent areas. 

O Formation of designated management areas. 

O Development of a ground water pumping program including new wells and al- 
lowable production capacity. 

O Construction of ground water recharge facilities including location and opera- 
tion. 



267 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft South Lahontan Region 

O Modification of Haiwee Reservoir operations. 

O Provisions of financial assistance required by the City of Los Angeles. 

O Release of city-owned lands. 

O Development of projects and other provisions involving numerous enhancement 
and mitigation measures and transfer of ownership of the water systems of sever- 
al towns. 

Continued study of the Owens Valley appears to be benefiting all concerned. 

Mono Basin. Mono Lake, which lies just east of Yosemite National Park at the base of the eastern 
Sierra Nevada, is the second largest lake completely within California. It has long been recognized as a 
valuable environmental resource because of its rare scenic and biological characteristics. The area is 
famous for its tufa towers and spires, structures formed by years of mineral deposition in the lake's 
unique saline waters. The lake has no outlet, and there are two islands in the lake that provide a protected 
breeding £irea for large colonies of California gulls and a haven for migrating waterfowl. 

Much of the water flowing into Mono Lake comes from snowmelt via five fresh water creeks. Since 
1941, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power has diverted water from four of these creeks — 
Lee Vining, Walker, Parker, and Rush creeks. Tunnels and pipelines carry the water to the Owens Valley 
drainage, where it is eventually transferred, together with Owens River flows, to Los Angeles via the Los 
Angeles Aqueduct. 

Diversions of instream flow from its tributaries lowered Mono Lake's -water level by 45 feet to an 
historic low of 6,372 feet above sea level reached in December 1981 . With decreased inflow of fresh 
water, the lake's salinity has increased dramatically, which may threaten local food chains. There is 
evidence that higher salinities reduce algal blooms, the food supply for the lake's abundant brine shrimp 
and brine flies. Such a change poses a threat to bird populations that feed on the shrimp and brine flies. 
In addition, drops in water levels to 6,375 feet or lower create a land bridge to Negit Island, one of the 
lake's two islands, allowing predators to reach gull rookeries; this first happened in 1978 and again 
during the 1987-92 drought. Large areas of the lake bed have also become exposed, and the dust formed 
by dried alkali silt causes air quality problems, especially during wind storms. 

As a result of these impacts, the lake and its tributaries have been the subject of extensive litigation 
between the City of Los Angeles and a number of environmental groups since the late 1970s. (A more 
detailed discussion of key court cases is provided in Volume 1, Chapter 2.) Los Angeles Department of 
Water and Power is now prohibited by court order from diverting the tributaries until the lake level 
stabilizes at 6,377 feet above sea level, the level identified by state and federal agencies to protect the 
ecosystem and control air pollution. During the 1987-92 drought. Mono Lake remained near the target 



268 




Bulletin 16&-93 Administrative Draft South Lahontan Region 

level, but the diversion limit resulted in an estimated loss of 100,000 AF per year to Los Angeles' water 
supply by the end of 1992. In addition, releases into four of the lake's tributaries have been ordered by 
another court ruling to protect and restore once thriving trout fisheries. Instream flow requirements for 
the tributaries have been set on an interim basis and will be reviewed once field studies are completed. 
The State Water Resources Control Board is preparing an EIR that will determine what instream flows 
and lake levels are required to protect Mono Lake's ecosystem and the fisheries. In the meantime, Los 
Angeles is making efforts to conserve water and approved a mandatory conservation ordinance during the 
drought. Since 1989, annual water deliveries to the City of Los Angeles from the Mono-Owens system 
have decreased by an average of 39 percent from previous levels in the 1980s. The decrease is in part 
drought related. Los Angeles is also investigating potential alternative sources of water. 

Antelope Valley Area. In December 1991 , the Palmdale Water District made public its intentions to 
create, through state legislation, a ground water management agency so that long-term overdrafting in 
the valley could be arrested. Several constituents within the Antelope Valley expressed their opposition. 
In the ensuing months, several local groups held meetings to reach a consensus on formation of the 
agency. The Antelope Valley East Kern- Water Agency suggests that a ground water management agency 
is "premature" and unnecessary. Due to public outcry over this issue, the Palmdale Water District Board 
of Directors has withdrawn its proposal. The Antelope Valley agencies have since formed an advisory 
board to discuss water issues, including ground water. 

High Desert Area. Recent court cases involving, among others, the Cities of Barstow, Victorville, 
and Hesperia, have led to concerns over water rights in the Mojave River Basin. The Mojave Water 
Technical Advisory Committee reports that a preliminary estimate of overdraft for 1990 would be 
between 65,000 and 75,000 AF. Projected overdraft for the year 2015 amounts to 90,000 AF, based on 
2015 population forecasts. The Mojave Water Agency Board of Directors has approved initiating a 
feasibility study for a 37-mile Mojave River Pipeline to convey State Water Project water to the City of 
Barstow and the community of Newberry Springs. 



II 



In addition, the SWP water will provide a supplemental supply for a district within the Mojave Water 
;ency, which now has only ground water available and whose extraction is exceeding the natural 
replenishment. In June 1990, the district voted to approve issuance of $66.5 million in general obligation 
bonds to finance the Morongo Pipeline. Ground breaking for the 70-mile pipeline was held in 
December 1992, with construction scheduled for completion by July 1994. It will deliver water from the 
Hesperia Turnout of the California Aqueduct to the Morongo Basin in the Yucca Valley, in the Colorado 



269 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft South Lahontan Region 

River Region. The Morongo Basin has an entitlement to 7,257 AF of SWP water. The Board of 
Directors of the Mojave Water Agency has decided to oversize the pipeline to provide capacity for water 
to recharge the Mojave River. Increasing the pipeline's first section from 30 inches in diameter to 54 
inches will give it the capacity to put as much as 30,000 AF a year into the river. 

The City of Barstow filed a suit in 1990 against some Upper Basin water districts requesting that the 
Superior Court guarantee it an annual supply of 30,000 AF of Mojave River water (to be received at a 
particular stream gaging station downstream of Barstow). Barstow alleges that this was the natural river 
flow to the city in 1950, before Victor Valley's growth began to cause overdrafting of the Mojave River 
Basin's ground water. It further alleges that it now receives less than half of the flow it did 40 years ago. 
Currently, Mojave Water Agency is developing a water management plan, as required by the court . The 
parties, with the assistance of a facilitator, drafted a set of preliminary principles of adjudication of water 
rights. They are attempting to expedite an agreement or a stipulated judgment to avoid a potential 
moratorium on new development and to create a workable long-term solution. In another suit, between 
Barstow and the City of Hesperia, the court's ruling emphasized the necessity for Mojave Water Agency 
to exercise its authority as a key agent in settling the region's long-term water problems. 

Water Balance 

Water balances were computed for each Planning Subarea in the South Lahontan Region by compar- 
ing existing and future water demand projections with the projected availability of supply. The region 
total was computed as the sum of the individual subareas. This method does not reflect the severity of 
drought year shortages in some local areas, which can be hidden when planning subareas are combined 
within the region. Thus, there could be substantial shortages in some areas during drought periods. Lo- 
cal and regional shortages could also be less severe than the shortage shown, depending on how supplies 
are allocated within the region, a particular water agency's ability to participate in water transfers or de- 
mand management programs (including land fallowing or emergency allocation programs), and the over- 
all level of reliability deemed necessary to the sustained economic health of the region. Volume I, Chap- 
ter 11 presents a broader discussion of demand management options. 

Table SL-1 1 presents water demands for the 1990 level and for future water demands to 2020 and 
balances them with: (1) supplies from existing facilities and water management programs, and (2) future 
demand management and water supply management options. 

Regional net water demands for the 1990 level of development totaled 550,000 AF for average and 
drought years. Those demands are projected to increase to 735,0(X) AF for average and drought years by 
the year 2020, after accounting for a 10,000 AF reduction in urban water demand resulting from 



270 



bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft South Lahontan Region 

mplementation of long-term conservation measures and a 10,000 AF reduction in agricultural demand 
iesulting from additional long-term agricultural water conservation measures. 

Urban net water demand is projected to increase by about 240,000 AF (200 percent) by 2020 from 
he 1990 level of 123,000 AF, due to increases in population. Agricultural net water demand is projected 
decrease by about 60,000 AF by 2020, primarily due to lands being taken out of production resulting 
jrom the high cost of developed water supplies. Environmental net water demands, under existing rules 
!ind regulations, will remain essentially level out to 2020. 

Average annual supplies were generally adequate to meet average net water demands in 1990 for this 
legion. However, during drought, present supplies are insufficient to meet present demands and, without 
jidditional water management programs, annual average and drought year shortages are expected to in- 
':rease to nearly 50,000 and 140,000 AF by 2020 respectively. 

With planned Level I programs, average and drought year shortages could be reduced to about 40,000 
Imd 80,000 AF respectively. This remaining shortage requires both additional short-term drought 
nanagement, water transfers and demand management programs, and other future long-term Level II 
options depending on the overall level of water service reliability deemed necessary, by local agencies, to 
;ustain the economic health of the region. In the short- term, some areas of this region will experience 
nore frequent and severe water shortages. 



271 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



South Lahontan Regioni; 



Table SL-11. Water Balance 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Demand/Supply 



1990 2020 

average drought average drought 



Net Demand 

Urban -with 1990 level of conservation 

-reductions due to long-term conservation measures (Level I) 
Agricultural 

-reductions due to long-term conservation measures (Level I) 
Environmental 
Other (1) 



123 


125 


370 


382 


-- 


— 


-10 


-10 


290 


293 


241 


244 


-- 


— 


-10 


-m 


128 


122 


128 




14 


14 


16 


15 



Total Net Demand 



555 



554 



735 



743 



Water Supplies w/Existing Facilities Under D-1485 for Delta Supplies 

Developed Supplies 

Surface Water 

Ground Water 

Ground Water Overdraft 
Subtotal 
Dedicated Natural Flow 



128 


100 


222 


144 


227 


256 


263 


270 


72 


72 


71 


71 


427 


428 


556 


485 


128 


122 


128 


122 



Total Water Supplies 



555 



550 



684 



607 



Demand/Supply Balance 



-4 



Remaining Demand/Supply Balance Requiring Sliort Term Drought 
Management and/or Future Level II Options 



-51 



-40 



-136 



Future Water Management Options Level i (2) 

Long-term Supply Augmentation 

Reclaimed 

Local 

Central Valley Project 

State Water Project 
Subtotal - Water Management Options Level i 
Ground Water/Surface Water Use Reduction Resulting from Level I Programs 



2 


2 














32 


54 


34 


56 


23 


-1 



-81 



(1) Includes conveyance losses, recreation uses and energy production. 

(2) Protection of fish and wildlife and a long-term solution to complex Delta problems will determine the feasibility of several water 
supply augmentation proposals and their water supply benefits. 

* * * 



272 



I Draft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 



COLORADO RIVER REGION 




Control gates on the Colorado River Aqueduct. 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Colorado River Region 



COLORADO RIVER REGION 

The Colorado River Region encompasses the southeastern comer of California. The region's 
northern boundary, a drainage divide, begins along the southern edge of the Mojave River watershed in 
the Victor Valley area of San Bernardino County and meanders northeast across the Mojave Desert to the 
Nevada state line. The southern boundary is the international border with Mexico. A drainage divide 
forms the jagged western boundary through the San Bernardino, San Jacinto, and Santa Rosa Mountains 
and the Peninsular Ranges (which include the Laguna Mountains). The Nevada state line and the 
Colorado River (the boundary with Arizona) delineate the region's eastern boundary. 

Covering over 12 percent of the total land area in the State, the region is California's most arid. It 
includes mountain ranges and hills of volcanic origin; distinctive sand dunes; broad areas of the Joshua 
tree, alkali scrub, and cholla communities; and elevated river terraces. Despite its dry climate and rugged 
terrain, the region contains some of the State's most productive agricultural areas and vacation resorts. 
(See Appendix C for maps of the planning subareas and land ownership in the region.) 

Much of the region's topography consists of flat plains punctuated by numerous hills and mountain 
ranges. Faulting and volcanic activities are partially responsible for the presence of many abrupt 
mountain ranges. The San Andreas fault slices through portions of the Coachella and Imperial Valleys. 

A prominent topographic feature is the Salton Trough located in the south-central part of the region. 
Oriented in a northwest-southeast direction, the trough extends from San Gorgonio Pass in the north to 
the Mexican border and beyond to the Gulf of California. It includes the Coachella Valley in the north and 
Imperial Valley in the south. The low point of the trough is the Salton Sea, which was created between 
1905 and 1907 when the headworks of an irrigation canal conveying Colorado River water to Imperial 
Valley broke. Large volumes of water flowed into the Salton Sink, resulting in the sea that exists today. 
In September 1993, the Salton Sea's water surface level was about 227 feet below sea level. 

The climate for most of the region is subtropical desert. Average annual precipitation is much higher 
in the western mountains than in the desert areas. Winter snows generally fall above 5,000 feet; snow 
depths can reach several feet at the highest levels during winter. Most of the precipitation in the region 
falls during the winter; however, summer thunder storms can produce rain and local flooding in many 
areas. 

Region Characteristics 

Average Annual Precipitation: 5.5 inches Average Annual Runoff : 1 78,700 acre-feet 

Land Area: 19,730 square miles 1990 Population: 464,200 i 



273 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Colorado River Region 



Drainage in the region is internal except for the eastern portion, which drains into the Colorado River. 
Portions of the Coachella Valley are drained by the Whitewater River, which terminates in the Salton Sea. 
The Imperial Valley is drained by the Alamo and New Rivers, which originate in Mexico and terminate 
in the Salton Sea. 

Population 

The Colorado River Region's population increased from 313,000 in 1980 to 464,200 in 1990, over 
48 percent. Most of the population is concentrated in the Coachella and Imperial Valleys. Major cities in 
the Coachella Valley include Palm Springs, Indio, Cathedral City, and Palm Desert. Other urban centers 
in the region include the Cities of El Centro, Brawley, and Calexico in Imperial Valley, the Cities of 
Beaumont and Banning in the San Gorgonio Pass area, and the cities of Needles and Blythe along the 
Colorado River. Table CR-1 shows the population projections for this region. 

Table CR-1. Population Projections 

(thousands) 

Planning Subareas 1990 2000 2010 2020 

Twenty Nine Palms 

Chuckwalla 

Colorado River 

Coachella 

Borrego 

Imperial Valley 

Total 463 639 818 1,003 

About 1 .5 percent of California's population resides in the region. Urban development in the 
Coachella Valley is proceeding at a rapid pace due to affordable housing and the area's aesthetic appeal. 
Much of the growth is attributed to retirees and others finding the climate and real estate settings 
attractive. 

Land Use 

Federal and state government-owned lands account for about 14,270 square miles, or 72 percent of 
the total land area of the region. There are several military training and testing grounds, including the 
large U.S. Marine Corps Military Training Center at Twenty Nine Palms and the gunnery range in the 
Chocolate Mountains. Major parks include Joshua Tree National Monument and Anza-Borrego Desert 
State Park. The U. S. Bureau of Land Management oversees use of much of the desert lands 

The number one industry and most important source of income for the region is agriculture. Almosi 
90 percent, 647,000 acres, of the developed private land is being used for agriculture, most of which is 



274 



60 


78 


102 


124 


'W:'W 


2 


3 


3 


3 


' M 


28 


31 


35 


38 


M 


263 


375 


496 


619 


:: -i^ 


6 


8 


9 


11 


. yh 


104 


144 


' 173 


208 





I 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Colorado River Region 



located in Imperial Valley. Because of a lack of significant rainfall, all crops planted and harvested in 
these areas receive irrigation water, imported mostly from the Colorado River. Some ground water 
supplies are used as well. Some of the more prominent crops include alfalfa, winter vegetables, spring 
melons, table grapes, dates, Sudan grass, and wheat. Figure CR-1 shows land use, along with imports, 
j exports, and water supplies for the San Joaquin River Region. 

Together, recreation and tourism have become the second most important industry and source of 
income for the region. In Coachella Valley, a heavy media advertising campaign over the past decade has 
promoted the positive aspects of resort lifestyle and golf, and has contributed to the influx of retirees and 
vacationers from around the world. To accommodate and maintain the increase in businesses, developers 
in the valley have constructed world-class hotels, country clubs, golf courses, and residential 
communities from Palm Springs to Indio. Over 90 golf courses have now been established in the valley. 
Other activities, such as boating, water sports, and fishing on the Salton Sea and Colorado River, snow 
skiing in the higher mountains, and camping, are also promoted to maintain the strong recreation and 
tourism industry. 

Most of the remaining industries are generally associated with the region's intensive agricultural 
, activities. These industries process, pack, and distribute harvested crops or manufacture and sell 
' agricultural equipment and materials. Other industries in the region include geothermal and alternative 

energy developments near the Salton Sea and in Imperial Valley, wind farms near San Gorgonio Pass, and 

gold and miscellaneous mining operations. 

The major issue involving land use in the Colorado River Region is how to balance long-term 
preservation and protection of the land while providing various kinds of recreational opportunities. 
Recent discussions have centered on proposed federal legislation that would enlarge and give national 
park status to the East Mojave National Scenic Area and Joshua Tree National Monument. 



275 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Colorado River Region 



! 



PRESENT WATER SUPPUES 

(1,000 AF/Yr.) 



LOCAL SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT 
GROUND WATER PERENNIAL YIELD 
COLORADO RIVER 
STATE WATER PROJECT 
WATER RECLAMATION 
WATER SUPPLY 



GROUND WATER OVERDRAFT 
TOTAL 



Call fornia Aqueduct 
(Exchange Agreement ) 




Colorado 

Ri ver 

3,898 



Region Water Transfer 

d.OOO'* of A<»-FMt par Ymi) 



Figure CR-1. Colorado River Region 
Land Use, Imports, Exports, and Water Supplies 



276 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Colorado River Region 



Water Supply 

The region began its water development by depending mostly on ground water, as in the Coachella 
Valley, supplemented with a minimum of surface water (those rivers that supply water to the Palm 
Springs area). Water demands are met from the following sources: Colorado River (through local 
diversions, the Colorado River Aqueduct, and the Ail-American and Coachella Canals), State Water 
Project (indirectly), ground water, local surface water, and reclaimed water. Figure CR-2 shows the 
region's 1990 level sources of supply. 



Figure CR-2. Colorado River Region 

Water Supply Sources (Average Conditions) 

1990 Level 



Total Imports* 
95.8% 




Local Surface 
Water 

.1% 

Reclaimed 

.1% 



includes imports by local agencies and imports from the Colorado River and the State Water Project. See the Region Water Supplies 
Table CR-2 for details. 



I 



277 



lal 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Colorado River Region 

Supply with Existing Facilities 

In 1938, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation began conveying Colorado River water, via the 
All-American Canal, to the Imperial Valley, Coachella Valley, and Borrego. The Ail-American Canal 
can carry 15,100 cubic feet per second, which has provided these areas with an adequate and reliable 
supply of water. There are no major water supply reservoirs in the region beyond those on the Colorado 
River. Table CR-2 shows water supplies with existing facilities and water management programs. 

The Colorado River also supplies water to areas served by the Colorado River Aqueduct, owned by 
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. The California apportionment of Colorado River 
water is 4.4 million AF annually plus one-half of any surplus. California consumptively used over 5.2 
MAF of Colorado River water in 1990, of which 3.9 MAF was used in the Colorado River Region. 
Water from the Colorado River makes up about 95 percent of the region's total supply. 



Table CR-2. Water Supplies with Existing Facilities 

and Programs 

(Decision 1485 Operating Criteria for Delta Supplies) 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Supply 


1990 
average drought 


2000 

average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 

average drought 


Surface 


















Local 


6 


4 


6 


4 


< 6 


4 


6 


4 


Local imports 





^^1 




















Colorado River^ 


3,898 


3.898 


3,774 


3,774 


3,774 


3,774 


3,774 


3,774 


CVP 


























Other federal 


























SWP 


58 


43 


56 


35 


53 


32 


53 


32 


Ground water 


79 


79 


76 


78 


79 


79 


79 


79 


Overdraft 


80 


80 


68 


68 


65 


65 


67 


67 


Reclaimed 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


Dedicated natural flow 


























Total 


4,124 


4,107 


3,983 


3,960 


3,980 


3,957 


3,982 


3,959 



^Colorado River supplies for the year 2000 and beyond reflect elimination of surplus Colorado River supply and transfer 
of 76,000 AF of water to the South Coast Region as a result of currently agreed upon conservation programs. 

Three State Water Project contractors are located in the region: Desert Water Agency, Coachella 
Valley Water District, and San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency. The SWP does not extend into the region at 
this time; however, MWDSC has signed an exchange agreement with Desert Water Agency and 
Coachella Valley Water District that allows MWDSC to take the two agencies' SWP entitlement water. 



278 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Colorado River Region 

In return, MWDSC releases the same quantity of pre-delivered water from its Colorado River Aqueduct 
I into the Whitewater River for recharge of the ground water basin in the Coachella Valley. Local surface 
water supply in the Coachella subarea amounted to about 6,000 AF in 1990. This supply is derived from 
the Whitewater River. However, the supply is not dependable in times of drought. 

About 2,700 AF of fresh water was displaced by reclaimed water in 1990. Most of the fresh water 
displacement occurred in the Coachella (about 2,000 AF) and Twenty-Nine Palms (almost 700 AF) 
PSAs, with less than 100 AF displaced in the Imperial PSA. Most of the reclaimed water was applied to 
golf courses and resort hotel common areas. 

Total ground water supplies for 1990 were about 160,(X)0 AF, almost 4 percent of the region's total 
I supply. The Coachella PSA accounted for about 89,000 AF of the ground water use in the region, 56,0(X) 
AF of this use was overdraft. Recharge of various ground water basins depends on location. Streamflow, 
percolation, subsurface inflow, periodic Colorado River flooding, and canal leakage all provide ground 
water basin recharge. 

From 1990 to 2020 overdraft could be reduced by over 16 percent (80,000 AF in 1990 to 67,000 AF 
in 2020) in the Colorado River Region. Reduced agricultural demand and increased SWP deliveries 
account for most of this decrease. 

Supply with Additional Facilities and Water Management Programs 

Future water management options are presented in two levels to better reflect the status of 
investigations required to implement them. 

O Level I options are those that have undergone extensive investigation and environmental analyses 

I and are judged to have a high likelihood of being implemented by 2020. 

O Level II options are those that could fill the remaining gap between water supply and demand. 
These options require more investigation and alternative analyses. 

Drought Water Management Strategies. State requirements for water shortage contingency plans 
for urban water providers encourage urban water agencies to implement water conservation measures and 
practices within their respective service areas and to plan strategies for managing shortages. The Federal 
Reclamation Reform Act of 1982 requires that water suppliers who contract with the U. S. Bureau of 
Reclamation prepare water conservation plans and update them every five years. Most of the larger 
agencies in the region would be affected. (Volume I, Chapter 2 of the California Water Plan Update 
presents more details of the 1982 act.) These planning steps constitute the major drought water 
management efforts in the region. The recent drought has not adversely affected the area due to ample 
l^puryover of supplies in the lower Colorado River. " 

I 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Colorado River Regicm 

Water Management Options with Additional Facilities. Currently, the San Gorgonio Pass Water 
Agency plans to construct facilities that would allow it to import its SWP entitlement (17,300 AF) plus 
an additional 50,000 AF to be used conjunctively in the ground water basin. Under this plan, facilities 
would have a carrying capacity of 32 cfs. The facilities are expected to be on-line in 1995 or 1996. 

An estimated 1 MAF of evacuated space is available within the San Gorgonio ground water basins. 
At present, the agency is gathering hydrogeologic information to determine whether or not to make a 
feasibility study. To date, two 1 ,000-foot-deep exploration wells and two monitoring wells (100 feet and 
250 feet deep) have been established in the potential recharge area. 

The Mojave Water Agency is constructing the Morongo Basin Pipeline, which will convey State 
Water Project water from the Hesperia turnout of the California Aqueduct to the Morongo Basin-Johnson 
Valley area. The design capacity of the pipeline is 22 cubic feet per second. Construction is scheduled to 
be completed in 1994. The San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency, a SWP water contractor, has no physical 
facilities for transporting its SWP entitlement of 17,300 AF. The agency is currently designing facilities 
to take delivery of its entitlement. San Gorgonio serves the cities of Banning and Beaumont and the 
Morongo Indian Reservation. Table CR-3 shows water supplies with additional Level I water 
management programs 



280 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Colorado River Region 



Table CR-3. Water Supplies with Level I Water Management Programs 

(Decision 1485 Operating Criteria for Delta Supplies) 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Supply 


1990 


2000 


2010 


2020 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


average 


drought 


Surface 


















Local 


6 


4 


6 


4 


6 


4 


6 


4 


Local imports 


























Colorado River'' 


3,898 


3.898 


3,704 


3,704 


3,704 


3,704 


3,704 


3,704 


CVP 


























Other federal 























MB 


SWP 


58 


43 


59 


44 


62 


51 


62 


^^p 


Ground water 


79 


79 


76 


76 


84 


84 


43 


43 


Overdraft 


80 


80 


68 


68 


60 


60 


60 


60 


Reclaimed 
Dedicated natural flow 


3 



3 



4 



4 



4 



4 



5 



fl»H^ 


Total 


4,124 


4,107 


3,917 


3,896 


3,920 


3,907 


3,880 


3,868 



1 Colorado River supplies for the year 2000 and beyond reflect elimination of surplus Colorado River supplies, the transfer 
of 76,000 AF of water as a result of a currently agreed upon conservation program, and the saving of 70,000 AF of water 
by lining the All American Canal, a Level I conservation program. 

I 

■ Water Use 

The 1990 level annual net water demand within the Colorado River Region is about 4,124,000 AF. 
Agricultural irrigation accounts for 83 percent of the region's net water use, while municipal and 
i industrial use accounts for almost 5 percent. The Colorado River Region's agricultural water use is the 
fourth highest in the State. Even though the region has a small permanent population base, the water 
requirements of its recreation and tourism industries make up a large portion of the region's municipal 
and industrial net water use of 204,000 AF. Figure CR-3 shows 1990 level of development net water 
demands for the Colorado River Region. 



281 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Colorado River Region 



Figure CR-3. Colorado River Region 

Net Water Demand (Average Conditions) 

1990 Level 



Agricultural 
83% 




Environmental 
1% 



Urban Water Use 

Population projections indicate that urban applied water demand will increase about 106 percent 
between 1990 and 2020, due to an expected population increase of roughly 1 17 percent during the same 
period. Table CR-4 shows the total urban applied net water demand, and depletion for the Colorado 
River Region through 2020. Much of the increase in urban water demand can be attributed to the 



282 




Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Colorado River Region 



development of recreation and resort facilities in Coachella Valley. Figure CR-4 shows the 1990 level 
applied urban water demands by sector. 

Table CR-4. Urban Water Demand 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Planning Subareas 


1990 
average drought 


2000 
average drought 


2010 
average drought 


2020 

average drought 


IWenty Nine Palms 


















Applied water demand 


11 


HP 


14 


14 


18 


18 


22 


22 


Net water demand 


6 


P™*6 


8 


8 


11 


11 


13 


13 


Depletion 


6 


m g 


8 


8 


11 


11 


13 


13 


Chuckwalla 


















Applied water demand 














1 


1 


1 


1 


Net water demand 





m. ° 




















Depletion 





m 




















Colorado River 


















Applied water demand 


11 


i ^^ 


12 


12 


14 


14 


15 


15 


Net water demand 


6 


i ^ 


7 


7 


8 


8 


9 


9 


Depletion 


6 


6 


7 


7 


8 


8 


9 


9 


Coachella 












M 






Applied water demand 


251 


251 


335 


335 


431 


™' 


524 


524 


Net water demand 


165 


165 


220 


220 


283 


283 


344 


344 


Depletion 


165 


165 


220 


220 


283 


283 


344 


344 


Borrego 




ft 














Applied water demand 


2 


lliiiii 


2 


2 


3 


3 


3 


3 


Net water demand 


1 


HH| 


1 


1 


2 


2 


2 


2 


Depletion 
Imperial Valley 


1 


^H 


1 


1 


2 


2 


2 


2 
















Applied water demand 


26 


26 


36 


36 


45 


45 


56 


56 


Net water demand 


26 


26 


36 


36 


45 


45 


56 


56 


Depletion 


26 


26 


36 


36 


45 


45 


56 


56 


Total 




HH 


1 












Applied water demand 


301 


HUP 


399 ^ 


399 


512 


512 


621 


621 


Net water demand 


204 


204 


272 


272 


349 


349 


424 


424 


Depletion 


204 


204 


272 


272 


349 


349 


424 


424 



283 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Colorado River Region 



Figure CR-4. Colorado River Region 

Total Applied Urban Water Demand 

(Average Conditions) 

1990 Level 




Industrial 

2% 

Governmental 

3% 



Average 1990 level water use for the region was 336 gallons per capita daily. However, values range 
from 853 gpcd in the Coachella PSA to 163 gpcd in the less densely populated areas of the Twenty Nine 
Palms PSA. Average per capita water use is expected to increase by about 7 percent between 1990 and 
2020. 

The higher per capita values in 1990 are attributable to a large tourism industry, greater landscape 
irrigation requirements, and a rise in the number of people who reside in the region part-time. Lower 



284 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Colorado River Region 



per-capita values are common in areas where the residential landscape requirements are lower and 
commercial and industrial water uses are extremely small. 

Agricultural Water Use 

The 1990 level irrigated crop acreage for the Colorado River Region amounted to 750,000 acres. 
Table CR-5 shows irrigated crop acreage projections to 2020. Most of the major agricultural operations 
n the region are in the Imperial Valley, Colorado River, and Coachella PSAs, with the largest and most 
ntensive being located in the Imperial Valley PSA. Minor reductions of about three percent in total 
rrigated crop acres are projected to occur between 1990 and 2020. However, increases will occur in the 
blanted and harvested acres for certain high market value crops, such as fresh market vegetables, 
pemand by both international and domestic markets for fresh vegetables will probably encourage 
growers to maintain current levels of crop production and, if possible, plant and harvest additional acres. 
bdier crops expected to show minor to moderate increases are small grains, citrus and subtropical fruit, 
;ugar beets, and cotton. For cotton, current pest problems caused by boll worm could be rectified and 
idditional acres planted, mainly in Imperial Valley. The silverleaf whitefly infestation, primarily in 
mperial Valley, has caused temporary minor reductions in the recent planted and harvested acreage. 
Eradication and management efforts should mitigate the problems caused by these pests and allow crop 
icreage to return to normal levels. Table CR-6 shows the 1990 level evapotranspiration of applied water 
)y crop. 

Table CR-5. Irrigated Crop Acreage 

(thousands of acres) 



Planning Subareas 



1990 



2000 



2010 



2020 



Twenty Nine Palms 

Chuckwalla 

Colorado River 

Coachella 

Borrego 

Imperial Valley 

Total 



4 


6 


7 


7 


6 


3 


3 


3 


130 


131 


132 


132 


74 


64 


48 


37 


10 


12 « 


13 


13 


526 


530 ' 


534 


534 



750 



746 



737 



726 



285 



Bulletin 160-93 Administratiye Draft 



Colorado River Region 



The four top crops in terms of acreage and total gross applied water use are alfalfa, track (vegetables 
and nursery), small grains, and miscellaneous field. In 1990, alfalfa used roughly 50 percent of the total 
gross applied agricultural water. Figure CR-5 compares 1990 crop acreages, evapotranspiration, and 
applied water for major crops. 

Table CR-6. 1990 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water by Crop 

(thousands of acres) 



Irrigated Crop 


Total Acres 
(1,000) 


Total ETAW 
(1,000 AF) 


Irrigated Crop 


Total Acres 
(1,000) 


Total ETAW 

(1,000 AF) 


Grain 


76 


152 


Pasture 


31 


176 


Cotton 


37 


121 


Tomatoes 


13 


32 


Sugar beets 


36 


134 


Other truck 


190 


310 


Com 


8 


20 


Other deciduous 


1 


5 


Other field 


55 


146 


Vineyard 


20 


65 


MaUfSi 


255 


1.381 


Citrus/olives 


29 


123 




Total 


750 


2,665 



mi 



Reductions in irrigated acres are expected for crops or crop categories with low or fluctuating market 
values, such as alfalfa, com, and miscellaneous Held crops. Market competition (international and 
domestic) and the pressures from urban encroachment may cause decreases in acres planted with table 
gntpes in the Coachella Valley. Total 1990 agricultural applied water demand was about 3.7 MAF and net 
water demand was about 3.4 MAF. Table CR-7 summarizes the 1990 and projected agricultural water 
demand in the region. 



286 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Colorado River Region 



Table CR-7. Agricultural Water Demand 

(thousands of acre -feet) 



Planning Subareas 



1990 2000 2010 

average drought average drought average drought 



2020 
average drought 



IWenty-Nine Palms 

Applied water demand 
Net water demand 
Depletion 



22 
20 
20 



22 
20 
20 



28 
24 
24 



28 
24 
24 



32 
28 
28 



32 
28 
28 



34 m 

30 

30 



34 
30 
30 



Chuckwalla 

Applied water demand 
Net water demand 
Depletion 



30 
27 
27 



30 

27 
27 



17 
16 
16 



17 
16 
16 



13 
12 
12 



13 
12 
12 



15 
13 
13 




13 
13 



Colorado River 

Applied water demand 
Net water demand 
Depletion 



785 
606 
606 



785 
606 
606 



751 
588 
588 



751 
588 
588 



705 
566 
566 



705 
566 
566 



698 

559 
559 



698 
559 
559 



Coachella 

Applied water demand 
Net water demand 
Depletion 



393 
313 
313 



393 
313 
313 



342 
277 
277 



342 
277 
277 



260 
215 
215 



260 
215 
215 



202 
168 
168 



202 
168 
168 



Borrego 

Applied water demand 
Net water demand 
Depletion 



Imperial Valley 

Applied water demand 
Net water demand 
Depletion 



37 
35 
35 



37 
35 
35 



45 
42 
42 



45 
42 
42 



48 
46 
46 



48 
46 
46 



51 
48 
48 



2,438 2,438 
2,438 2,438 
2,438 2,438 



2,415 
2,415 
2,415 



2,415 
2,415 
2,415 



2,395 2,395 
2,395 2,395 
2,395 2,395 



2,363 
2,363 
2,363 



48 
48 



2,363 
2.363 
2,363 



Total 

Applied water demand 
Net water demand 
Depletion 



3,705 


3,705 


3,598 


3,598 


3,453 


3,453 


3,363 


3,363 


3,439 


3,439 


3,362 


3,362 


3,262 


34262 


3,181 


3,181 


3,439 


3,439 


3,362 


3,362 


3,262 


3,262 


3,181 


3,181 




287 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Colorado River Region 



800 



Acres p< 1 ,000) 



600 



400 



200 



Acre-Feet (X 1 ,000) 




2,400 



1,800 



1,200 



-600 







Grain Other Field Alfalfa Other Truck 
■Acreage META\N ■Applied Water 



Figure CR-5. Colorado River Region 
1990 Acreage, ETAW, and Applied Water for Major Crops 



288 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Colorado River Region 



Minor reductions in crop acreage and applied water use are expected for the region. Projections 
indicate that the region's total applied agricultural water use will decrease by about 9 percent between 1990 
and 2020. Improvements in on-farm irrigation operations and irrigation system technologies, the loss of 
irrigated land caused by urbanization, and minor shifts in crop type will contribute to the decrease. Table 
CR-7 shows increases of about 55 percent and 38 percent in applied agricultural water use between 1990 
and 2020 in the Twenty-Nine Palms and Borrego PSAs, respectively. During the same period, decreases of 
about 50 percent are projected for both the Chuckwalla and Coachella PSAs. 

Since the late 1970s, major efforts have been undertaken by local governments, water agencies, and 
growers to improve the efficiency of agricultural irrigation operations in the region. The most observable 
improvements have been made in the Imperial and Coachella Valleys. Agricultural conservation in the 
region can be placed into two categories: (1) on-farm irrigation system management and operation 
improvements and (2) conveyance system improvements. Examples of current on-farm improvements 
include: careful management and design of furrows, basin and sprinkler systems to minimize excessive 
tailwater runoff from the ends of fields into drains and to evenly irrigate the entire field; laser leveling of 
fields to improve movement of irrigation water in furrows and basin systems; implementing 
micro-irrigation technology (drip emitters and micro-jet sprinklers) for permanent crops; using different 
irrigation and cultivation techniques (hand-move sprinklers for pre-irrigation of fields and seed 
germination); reusing tailwater to supplement delivered water for the irrigation of another field; and 
irrigation scheduling. Subsurface irrigation systems are also being tested on certain crops in the region. 

Conveyance system improvements have come in the form of: constructing regulatory reservoirs to 
enhance the delivery and storage capabilities of the system; concrete lining of canals and laterals with 
concrete to minimize supply losses due to seepage; automating the system with telemetry for improved 
control over the delivery of water; and installing seepage recovery and operational spill interceptor 
systems. 

Environmental Water Use 

Total 1990 environmental water use for the Colorado River Region amounts to nearly 40,000 AF. 
Demands are projected to increase 13 percent by 2000 and remain at the 44,000 AF level through 2020. 
Colorado River water supplies most of this use. Currently, there are two major areas where water is used 
for wildlife habitat in the region: the Salton Sea National Wildlife Refuge and Imperial Wildlife Area. 
There are also several private wetlands. Table CR-8 shows wetland water needs in the Colorado River 
Region. 



289 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Colorado River Region 

The Salton Sea National Wildlife Refuge was established in 1930 by executive order. Originally, the 
refuge contained 23,425 acres, but due to inflow of agricultural drain water and a rise in the sea level, 
most of the refuge is now inundated. About 2,500 acres of manageable habitat remain, with about 1 ,068 
acres managed as marsh land. In 1990, the refuge used about 4,900 AF of fresh water. Projections 
indicate the refuge will require about 10,000 AF of fresh water by the year 2000. 

The Imperial Wildlife Area is operated and managed by the State Department of Fish and Game. The 
area is comprised of two units. The Finney-Ramer unit contains two lakes with a combined area of 320 
acres and several small ponds. The total water surface area of the unit is about 2,050 acres, with total 
annual water use estimated at 7,600 AF. The Wister unit has a total water surface area of about 5,500 
acres and total annual water use of almost 21,000 AF. Demands are projected to remain level through 
2020. 

Private wetlands in the Colorado River Region occupy about 2,225 acres and consumptively use 
roughly 5,330 AF of fresh water annually. These wetlands, scattered throughout Imperial and Riverside 
Counties, are used for duck hunting. 



290 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Colorado River Region 



Table CR-8. Wetlands Water Needs 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Wetlands 



1990 2000 2010 2020 

average drought average drought average drought average drought 



Salton Sea 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



10 
10 
10 



10 
10 
10 



10 
10 
10 



10 
10 
10 



10 
10 
10 



10 
10 

10 



Imperial 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



29 
29 
29 



29 
29 
29 



29 
29 
29 



29 
29 
29 



29 
29 
29 



29 
29 
29 



29 
29 
29 



29 
29 
29 



Private 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



Total 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



39 
39 
39 



39 
39 
39 



44 
44 
44 



44 
44 
44 



44 
44 
44 



44 
44 
44 



44 
44 
44 



44 
44 
44 



Other Water Use 

Conveyance losses, primarily in the All-American and Coachella Canals, totaled about 360,000 AF 

in 1990. Both the Imperial Irrigation District and Coachella Valley Water District conveyance losses are 
calculated as the acre-feet of water allocated to them minus the amount of water actually sold to users by 
the districts. Conveyance losses are projected to decrease to 170,000 AF by 2020, as a result of 
conservation programs to line the canals. Geothermal power plants in Imperial Valley PSA produce 
about 379 megawatts per year and use about 74,200 AF of cooling water annually in their operation. 
Table CR-9 shows the total water demand for this region. 

Recreational facilities are found in all PSAs; most consist of campgrounds and parks, and water is 
used for drinking, landscape watering, toilets, showers, and facility maintenance. Total water use in these 
areas amounted to almost 5,000 AF in 1990. The Colorado River PSA accounted for about 3,000 AF of 
that use. Recreation includes water skiing, boating, fishing, and swimming. Figure CR-6 shows water 
recreation areas in the Colorado River Region. 



I 



291 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Colorado River Region 



Table CR-9. Total Water Demands 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Category of Use 



1990 2000 2010 2020 

average drought average drought average drought average drought 



Urban 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



301 
204 
204 



301 
204 
204 



399 
272 
272 



399 
272 
272 



512 
349 
349 



512 
349 
349 



621 
424 
424 



621 



42^ 



Agricultural 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



3,705 3,705 
3,439 3,439 
3,439 3,439 



3,598 
3,362 
3,362 



3.598 
3,362 
3,362 



3,453 
3,262 
3,262 



3,453 3,363 
3,262 3,181 
3,262 3,181 



Environmental 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



39 
39 
39 



39 
39 
39 



44 
44 
44 



44 
44 
44 



44 
44 
44 



44 
44 
44 



Otheri 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



82 
442 
442 



82 
442 
442 



83 
363 

363 



83 
363 
363 



83 
363 
363 



83 
363 

363 



Total 

Applied water 
Net water 
Depletion 



4,127 4,127 4,124 4,124 4,092 4,092 4,111 4,111 

4,124 4,124 4,041 4,041 4,018 4,018 4,012 4,012 

4,124 4,124 4,041 4,041 4,0t8 4,018 4,012 4,012 



^ Other includes conveyance losses, recreation uses, and water used in energy production. 



292 



(ulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Colorado River Region 



Leg end 
▲ Water Recreation Area 
• Hydroelectric Power Plant 

WATER RECREATION AREAS 

1. Salton Sea S.R^ 

2. Picacho State Recreation Area 




_-.-i--VT? 1 c ° 



10 20 30 



Figure CR-6. Colorado River Region 
Water Recreation Areas 



293 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Colorado River Region 



Issues Affecting Local Water Resource Management 

Legislation and Litigation 

Colorado River Water Allocations. As a result of the 1964 U.S. Supreme Court decree in Arizona v. 
California, California's allocation of Colorado River water was quantified and five lower Colorado River 
Indian tribes were awarded 905,496 acre-feet of annual diversions, 131,400 AF of which were allocated 
for use in and chargeable to California pursuant to a later supplemental decree. 

In 1978, the tribes asked the court to grant them additional water rights, alleging that the United 
States failed to claim a sufficient amount of irrigable acreage, called "omitted" lands, in the earlier 
litigation. The tribes also raised claims for more water based on allegedly larger reservation boundaries 
than had been assumed by the court in its initial award of water rights to the tribes, called "boundary" 
lands. In 1982, the special master appointed by the Supreme Court to hear these claims recommended 
that additional water rights be granted to the Indian tribes. In 1983, however, the court rejected the 
claims for omitted lands from further consideration and ruled that the claims for boundary lands could 
not be resolved until disputed boundaries were finally determined. Three of the five tribes — Fort 
Mohave Indian Tribe, Quechan Indian Tribe, and Colorado River Indian Tribe — are pursuing additional 
water rights related to the boundary lands claims in a further Supreme Court proceeding currently being 
held by still another special master. A settlement may be reached soon on the Fort Mohave claim. The 
Quechan claim has been rejected by the special master on the grounds that any such claim was 
necessarily disposed of as part of a Court of Claims settlement entered into by the tribe in a related matter 
in the mid-1980s. The Colorado River Indian Tribe case was presented to the special master in early 
1993. As with all claims to water from the main stem of the Colorado River and any determination by 
the special master, only the U.S. Supreme Court itself can make the final ruling. 

Any Colorado River or Fort Mohave tribal claims granted for additional water rights would reduce 
the amount of water available to satisfy the fourth priority demands of The Metropolitan Water District of 
Southern California under the 1931 California Seven Party Agreement, which established priorities for 
use of California's entitlement. Any Quechan tribal claims granted for additional water rights would 
reduce the amount of water available to satisfy the third priority demands of the Coachella Valley Water 
District under this agreement because the Quechan tribe receives Colorado River water under the Yuma 
Project Reservation Division's second priority. If all additional water rights claims were granted to the 
three Indian tribes, MWD could effectively lose up to 22,600 AF and Coachella up to 45,200 AF of their 
Colorado River supplies. The actual amounts to be granted, if any, are yet to be determined. 



294 



I 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Colorado River Region 



The Lower Colorado Water Supply Act. On November 14, 1986, the President signed the Lower 
Colorado Water Supply Act, Public Law 99-655, authorizing the U.S. Secretary of the Interior to 
construct, operate, and maintain a project consisting of a series of wells along the AU-American Canal. 
The project would be capable of providing up to 10,000 AF of water annually from ground water storage 
to indirectly benefit the City of Needles, the community of Winterhaven, the U.S. Bureau of Land 
Management, and other municipal, industrial, and recreational users in California with no rights or 
insufficient rights to Colorado River water. Under PL 99-655, the Imperial Irrigation District or the 
Coachella Valley Water District, or both, would exchange a portion of their Colorado River water for an 
equivalent quantity and quality of ground water to be pumped from the well field into the Ail-American 
Canal during years that the total consumptive uses in the Lower Basin States are less than 7.5 MAF and 
apportioned but unused water is not available. The Lower Colorado Water Supply Project is now under 
construction and is scheduled for operation in 1994. 

Effects of the Central Arizona Project on Colorado River Allocations. The Central Arizona 
Project, with an annual diversion capacity of 2.1 MAF, started delivering water in December 1985. All 
aqueduct facilities were completed in 1992 and are projected to divert about 675,000 AF for municipal, 
industrial, and agricultural uses in Central Arizona in 1993. Deliveries are expected to increase to 1.5 
MAF annually under full development, with the capability of up to 2.1 MAF when it is available and 
needed. 

When the Central Arizona Project begins diverting its full allocation of Colorado River water, 
California will be limited to its basic annual apportionment of 4.4 MAF when the Secretary of the 
Interior declares that a normal condition exists. Additional water can and has been made available when 
the Secretary determines a surplus condition exists, or when one or both of the other Lower Division 
states (Arizona and Nevada) are not fully using their apportioned water. Since 1985, neither Arizona nor 
Nevada has used its full basic apportionment, and the Secretary of the Interior has allowed California to 
use surplus water or Arizona's and Nevada's apportioned but unused Colorado River water. These factors 
have allowed California to divert and consumptively use 4.5 MAF to 5.2 MAF annually since 1985. 

The availability of Colorado River water to California in 1993 was determined in the annual 
operating plan issued by the Secretary of the Interior in October 1992. The 1993 annual operating plan 
makes sufficient water available to supply all of California's reasonable beneficial consumptive use 
demands, but the plan contains a proviso that if the total mainstream consumptive use in the Lower 
Division states exceeds 7.5 MAF, the entity or entities responsible for the overuse will be required to 
compensate for such overuse by 1996. 



295 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Colorado River Region 



Lining of the Ail-American Canal. The Secretary of the Interior (under PL 100-675 enacted in 
1988) is authorized to line portions of the All-American Canal and the Coachella Canal, using funds 
provided by MWDSC, Coachella Valley Water District, Imperial Irrigation District, and Palo Verde 
Irrigation District. As of April 1993, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation was preparing a final 
environmental impact statement/report regarding lining of a portion of the All-American Canal. Lining 
the canal or constructing a parallel canal from Pilot Knob to Drop Number 3, about 25 miles east of 
Calexico, would save roughly 67,700 AF annually. 

The draft EIS/EIR for the project identified the preferred alternative to be a parallel concrete-lined 
canal. The final EIS/EIR is scheduled to be filed in 1993 and construction could begin in 1995. In 
addition, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation is preparing a draft EIR/EIS regarding lining another section of 
the Coachella Canal, from which savings are expected to total 30,000 AF per year. Thus, if both canals 
were lined, as much as 97,700 AF of water could be made available for other uses. 

Salinity Concentrations in the Colorado River. Salinity in the Colorado River varies from year to 
year because the river is subject to highly variable flows. As a result of high river flows from 1983 to 

1986, releases from reservoir storage into the lower Colorado River were greatly in excess of the releases 
required for beneficial uses. These record high flows reduced salinity in the lower river. However, since 

1987, with below normal water supply conditions and fewer reservoir releases being made to supply 
consumptive uses only, salinity levels have again increased. 

Like most western rivers, the Colorado increases in salinity from its headwaters to its mouth, 
carrying a salt load of about 9 million tons annually (measured at Hoover Dam). Roughly 50 percent of 
the river's salinity results naturally from salt in saline springs, ground water discharge into the river, 
erosion and dissolution of sediments, and evaporation and transpiration. About 37 percent of the salt 
load comes from agricultural return flows, which carry dissolved salts from underlying saline soils and 
geologic formations. The remainder of the salt load results from out-of-basin exports, reservoir 
evaporation, development of energy resources in the Upper Colorado River Basin, and other municipal 
and industrial uses. 

In 1972, the seven Colorado River Basin states adopted a policy that while they would continue to 
develop the Colorado River water apportioned to each of them, they would work with each other to 
maintain salinity concentrations in the lower main stem of the Colorado River at or below the flow 
weighted average annual salinity of 1 972. Later that year, amendments to the Federal Water Pollution 
Control Act required that standards for salinity in the Colorado River be established. In 1973, the seven 



296 



I 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Colorado River Region 



basin states created the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum to establish criteria and develop a 
plan for implementing a salinity control program. 

In 1975, all the basin states adopted the salinity standards set forth in the report Water Quality 
Standards for Salinity, Including Criteria, and Plan of Implementation for Salinity Control, Colorado 
River System, as recommended by the forum. The state-adopted and EPA-approved standards call for 
maintenance of average annual flow weighted salinity concentrations of 723 milligrams per liter below 
Hoover Dam, 747 mg/L below Parker Dam, and 879 mg/L at Imperial Dam. 

Because of changes in hydrologic conditions and water use within the Colorado River Basin, the 
forum reviews its plan of implementation every three years. The recommended revisions to the plan for 
1990 appear in Review, Water Quality Standards for Salinity, Colorado River System. The revised plan 
of implementation is designed to control enough salt to maintain the salinity criteria adopted in 1975 
under a long-term mean water supply of 15 million AF per year. The 1990 proposed plan of 
implementation includes: 

O Completion of U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Land Management, and Department of 
Agriculture salinity control measures. Currently remaining federal construction funds for these 
activities total about $669 million. 

O Imposition of effluent limitations, principally under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 
System permit program for industrial and municipal discharges. 

O Implementation of various forum-recommended policies on such subjects as use of brackish or 
saline waters for industrial purposes, NPDES standards for intercepted ground water, and fish 
hatcheries. 

The forum reported that average salinity concentrations for 1990 were 578 mg/L below Hoover Dam, 
600 mg/L below Parker Dam, and 702 mg/L at Imperial Dam, which were all below the forum's criteria. 
It also reported that there was no reason to believe the criteria would be exceeded during the 1990 to 
1993 period. In fact, projections appearing in the 1990 review state, "...except for deviations caused by 
factors beyond human control, average annual salinity levels would be maintained through 2010 at or 
below the 1972 levels with the recommended plan of implementation." 

Saltan Sea. The Salton Sea is a 35-mile-long, 12-mile-wide, 40-foot-deep, saline body of water. 
It lies 228 feet below sea level in the desert of Imperial and Riverside Counties. In 1924, the federal 
[government, recognizing the sea as a depository for agricultural drainage waters, placed lands lying 
[below Elevation -220 feet in and around the sea in a public water reserve. 



297 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Colorado River Region 

In 1968, California enacted a statute declaring that the primary use of the Salton Sea is for collection 
of agricultural drainage water, seepage, leachate, and control waters. In 1980, a Salton Sea shore farmer 
wrote a letter to the State Water Resources Control Board alleging that the Imperial Irrigation District 
was wasting water to the sea and causing his land to be flooded. After several hearings, the board, in 
1988, ordered IID to develop a plan to conserve 100,000 AF of water per year by 1994, The order 
required IID to make water delivery and irrigation practices more efficient and included a reservation of 
jurisdiction regarding the possible future conservation of up to 368,000 AF annually. 

The order caused concerns that conservation measures would lower the sea's surface level and 
increase salinity concentrations at a slightly faster rate. The Salton Sea became increasingly saline 
between 1907 and 1934, largely because of high evaporation and reduced inflow of fresh water. Since 
1934 the salinity has varied from 33,000 mg/L to 44,000 mg/L. Inflow from Imperial, Coachella, and 
Mexican Valleys from 1989 to 1991 was 977,000 AF, 108,000 AF, and 141,000 AF, respectively. 
Irrigation return flows, precipitation (which averages less than 3 inches per year), and local runoff are the 
only fresh water supplies to the sea. As is common in arid environments, the equivalent of several years 
rain may arrive in a single storm. With a watershed exceeding 8,000 square miles, a large storm can 
elevate the sea by one foot or more. 

Agricultural drainage carries with it varying amounts of nutrients, mainly compounds of nitrogen and 
phosphorus, which encourage the growth of algae. Although algae are very productive and support the 
higher trophic levels, algae blooms in the upper water levels discolor the water and, upon death and 
decomposition, often cause temporary anoxic conditions locally and produce obnoxious odors. Fish are 
occasionally killed by the temporary lack of oxygen. These conditions reduce the sea's aesthetic appeal 
and, to some extent, depress water contact recreation. 

The presence of selenium in the Salton Sea area has recently focused attention on its source or 
sources. The selenium content in the Colorado River water delivered to the Imperial and Coachella 
Valleys has been found to be about 2 parts per billion and reflects selenium contributions from tributaries 
to the main stem of the Colorado River in the Upper Colorado River Basin. The concentration of 
selenium in the sea water is about 2.5 ppb. As the result of a concentration of leachates from the soils 
irrigated with Colorado River water, higher levels of selenium concentrations in agricultural drains have 
been found. Although drainage water consists of components ( for example, tile water, tail water, and 
seepage) carrying different concentrations of selenium, the mixing that occurs in the drain channels 
results in a selenium concentration of about 8 ppb. 



298 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Colorado River Region 

The State Water Resources Control Board has adopted a California Inland Surface Waters Plan with a 
jrformance goal of 5 ppb for selenium concentrations in agricultural drain channels. In an earlier 
;tion, the California Department of Health Services, concerned over the concentration of selenium in the 
Bssue of fish in the sea, issued a health advisory that fish consumption by humans be limited to avoid any 
iverse health effects. 

Four bird species residing in the Salton Sea area are potentially adversely affected by organochlorine 
ssticides. Such pesticides are mobilized from farm fields and transported to drains by tail water runoff, 
tesuspension of bottom sediments in the New and Alamo Rivers and drains is another source of these 
jsticides. Twenty-three different organochlorine pesticides have been found in various types of biota in 
le Imperial Valley. 

The average salt loading of inflow the sea over the past 30 years has been 4.9 million tons per year. 
lince 1980, salinity concentrations have increased at a rate of 500 to 600 parts per million per year. As 
5f December 1992, salinity levels in the Salton Sea were 44,000 parts of salt per million parts of water — 
saltier than the ocean water, which averages 34,000 ppm. 

Further increases in salinity could harm fish and wildlife and the recreational resources in the area. 
Salinity concentrations in the sea are projected to reach 50,000 ppm in the next 10 years, even without 
irther conservation measures being implemented, which would increase the rate. It is not likely, even 
inder the most favorable hydrologic conditions, that the salinity of the sea will return to concentrations 
below 40,000 ppm, even without any further water conservation. On the other hand, flooding has also 
adversely affected shoreline developments and recreation. The sea has maintained relatively stable water 
elevations for the past decade. 

Since 1987, the Salton Sea Task Force, chaired by the State Resources Agency, has been studying 
these problems. This intergovernmental group's objective is to find a way to conserve water in the Salton 
Sea area while stabilizing the sea's salinity and water levels. Several plans have been proposed; however, 
all plans would incur substantial costs. The task force is continuing to explore various means of 
improving the financial feasibility of the plans and to seek some form of regional organization as a 
sponsoring entity to carry out and provide funding for preservation measures. 

Contracts and Agreements 

MWDSC Water Conservation Agreements. To compensate for the loss of Colorado River water 
under the Supreme Court decree in Arizona v. California, The Metropolitan Water District of Southern 
California is pursuing a number of programs to augment its supplies. In December 1988, MWDSC and 
Imperial Irrigation District signed the first of two agreements expected to make 106, 1 10 AF of conserved 

299 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Colorado River Region 



water available to MWDSC annually, except under certain limited circumstances, through the 
implementation of structural and nonstructural water conservation projects within IID's service area. The 
conservation measures to be used are: (1) concrete lining of existing earthen canals, (2) construction of 
reservoirs and canal spill interceptors, (3) installation of non-leak gates and distribution system 
automation equipment, and (4) on-farm management of irrigation water. MWDSC will furnish an 
estimated $222 million (1988 dollars) for the conservation projects. Increased conservation in the IID 
would reduce surface and subsurface fresh water inflow to the Salton Sea, thus shortening the time it 
takes for the sea to reach critical salinity concentrations. The potential for increasing the rate of salinity 
concentration is a controversial issue and, as yet, unresolved. 

The Palo Verde Irrigation District signed an agreement with MWD for a two-year fallowing program 
involving 22,000 acres of land that could save 200,000 AF of Colorado River water (100,000 AF per 
year). The fallowing began August 1, 1992 and will end July 31, 1994. Program lands lying fallow in 
1992 are required to lie fallow through July 31, 1994. Currently, about 90,000 AF has been conserved 
and that water is to be maintained in Lake Mead. MWDSC must use the water before the year 2000. 

IID and MWD were considering a test fallowing and modified irrigation practice program to save up 
to 200,000 AF of Colorado River water over a two-year period for MWD's use. Fallowing and modified 
irrigation of alfalfa would be conducted by Imperial Valley farmers on a voluntary basis for monetary 
compensation. 

Water Banking Proposal. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has formed a technical work group with 
representatives from California, Arizona, Nevada, and the Colorado River Indian tribes to explore the 
merits and feasibility of banking water in Lake Mead for use by California, Arizona, and Nevada, and the 
tribes. A banking proposal is being considered as a provision of proposed regulations being prepared by 
USER for administration of Colorado River entitlements in the Lower Basin. 

Yuma Desalting Plant. The high salinity of Colorado River water in past years led to protests from 
the Republic of Mexico and an agreement between the United States and Mexico. To enable the U.S. to 
comply with the agreement without depriving Colorado River basin states of any of their apportioned 
water, the Yuma Desalting Plant was authorized under Title I of PL 93-320 in 1974. The purpose of the 
desalter is to remove sufficient salts from irrigation drainage water from the Wellton-Mohawk Irrigation 
and Drainage District in Arizona to meet the established salinity control standards at the Northerly 
International Boundary when the treated drainage water is released into the river. At the Yuma Desalting 
Plant, the brine discharge is disposed of in a channel leading to the Santa Clara Slough in Mexico, and 
the treated water is blended with the remaining untreated drainage water and returned to the river. The 



300 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft Colorado River Region 

Yuma Desalting Plant began operation at one-third capacity in May 1992. Due to high flows in the Gila 
River early in 1993, the plant was shut down in January 1993. 

Under full operation, the desalter will be able to take about 98,000 acre-feet of drainage water and 

produce 68,500 acre-feet of product water; this will be blended with about 10,000 acre-feet of untreated 

irrigation water, so that a total of 78,500 acre-feet will be returned to the river. 
! 

Water Balance 

j Water balances were computed for each planning subarea in the Colorado River Region by 

; comparing existing and future water demand projections with the projected availability of supply. The 

j region total was computed as the sum of the individual subareas. This method does not reflect the 

fcverity of drought year shortages in some local areas which can be hidden when planning subareas are 

combined within the region. Thus, there could be substantial shortages in some areas during drought 
1 
1 periods. Local and regional shortages could also be less severe than the shortage shown, depending on 

i how supplies are allocated within the region, a particular water agency's ability to participate in water 

i transfers or demand management programs (including land fallowing or emergency allocation programs), 

I 

i and the overall level of reliability deemed necessary to the sustained economic health of the region. 

I Volume I, Chapter 11, presents a broader discussion of demand management options. 

i 
I 
i Table CR-10 presents water demands for the 1990 level and for future water demands to 2020 and 

I balances them with: (1) supplies from existing facilities and water management programs, and (2) fiiture 

demand management and water supply management options. 

Regional net water demands for the 1990 level of development totaled 4. 1 MAF for average and 
drought years. Those demands are projected to decrease to 4.0 MAF by the year 2020, after accounting 
for a 35,000 AF reduction in urban water demand resulting from implementation of long-term 
conservation measures and a 200,000 AF reduction in agricultural demand resulting from additional 
long-term agricultural water conservation measures. 

Urban net water demand is expected to increase by about 220,000 AF by 2020, primarily due to 
I increases in population, while agricultural net water demand is expected to decrease by about 260,000 
AF. Environmental net water demands, under existing rules and regulations, will increase from 39,000 
to 44,000 AF annually as a result of increased allocation of water to wildlife refuges. 

Average annual supplies were generally adequate to meet average net water demands in 1990 for this 
region. However, during drought, present supplies are insufficient to meet present demands and, without 
additional water management programs, annual average and drought year shortages are expected to be 
limited to about 0.03 and 0.05 MAF by 2020 respectively. 



301 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Colorado River Region 



Table CR-10. Water Balance 
(thousands of acre -feet) 



Demand/Supply 


1990 
average drought 


average 


2020 

drought 


Net Demand 










Urban -with 1990level of conservation 


204 


204 


459 


459 


-reductions due to long-term conservation measures (Level 1) 


-- 


— 


-35 


-35 


Agricultural 


3,439 


3,439 


3,381 


3,381 


-reductions due to long-term conservation measures (Level 1) 


-- 


— 


-200 


-200 


Environmental 


39 


39 


44 


44 


Other (1) 


442 


442 


363 


363 


Total Net Demand 


4,124 


4,124 


4,012 


4,012 


Water Supplies w/ExistIng Facilities Under D-1485 for Delta Supplies 










Developed Supplies 








1 


Surface Water 


3,965 


3,948 


3,836 


3,813 


Ground Water 


79 


79 


79 


79 


Ground Water Overdraft 


80 


80 


67 


67 


Subtotal 


4,124 


4,107 


3,982 


3,959 


Dedicated Natural Flow 














Total Water Supplies 


4,124 


4,107 


3,982 


3,959 


Demand/Supply Balance 





-17 


-30 


-53 


Future Water Management Options Level 1 (2) 










Long-term Supply Augmentation 










Reclaimed 






2 


2 


Local (3) 


- 










Colorado River 






-70 


-70 


State Water Project 






9 


20 


Subtotal - Water Management Options Level 1 






-59 


-48 


Ground Water/Surface Water Use Reduction Resulting from Level 1 Programs 






-27 


-27 


Remaining Demand/Supply Balance Requiring Short-Term Drought 
Management and/or Future Level 11 Options 






-62 


-74 


(1) Includes conveyance losses, recreation uses and energy production. 

(2) Protection of fish and wildlife and long-term solution to complex Delta problems will determine the feasibility of several water 
supply augmentation proposals and their water supply benefits. 



With planned Level I options, average and drought year shortages could be about 62,0(X) and 74,(XX) 
AF respectively. This remaining shortage requires both additional short-term drought management and 
future long-term Level II options depending on the overall level of water service reliability deemed 
necessary, by local agencies, to sustain the economic health of the region. Because of high priority of 
rights to Colorado River water by such areas in the Palo Verde Irrigation District, the Coachella Valley, 
and the Imperial Valley, any future shortages in these areas are expected to be limited. 



* * * 



302 



>raft of The California Water Plan Update 



Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 



APPENDIXES 



Appendix C Planning Subarea and 

Land Ownership Maps 



Appendix D Hydroelectric Resources 

of California 



Draft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 



Appendix C 



PLANNING SUB AREA AND LAND 
OWNERSHIP MAPS 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 



A 



T^ 



JMC 



*r^ 



^L 



T 



i 



-^R 



\ 



,N-'. 



.*^'S 



--^.^ 



--x 



■Ki^ 



£7"^ 



.^ 



/ 



r 



If 



^ 



.^. 



Xv 



Jf^ 



Legend 

OWNER 
ACRE8(»1000) 

-1 PWVATE 

J 51413 

I COUNTY/CITY 1/NOS 

I 486 

I STATE UVOS 

I 684 

I STATE FMKS ft REC 

I 1081 

I STATE F6H ft GWC 

I 97 

I COF 

I 68 

-1 MiUT>«Y 

J 3697 

-I BUREAU RECMHTION 

J 70 

-] BUREMJ WDMNAFfAR 

J 504 

-1 US RSH ft VMLOUFE 

J 210 

1 Mil PMK/MONUMB(T 

J 4491 

-{ BUREAU LAND MGMT 

J 17556 

-1 NATIONAL FOREST 

J 20646 



L 



f"' J 



tTL 



Tl 



L 



^ 



CR 



Statewide Land Ownership 



303 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 



14 



OREGON 



m 



^AMi 



J>. 



YCf 



!fo 



Lo\ 
KlamaUb 
Lalcff 



hWM rule 






s 



10 

02 



01 



* \ A 



\ 



.■%: 



30 



,xy 



32 



CLAi 



^^.J! 



7LF 



20 



^-i>- 



V^i 



27 



Upper Klamath PSA-OI 

Lost River (1) 

Butte Valley (2) 

Scott Valley (3) 

Shasta Valley (4) 
Lower Klamath-SinHh PSAr02 

Trinity (7) 

Lower Klamatti (10) 

Smith River Basin (14) 
Coastal PSA PSA-03 
(Mendocino Coas^ 

Big-Noyo-Ten Mile (17) 

Navarro-Garcia (18) 

Gualala (19) 






25 



17 




CIM? 



18 



o 



r \ 



N 



^9LAJlE 
SONOMA { 



36 



W 

10 20 



Clear 
Lake 



7Fk 



Planning Subareas, North Coast Region 



Coastal PSA-03 (eon^ 
(Eel River Basin) 
Lower Eel (20) 
Van Duzen (21) 
South Foric Eel (23) 
Upper Eel (25) 
Mattole-Bear (27) 
(Mad River Basin) 
Redwood Creek (28) 
Mad-Trinidad (30) 
Eureka Plain (32) 

Russian River PSA-04 
Ukiah 

Forsythe (33a) 
Coyote (33b) 
Upper Russian (33c) 

Geyserville 
Middle Russian (34a) 
Dry Creek (34b) 

Lower Russian (35) 

Santa Rosa (36) 

Bodega (37) 



304 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 




BUREAU INDWN/V^MR 

111326 

US nSH & WIOUFE 

98325 

NATL RWKMONUMBJT 

123769 

BUREAU UMDMGMT 

373529 

NATIONAL FOREST 

5061668 



Land Ownership, North Coast Region 



305 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 



North Bay PSAr^H 

West Marin (38) 
Petaluma 

South Sonoma (39a) 

East Marin (39b) 
Napa (40) 
Solano (41) 

South Bay PSAn02 

San Mateo Coast (42) 
South Bay Peninsula (43) 
San Jose (44) 
Livermore (45) 
Walnut Creek (46) 
Oakland (47) 




Planning Subareas, San Francisco Bay Region 



3Q6 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 




Legend 

OWNER 
ACRES 

-| PWVATE 
J 2335157 
I COUNTY/CfTY WNDS 

I STATE LANDS 

I 7930 

I STATE PARKS k REC 

I 76576 

I STATE RSH ft GHK 

I 1312 

I COF 

I 816 

MLTTARY 

36149 

BUREAU RECLAMATION 





US RSH ft WLDUFE 

20151 

NATL FWK/MONUMaiT 

79501 

BUREAU LAMO MGMT 

8852 

NATIONAL FOREST 





Land Ownership, San Francisco Bay Region 



307 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 



loeb Zoataatl 



SantM Clara 
Canal 



\ ffolUater 
Coadui t 



Northern PSA-01 

Pressure (48) 

East Side (49) 

Forebay (50) 

Upper Valley (51) 

Monterey Peninsula (52) 

Arroyo Seco (53) 

Gabilan Range (54) 

Loclcwood (55) 

Carmel River (56) 

Santa Lucia Range (57) 

Bolsa Nueva (58) 

Watsonville (59) 

Santa Cruz (60) 

Santa Cruz Mountains (61) 

South Santa Clara Valley (62) 

Pacheco-Santa Ana Creeks (63) 

San Benito River (64) 

Southern PSA-02 




Upper Salinas (65) 

North Coast (66) 

San Luis Obispo (67) 

Arroyo Grande (68) 

Carrizo Plain (69) 

Santa Maria Valley-SLO (70) 

Santa Maria Valley-SB (71) 

Cuyama Valley-SLO (72) 

San Antonio (73) 

Santa Ynez (74) 
South Coast (75) 
Cuyama Valley-SB (76) 



South Coast Coadui t- 



Planning Subareas, Central Coast Region 



308 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 



CruzW;LARA 



*Hollister 



v.n 



.SallJM.' 



SAN BENITO 



* 






MONTEREY 



1. 






^5K 



AtttOnb R099fyOw 




Legend 

OWNER 
ACRES 

-1 PRIVATE 

J S188194 

I COUNTY/CITY LANDS 

I 26310 

■ STATE LAN)S 
I 12889 

■ STATE PARKS ft REC 
I 74173 

i STATE F6H ft GMtlE 
I 22S3 

■ COF 
I 

^ MMTARY 

j 340240 

1 BUREAU REOAIiMTION 

J 9794 

1 BUREAU INDIAN ARVUR 



US RSH a WLDUFE 

114 

NATl PWK/MONUMBfT 

14827 

BUREAU LAND MGMT 

265933 

NATIONAL FOREST 

1274236 






N 



SAN LUIS OBISPO 
^Mom Bay 



If. 



V 



TwMhM 



^i 



•^ 



?i 






Sisqvoc 



^ 



SANTA BARBARA 



Lomp 



^il^ toto Cachurm 



Santa Bartani 



Land Ownership, Central Coast Region 



309 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 



Santa Oara PSA-01 
Vantura County (81) 
Loa Angalea County (83) 

Matropolltan LA PSA-02 

Malibu (87) 
Coastal (89) 
San Fernando (90) 
San Gabriel (92) 



Santa Ana P8A-08 

Orange (96) 
Riverside North (98) 
San Bemanfino (100) 
Riverside South (104) 

San DIago PSAr04 

Temecula (110) 

VMio (114) 

San Diego County (120) 




— M-E X'^ ^ ° 



N 



10 20 30 



Planning Subareas, South Coast Region 



310 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 




>Lak0 



iLalM Cmhm 



1 Ventur 



■^gants 



-cH' 



LP& yyMGELES 



VENTURA 



y 



._J 



* ^^ 



Legend 



OWNER 
ACRES 

PWVATt 

4612595 

COUNTY/CITY lANDS 

7644 

STATE LANDS 

1^88 

STATE PARKS & REC 

73513 

STATE FISH ft GAME 



COf 



MUTARY 

194139 

BUREAU RECIAMATION 



BUREAU INDIAN /^fAIR 

130991 

US FISH ft WIDUFE 

1902 

MVTL RWKyMONUMENT 

56 

BUREAU LAND MGMT 

142815 

NATIONAL FOREST 

1751375 



Anffvlu Rmtwvok 



SAN BE 



^ 



m ^•r 



ft^/ 



.iS^ 



kSanta Ana "^^ 



4GE 



I, 



/ 



4^^ 



1^ 



San Luli 



.RIVERSiPi 



if^^ 



SAN DIEGC 




Land Ownership, South Coast Region 



311 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 



OREGON 



Shasta Lalw-Pit fUvw PSA-01 

Goose Lake-Aituras (130) 

Big Valley (132) 

MacArthur-Hat Creek (134) 

Upper Shasta Lake (136) 
Northwest Valley PSA-02 

Clear-Cottonwood Creek (137) 

Stony-Elder Creek Group (139 

Redding West (141) 

Red Bluff-Oriand (142) 
Northeast Valley PSAr4)3 

Redding East (143) 

Los Mollnos (144) 

Cow-Battle Creek (145) 

Eastside Creek Group (147) 
Southeast PSAr-04 

Feather River (154) 

Yuba-Bear Rivers (156) 

American River (158) 

Foothill 

Honcut Foothill (159) 

Yuba Foothill (160) 

Placer Foothill (161) 
Central Basin West P8Ar-05 

Lower Cache (162) 

Willows-Arbuckle (163) 

Glenn-Knights Landing (164) 

Vacaville (191) 
Central Basin East PSA-06 

Meridian-Robbins (165) 

Durhanrt-Sutter (166) 

Butte City (167) 

Yuba City-Gridley (168) 

Honcut Valley (170) 

Yuba (171) 

Placer (172) 

Sacramento (173) 
Southwest P8JM)7 

Cache Creek (174) 

Putah Creek (175) 
Dafta Service Area PSAr^ 

Sacramento Delta (186) 




Planning Subareas, Sacramento River Region 



312 



Bulletin 16(K-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 




i«mvt^M*»AMM>xiM«>vinu«('M"m«l»Wwtf»«WSv4W 




Legend 

OWNBl 
ACRES 

-1 PnVATE 

J 1073098 

I COUNTY/CTTY l>MIS 

I 

I STATE LM05 

I S2017 

I STATE PMXS k REC 

I 71012 

I STATE F6H I GMkE 

I S1401 

I CDF 

I 12302 

T MILITARY 

J 48212 

1 BUREAU RECUMAT10N 

J 59381 

1 BUREMJ INDMNAFRW 

J 12807 

1 US RSH » WIOUR 

J 29349 

1 NML PARMNONUMBir 

J 149388 

n BUREAU lAND MGMT 

j 808Sffl 

-1 NATIONAL FOREST 

J 5322S10 



Land Ownership, Sacramento River Region 



313 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 





N 

I 



w 

10 20 



Sierra FoothHIs PSA-OI 

Cosumnes-Mokelumne-Calaverae (176) 
Stanislaus River (194) 
Tuolumne River (19S) 
Stanislaus-Tuolumne Interstream (196) 

EMtam Valley Floor PSA-02 

Elk Grove (180) 
lone-Jenny Lind (181) 
Lodi (182) 
Bachelor Valley (184) 

Delta Service Area PSArOS 

San Joaquin Delta (186) 
Wectem Uplands PSA-04 

Antioch-Corral Hollow (192) 
East Side Uplands PSArOS 

Merced River (197) 

Tuolumne-Merced Interstream (198) 

Chowchilla-Fresno River In t erstream (199) 

Fresno River (200) 

Chowchilla River (201) 

Mariposa (202) 

San Joaquin River (203) 

Little Dry Creek (204) 



Valley East Side PSA-06 

South San Joaquin ID (206) 
Modeeto-Oakdala (206) 
Modesto Reservoir (207) 
Turiock (208) 
Turiock Lake (209) 
Merced (210) 

Merced Stream Group (211) 
El Nido-Stevinson (212) 
Madera-Chowchilla (213) 
Adobe (214) 
Gravelly Ford (215) 

Valley West Side PSArO? 
West Side (216) 

Wert Side Uplands PSA-M 
Del Puerto Creek (217) 
Orestimba Creek (218) 
San Luis Creek (219) 
Los Banos Creek (220) 



Planning Subareas, San Joaquin River Region 



314 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 



:ramento 



50NTRA COSTA 



Stockton 





^Modesto 
fuMinii 

^ A STANISLAUS 



MARIPOSA 
\ ^Maripon 



r 



Merced 



X 



^^i 



/; 



MERCED 



Luis 



MADERA ^^3^ 

Madera 






V 



FRES 



Legend 



OWNBt 
ACRES 

PnVATE 

6629394 

COUNTY/OTY UMDS 

4341 

STATE lANDS 

6688 

STATE PARKS ft REC 

67325 

STATE RSH I GMS 

6222 

CDF 



MNJTARY 

37065 

BUREAU RECtAMOION 

1818 

BUREAU INDWNARMI 

1276 

US HSH a WLDlfE 

15950 

NATl FWUMUaa' 

795114 

BUREMI UND MGMT 

220800 

NATIONAL FOREST 

2119714 



Land Ownership, San Joaquin River Region 



315 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 



Uplands PSA-01 

San Joaquin-Kings Interstream (221) 

Kings River (222) 

Kings-Kaweah Interstream (223) 

Kaweah River (224) 

Kaweah-Tule Interstream (225) 

Tule River (226) 

Deer Creek (227) 

Poso Creek (228) 

Upper Kern River (229) 

Lower Kem River (230) 

Caliente Creek (231) 

Cummings (232) 




Kings-Kaweah-Tule Rivers 

Fresno (233) 
Academy (234) 
Raisin (235) 
Consolidated (236) 
Lower Kings River (237) 
Hanford-Lemoore (238) 
Alta (239) 
Orange Cove (240) 
Tulare Lake (241) 
Kaweah Delta (242) 
Tule Delta (243) 



P&D2 



N 

I 



f 

10 20 



San Luis West Side l>SA-«i 

Westiands (244) 
Kettleman Plain (245) 
South Tulare Lake (246) 
Kettleman Hills (247) 

Western Uplands PSA-04 
Panoche Creek (248) 
Ciervo Hills (249) 
Los Gatos Creek (250) 
Reef Ridge (251) 
Grapevine (252) 
Temblor (253) 

Kem Valley Hoor PSA-06 
Kem Delta (254) 
Semitropic (255) 
North Kern (256) 
Northeastern Kern (257) 
Arvin-Edison (258) 
Antelope Plain (259) 
Buena Vista Valley (260) 
Wheeler Ridge-Maricopa (261 



Planning Subareas, Tulare Lake Region 



316 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 




Land Ownership, Tulare Lake Region 



317 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 



LaM«n Group PSA-OI 

Surprise Valley (262) 
Madeline Plains (263) 
Susanville (264) 
Herlong (265) 
Upper Honey Lake (266) 

Alpine Group PSA-02 

Truckee-Tahoe (268) 
Carson-Walker (270) 




10 20 30 



Planning Subareas, North Lahontan Region 



318 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 




EL 001 




Legend 



OWNBt 
ACRES 

PHVATl 

1356142 

COUNTY/CITY UHK 



STAH i/HOS 

51158 

STATE FMXS k REC 

12856 

STATE F6H * GMC 

13735 

COF 



MUTMY 

83433 

BURMJ RECUIMT10N 



BUREMI mOHMARMR 

63S1 

US RSH ii moun 



NATL RWK/MONUMBfT 

536 

eUtmUW MGMT 

1103920 

IMTNNM. FOREST 

1246248 



Land Ownership, North Lahontan Region 



319 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 



274 



((WO 



\ 



'\ 



275 



\ 



276 



277 



28^x 



281 



Mono-Owww ATM PSA-OI 

Mono (274) 
Adobe (275) 
Long (276) 
Upper Owens (277) 
Lower Owens (278) 
Centennial (279) 
Rsh Lake (280) 



01 



282 



\ 






283 






v\ 



285 




\ 



02 



298 



301 



Death Valey P8A-02 
Deep Springs (281) 
Eureka (282) 
Saline (283) 
Race Track (284) 
Death Valley (286) 
VaQean (286) 
Furnace Creek (287) 
Amargosa (288) 
Pahrump (289) 
Mesquite (290) 
Ivanpah (291) 
Owlshead (292) 
Lesdi (293) 
Nelson (294) 
Bicycle (295) 
Qoldstone (296) 
Superior (297) 
Partamint (298) 
Coyote (315) 



303 

03 



306 



292 



299 



300 



293 



294- 



296 



\ 



\ 



v289* 



Indian Weils Area PSA-03 

Searies (299) 

Cuddeback (300) 

Coso (301) 

Upper Cactus (302) 

Indian Wells (303) 

Fremont (304) 
Antelope Valley PSA-04 

Mojave (306) 

Rosamond-Palmdale (306) 

Pearblossom (307) 
Mo^a River PSA-05 

El Mirage (308) 

Upper Moiave (309) 

Middle Mojave (310) 

Harper (311) 

Lower Mojave (312) 

Afton (313) 

Troy (314) 

Baker (316) 

Kelso (317) 

Broadwell (318) 



290^^ 



286 



291 



N 



313 



311 



315 



316 



317 



<M 



310 



314 



318 



307 



N 



10 20 30 



Planning Subareas, South Lahontan Region 



320 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 




HMwio LakB \ 




MONO X^ 




< ^^Lukt CmwiaY 




''V/^JV__ 


""- -V 


\ ^^tf^V 


■. X. 


L^*,m 


* ' ° ' ^ \ 


W, ^ 


1 Tktamaha R«siarvclr 



Legend 



OWNER 
ACRES 

PRIVATE 

3064594 

COUNTY/CtTY LANDS 

381184 

STATE lANDS 

258521 

STATE PARKS & REC 

18734 

STATE RSH I GAME 



CDF 



MUTARY 

2062921 

BUREAU RECLAIiMTION 



BUREAU INDIAN AffAR 

4305 

US RSH & WLDUFE 



NATL PMW/MONUMENT 

1968325 

BUREAU LAND MGMT 

7486322 

NATIONAL FOREST 

1840250 



INYO 



tOwsns take 




SAN BERNARDINO 



■■fs\. 



» 



^'pjstyt 



fi^ 



?S ANGELES 



Land Ownership, South Lahontan Region 



321 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 



Twenty-Nine Palms-Lanfair 

Lucerne (319) 
Johnson (320) 
Bessemer (321) 
Means (322) 
Emerson (323) 
Lavic (324) 
Deadman (325) 
Joshua Tree (326) 
Dale (327) 
Bristol (328) 
Fenner (329) 
Lanfair (330) 
Cadiz (331) 
Ward (332) 



PSA-01 



Chuclcwaila PSAr02 

Rice (333) 
Ford (334) 
Palen (335) 
Pinto (336) 
Pleasant (337) 
Hayfield (338) 
Colorado River PSA-03 
Piute (339) 
Needles (340) 
Vidal (343) 
Chemehuevis (341) 
Quien Sabe (342) 
Big Wash (344) 
Palo Verde (345) 
Arroyo Seco (346) 
Yuma (347) 



Coachella PSA-04 

Coachella (348) 

East Salton Sea (349) 
Borrego PSA-05 

Claric (350) 

West Salton Sea (351) 

Anza (352) 
Imperial Valley PSA-06 

Imperial (353) 

Coyote Wells (354) 

Davies (355) 

Amos-Agilby (356) 

Salton Sea (357) 




10 20 30 



Planning Subareas, Colorado River Region 



322 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 





Land Ownership, Colorado River Region 



Legend 



OWNBI 
ACRES 

3807464 

COUNTY/CflY lANDS 

115 

STATE itHO& 

255810 

STATE MRXS k REC 

556311 

STATE nSH t GAME 



CDF 



MUTARY 

982069 

BUREAU RECUMIkTION 



BUREAU INDMNAFFAff 

182986 

US RSH 4 WIOUFE 

27698 

NATL FARX/MONMBfT 

548869 

BUREAU LAND MGMT 

6401954 

NATKMAL FOREST 

176950 



N 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix C 



324 



Draft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 



Appendix D 



HYDROELECTRIC RESOURCES OF 

CALIFORNIA 

This appendix condenses information from the following sources: 

O The California Energy Commission, California Power Plant Maps, July 1992. 

O The Federal Energy Regulatory Agency, Hydroelectric Power Resources of the United 
States, Developed and Undeveloped, January 1988. 

O The Federal Energy Regulatory Agency, SFRO Project Assignments by Project Number, 
September 16, 1992 (unpublished). 

The proposed developments in Tables D-1 and D-3 are only those that have a Federal 
Energy Commission number or are listed by the California Energy Commission. 

There are 416 operating hydroelectric plants with an installed capacity of 1 1.8 million 
kilowatts. Another 74 planned developments are in the regulatory process. Table D-1 shows 
the distribution of developed and planned projects among the hydrologic regions, and Table 
D-2 further breaks down hydroelectric resources in California. The data sources differ as to 
hydroelectric plant names, owners, and capacities. FERC is generally the preferred source 
for the information in Table D-3, except when information was secured directly from the 
owner. CEC designation is supplied when it is significantly different from that of FERC's or 
is not the owner's name. 



* * * 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-2. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 



Hydrologic Region 
River Basin/PSA 



Developed Sites 
KW Number 



Undeveloped 
Sites 

Number 



Total 



North Coast 
Klamath 
Trinity River 
Mad River 
Eel River 
Russian River 



South Coast Total 



49,532 

114,526 

4,240 

25,968 

16,500 



South Coast 

Santa Clara 212,500 

Metro Los Angeles 260,31 1 

Santa Ana 326,344 

San Diego 1 3,820 



812,975 



12 
25 
32 

10 



79 



1 
1 





13 

13 

3 

5 

7 



13 
26 
34 

10 



83 



North Coast Total 


210,766 


32 


9 


41 


San Francisco Bay 










North Bay 


287 


2 


f 


3 


South Bay 


800 


1 


2 


3 


San Francisco Bay 
Total 


1,087 


3 


3 


6 


Central Coast 










Northern 


90 


1 


1 


2 


Southern 


7,335 


9 


2 


11 


Central Coast Total 


7,425 


10 


3 


13 



Sacramento River 

Sacramento River 959,640 

Pit and McCloud 817,227 
Rivers 

West Side 28,143 

East Side 78,836 

Feather River 1,599,965 

Yuba and Bear 708,366 
Rivers 

American River 1,074,734 



7 
22 

10 
28 
24 
35 

25 



9 
26 

11 
31 
29 
42 

33 



Sacramento River 
Total 



5,266,911 



151 



30 



181 



326 




Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-2. (continued) 



San Joaquin River 

Mokelumne River 246,590 

Calaveras River 3,940 

Stanislaus River 784,750 

Tuolumne River 483,631 

Merced River 107,000 

San Joaquin River 1,598,024 



9 

3 
14 
15 

6 
28 



1 


10 





3 


1 


15 


2 


17 





6 


4 


32 



San Joaquin River 
Total 



3,223,935 



75 



83 



Tulare Lake 
Kings River 
Kawea River 
Tule River 
Kern River 



1,713,000 

23,850 

11,388 

105,450 



10 
4 
6 
6 



Tulare Lake Total 



1,853,688 



23 



26 



North Lahontan Total 6,450 

South Lahontan Total 20 1 ,302 

Colorado River Total 209,395 



2 
27 

14 



3 
36 

18 



Statewide Total 



11,793,934 



416 



74 



490 



327 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 











""" 


^^ 









"cT" 


"in" 


in 








r- 


00 


< 





"^ 


in 


< 




■"— 





CT\ 












(7\ 





< 





— 










e 








n 


in 


CN 


^ 


ro 


ro 


rH 


in 




in 


<N 


n 











VO 




<N 




VD 


VO 


rH 













w 


S 








c~ 


rH 


'-^ 


(N 


<N 


<N 


in 


rH 


z 


f-t 






z 






•<» 












•* 




2 


<j\ 














in 




























































^ 


Q 

< 
U 




r- 
































































X 


























































































00 











^ 































^^ 




Q 






















in 


in 




in 








CO 








Oi 





















in 






u 

0. 


Q 


























*"* 








■«» 
















c~ 

rH 











in 






1 


O 


I 


§ 


















































c* 












i 


a. 


< 
































































0. 


u 


































































































in 


00 




















O) 













■» 


■"^ 


"^ 








z 



















l£ 






CO 





<--) 




































VO 










Ci] 


o 


5 








00 


(N 





lO 






IS 


m 




OJ 


^ 












o\ 




rH 




lO 





<Tt 












S ^ 


i* 


X 








(N 


rH 













ro 


















in 








fN 


CM 


^ 












s 










rH 


■fli 












in 











































d^ p 


a: 
u 
2 
u 
o 


o 
o 










rH 


rH 










r-i 




























■V 














5 1 


o 




























































CO 

w 
u 

























































































in 












fS 


in 





















"o" 







\o 








■"■" 







Q 


>< 

Eh 

M 



















a> 



































tn 




m 


in 









o\ 


« 




U 










(N 














r-i 









rH 








00 




in 








n 


in 


m 






o\ 


o 




ti 


1 








ol 


<N 


cs" 










00 














■* 




-^ 










in 


rH 










w 


Q 


5 


< 






























































« 




u 






























































u 

M 


3 














































































to 


in 


00 










ft 




"^^ 










r~ 












^"^ 








^^^ 


"""■ 








Q 











<N 


rH 










u> 














00 
























(iC. 






U 








<3\ 


0\ 


o> 










o\ 














<T\ 
























£-• 




CC 










t-4 


iH 


rH 










rH 














ri 
























u 






< 


i 


































































u 
>< 




























































w 








2 




























































o 








" 




























































Q 












































































m 




<N 


fS 


<N 


"ch" 


a> 


~cr 


f 


fS 


[^ 









H* 







r- 


00 









"~~ 




[^ 


00 


00 


■» 














in 




00 


00 


00 




r- 


r~ 


n 


00 


00 















VO 


VC 




in 










r- 


t^ 


in 








Q 




rH 




















vo 





Ol 






«» 


•» 







rH 






in 








r- 


H» 


If 


rH 








z 




00 




<N 


CN 


<N 


r- 


r- 


t- 


10 


<N 


r^ 






r- 


vo 




C- 


«> 


«> 




la 












•* 


to 


(i, 






^ 


E- 

U 

u 




























































o 






Id 

Cl4 




























































tH 






8 

OS 






























































































































s 






































































































































a< 




































































o 




































































f^i 












































































>• 




























































^ 








1 




<1> 
u 




3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


IJ 














U 












4J 


Q 








Q 




M 








































■O 




>1 


>, 


N 


U 


>. 


•0 


>i 


>1 


>i 


>1 


>i 


•a 

















>i 


>i 


>i 


>i 


>i 


>i 


s 


>i 


>i 


>i 


>. 


>. 






U 


u 


u 


rH 


u 


rH 


u 


U 


u 


iJ 


4J 


rH 














2 




•H 


•H 


■H 


•H 


•H 


•rH 


•rH 


•f-i 




•H 


-rl 


-rl 




















-H 






-H 




Q 
















^ 


>! 


>! 


.lii 


Jii 


.« 


.« 


.« 


M 


>: 


>; 


X 


•| 




n 


B 


B 


•| 


B 


^ 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


X 


U 












rH 




(0 


n 


to 


U) 


(0 


(0 


to 


(0 


10 


(0 


(0 


(0 








-H 


■H 


g 


•H 


•H 


•H 


•H 


•H 


g 


2 












s 




•H 


■H 








•^ 












•H 


3 




M 


M 


M 


3 


M 


3 


M 


M 


n 


u 


M 


3 














w 


M 


CO 


W 


M 


w 


CO 


(0 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


I 




Eh 


_E^ 


_E2_ 


_£. 


Eh 


X 


_H_ 


Eh 


Eh 


Eh 


Eh 


X 






g 




































































0. 






u 
























































o 






O 


„ 








^ 













10 






a: 






U 






M 


M 




u 










4) 


01 














b! 




Jj 






u 




M 


^ 


















b. 


x 














4) 


4) 










DlI 

a: 
















10 


U 


to 






u 






4) 












B 








u 


IM 


>M 










2 




ui 












3 










u 






iJ 




Eh 





































ro 






3 


O) 


to 


J 




•H 









10 






CO 


M 




U 


















g 






1 
ffl 














01 





3 






>H 





ki 








>! 




U 




Eh 








CO 


u 











OS 






:<: 









CO 


O) 






u 


CO 


4) 




W 




(b 
















Qi 












Q 


u 


M 










CO 







M 




4) 




> 










kH 


u 




















04 






> 


u 


CS 




a. 


CC 




•. 


m 


u 


oc 


s 




•H 




« 


(£ 


CO 


u 


<0 




kH 




o: 


CC 


< 


l4 


IH 










U 
> 




M 






M 


















M 


a: 


a: 


u 












U 










u 


U 




^ 






*< 


06 


M 


X 


U 


fi 


4: 


M 


u 


IH 


Vh 


.c 





U 









g 


« 


e 


[b 








>i 


>i 


>1 


















(V 


g 




4J 


u 


U 


u 


u 


4) 


u 


u 




10 


■0 




M 









B 




«j 


jJ 


u 


4) 


4> 


U 










X 


■a 




>i 


ni 










rC 


s 




M 


u 


u 


<M 




U 


0, 


M 




4) 














9 


Q 






K 




Eh 






C 






T3 


•0 


-o 


iJ 




Si 


U 


CO 


CO 


*4 


2 




10 


10 




"O 




B 


B 


B 


u 


U 












3 




a 












10 




•H 


10 


10 


10 


3 


M 


t3> 


u 


•o 




•0 




•H 






u 


U 












S 





a 


4) 




rH 











M 


rH 


IH 




j= 


x: 


rH 


0: 


•rH 


r-i 


4> 








M 


k4 


M 


10 


10 












W 


CO 


>i 


_2_ 


:<: 


:>: 


U 








O, 


£<: 


Eh 


CJ 


CO 


w 


m 


Eh 


CO 


u 







m 




Eh 


Eh 


Eh 


CO 


oa 


X 














































1 

rH 












































u 


u 


u 










U 










































O 


U 
U 

w 

2 
u 
o 








u 


4J 


<j 




rH 






u 
























C 


c 
















cc 








^ 


x: 


x: 




(0 






jC 










41 




CO 
































u 








01 


D) 


O) 


(0 




t-t 




CJl 


> 








C 




4) 












•H 


















Cb 








M 


•rH 


•H 




u 


3 




'H 










4) 




CO 












U 


u 
























ij 


iJ 


►3 


U 


4) 


lO 




iJ 


•^ 


10 






CU 




-H 































a: 














41 




0. 


















M 




CO 








g 


g 




CO 


CO 


M 








O 


J 








•n 


>« 


>« 




« 






<« 


Ul 


U 






>« 




a 




w 








10 


10 


to 


4) 


4) 


T3 






















•0 


■o 


■o 








41 




Q 






M 




rH 




CO 






rH 




CO 


CO 


^ 








a: 










u 


kl 


M 






u 




M 


X 








•T3 




41 




.Q 














>« 


-w 










u 










01 


41 


4> 








10 




<D 




& 




>, 











10 








4) 


4> 




M 


u 


















J 


» 


» 


U 


IH 


3 


M 


» 


z 




4) 


> 




a 


« 


3 




01 




DC 


(£ 




a 


0. 


u 



















s 





(0 


(0 


10 


4) 







41 




» 


10 




u 




4> 




M 








bi 


u 


u 


ca 












z 




a. 


0. 


X 


X 


X 


» 


a 




Eh 




4) 


Q 








B 










IM 




4) 


41 


10 












u 





















rH 




CO 









c 


B 


4> 
















iJ 


iJ 




































a 
























a 












U 


B 


B 























•H 




U 


M 


>1 






4) 


M 






U 




.c 


CO 










3 


3 


U 


U 


u 
















41 




tM 


tM 


MH 


41 


41 


4) 





MH 


» 


4) 


c 


J3 


M 




a 


li-i 


« 




r-i 




10 


(0 


4> 






.c 














H 










U 


>J 


•M 




•rl 


g 


01 


10 


U 


4) 




10 





10 




•-I 




4) 


41 








iJ 




























CO 


(0 





iC 





10 


<M 




X 




B 




Dl 




v 




M 


U 


rH 


rH 


rH 


M 



















(0 


10 


113 








3 




10 





M 




1. 







4) 


3 


41 




0> 




3 


3 


10 


41 


« 

















X 




Q. 


0. 


a. 


[>. 


Cl, 


_J_ 


Eh 


CU 





Q 


Q 


U 




X 


_2_ 


a 




CO 




m 


m 


a 


m 


OQ 


2 




































CO 


















. 














« 






o 




M 


s 




s 








n 

01 


(0 










C 








8 










a 








9 












•-' d 


2 


w 






H 








c 


C 










g 








H 










u 








4) 






CO 






§ 








s 








•rH 



























« 












M 






iH 








(X 

o 


§ 




S 










0. 




.C 


* 




Eh 








9 










■§ 


* 


„ 




U 






U 






c^ 


U 
















w 


W 




c; 






CO 


M 


M 






















10 






M 






s 


oc 




K 




H 














c 






4) 


41 


4) 


.« 




« 
















Qi 


IH 




« 






£ 








M 




>: 






■0 


■o 




10 






C 


> 


> 


4> 






M 


u 


VH 










rH 





U 


,B 












U 




4) 












IX 


4) 







•ri 


fH 


4) 









10 


U 


4) 


M 






< 


a 





Qi 










•J 


Q 




p 


41 
















U 


•-I 


►^ 


K 


q: 


V4 









•-I 




Qi 


U 


B 






a 


» 












04 




U 




u 




^-^ 


u 







M 


10 










U 








b. 


n 


ca 







>1 


>< 


D 





3 














41 




u 










>1 


4) 





4> 


U 


10 


10 






M 






B 




» 


u 


u 


U 




iJ 


CO 












E! 


X> 


g 










IH 


M 


41 


■C 




» 


4) 


U 


ki 


<M 


g 


u 


Qi 


U 




IH 





CO 
































4) 


4> 


M 


u 


B 


C 


01 


m 


m 






10 


■0 


j<: 


1 






B 


B 


















tt 


3 




(H 


a 


0. 




a 





(0 





M 


10 


10 


10 


3 




01 


U 


■0 


» 


rH 


3 






rH 


r-H 


rH 

















m 




10 










a 


3 


M 


U 





M 


jC 


j= 




S 






4) 


■0 






41 


IH 


^ 


A 


41 




^^ 










a 


« 


b. 


u 


u 


•J 


a 


iJ 


0. 




U 


a 


M 


CO 


m 


m 


Cd 


U 


I 


m 


_s_ 


J 


Eh 


J^ 


m 


_s 



*! 



« 



328 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 









i 


o 




o 


o 




00 


VS 


o 


00 




00 




o 


o 


m 


00 


lA 


v£ 










«-* 




(N 


o 




^ 


rH 


iH 


in 




o 




o 


o 


rH 


fH 


rH 


t~ 






(0 

8 

a: 


i 






if) 








o\ 




00 




o 




<N 










^ 










u 














































X 








































































"~"~ 


~~ 


~~~ 


^^ 


O 














































o 






a 
u 

s 


o 
u 


H 










































2 


1^ 


i 








































1 


2 

0. 


a. 


















































o 




r- 


o 




o 


o 


O 


"in" 




o 




o 


o 


o 


^^ 


"™" 


O 








z 




o 




p- 






o 


00 


O 


00 




o 




•H 


u> 


r- 






o 






si 


o 


£ 


o 




^ 


<N 




in 


If) 


vH 


m 




fN 




tN 


>« 


00 






o 


















































H 


* 


n 






•w 




n 


m 




m 




^ 




00 


t~ 


rH 






rH 






u 


o 








1-t 














r-i 




<-• 


»H 








VO 






u c 


o 








































Q 


5 a 


o 






















































































s 








o 


o 


o 


o 




o 


o 


in 


o 




O 




O 


O 


O 


o 


"■■" 


O 


o 


Q 


M 

s 




in 


o 


•«» 


o 




vc 


o 


fN 


m 




m 




o 


o 


00 


o 




O 


cs 


u 


U 
H 


g 


t~ 


I-l 




o 




rH 


I/) 




OJ 








o 


in 


<n 


'» 




















m 






c^ 




•>» 




o\ 




00 




*""" 


"""" 


■^■"" 












Q 








00 






00 




00 




00 




CO 




















U 








o 






o% 




o\ 




<J\ 




o> 


















>< 


.J 








tH 






•-* 




tH 


























^ 












































^ 














































2 














































M 














































a\ 




n 


o 






r- 


in 


(N] 


(N 


o 




^ 


^ 


00 


VC 


t~ 


t" 










• 


irt 




n 


fo 






(N 


in 


U> 


CO 


<N 




m 


•« 








p- 












CTl 




VO 


•«» 






«) 


<J\ 


o 


00 


rH 




r> 


00 


VO 


a\ 


VO 












2 


vo 




VO 


n 






•«» 


in 


«> 


o 


r- 




ro 






00 


<JV 










u 


S 










































































o 


o 


o 


o 


o 














iJ 


u 






iJ 


IJ 














B 


B 


B 


B 


B 












>i 


•o 


•o 


S 




-o 


•a 


>i 


>, 


>, 


>, 






*H 








-rH 












u 






u 






rH 


u 


IJ 










o 


O 


o 


O 


CJ 


■0 
















*H 














•H 






o 


O 


o 


O 


o 












c 


Q 


fi 


c 




s 


fi 


c 


B 


B 


B 







•o 


•a 


■o 


•O 


T3 


o 










■M 






•H 








-*H 


•H 


■H 






B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 










U 


3 


3 


l4 




3 


3 


I-l 


tJ 


U 


M 




o 


« 


<a 


v 


01 


41 


o 










t^ 


I 


X 


t< 




X 


X 


E-i 


Eh 


^ 


tH 




M 


X 


X 


z 


z 


z 


to 






< 














































n 














































0. 






















o: 
























a 




















a 








o: 


















z 














o 






I-l 


rH 






















< 






o: 














« 


« 




B 




































« 


u 


U 




10 


K 


o: 






o: 








z 






73 








c 




u 








■rl 


















M 


>1 




a 






u 


a 






« 


« 




10 


B 


a 


rH 


r-t 


B 








2 


L> 




X 






u 


> 








u 




(0 


10 


10 


B 


C 


10 








Q 


■H 














^ 


v< 


M 


u 




3 






u 


V 




J3 






CQ 


C 




*. 






« 


« 


U 


u 


u 




te 


tx 


CO 


CO 






CO 














u 








u 








CD 






(0 


CO 


£ 


^ 


CO 


ki 






« 


M 




u 






•O 


u 


m 


•a 


■o 


>: 


§ 


« 


3 


3 








3 


H 






^ 




H 










B 




a 


u 


u 


« 


u 


a: 


a 


CO 


CO 


o: 












« 


10 


a: 


ct 


■H 


IH 


0) 


o 


o 


3 


M 


u 












fi 






IH 




M 










l4 


o 


D> 


•M 




10 


w 




>! 


M 


Q 


13 


>; 


10 






oc 




b 




> 


TJ 


iJ 


ffi 


>; 


I-l 


3 


3 


>! 


w 


Q 


b. 


b. 






Du 


«> 










S 


i 


_2_ 


J_ 


u 
u 


^ 


& 


s 


ED 


IS 


s 


g 


u 


Cd 


A 


J_ 


Cd 


8 












































8 
















o 















































o 










■H 






s 




& 










■rt 


6 










c 




o> 










<0 






M 




B 




z 






kl 


B 










M 




H-l 

z 










u 






(0 




4) 




•d 




10 





M 








o: 


o 














« 






iJ 




< 








u 


4) 
















u 
o 


Q 






u, 


•o 










U 




a 

B 




4) 


Cd 


CO 

IH 










^ 




•H 




u 




M 


z 




g 




0) 


OH 


4) 








4) 












L> 








m 


a 








<■> 


o 


Ol 




X 


>« 


3 














(0 


>, 




^ 






>« 


DC 


rH 




S 




s 


o 






O 










o 




10 


2 




10 


•a 








-H 




s 


>, 


u 


3C 


CO 


U 


















I-l 






z 


z 


ȣ 






u 








a 


O 










<M 




0. 






tl 


o: 












o 






o 




O 


















U 














10 




u 


o 


B 


l4 


B 




s. 










o 






T3 




■o 


< 


ID 


CO 


n 


a 








« 


"O 


4) 


o 


HI 










10 




<0 






o 




10 


(0 


10 


10 








•o 


^ 


^ 














0. 




u 


Q 






« 


V 


« 


» 


» 




g 


£ 


•o 




<M 


Du 














4) 








u 


o> 


Ol 


Ol 


10 






10 


10 






-H 












a 












c 


i4 


14 


u 


^ 








Cu 


CO 

















m 












3 


3 


3 


3 


« 




o 


J< 


o 


u 




a 


n 










Q. 




o 


X 




CC 


X 


m 


CO 


O 


bi: 




M 


s 


z 


CO 


X 


a 


U 




o 

M 


§ 


w 




• 

h 




« 


< 
w 


u 


« 




« 






8 


. 




« 


• 




« 


« 
n 


c* 


o; 


i 


O 




S Cu 






X 






M 


J< 




« 


5 






s 






>. 














«) 








V 


« 




9 




a 










4) 


b. 




5 


flC 






t <■* 


J< 


3 


f< 


<a 


>< 


4> 


0) 


■a 


U 




o 




M 












^ 






u 


fa 0) 


« 


0) 


y 


k4 


« 


kl 


u 


j<: 


U 




B 




b< 


10 






a 








10 


■a >-■ 


01 


£ 


■< 


t> 


« 


CJ 


O 


u 








o 




a 




10 








tj 




3 t< 


u 


U 


o 




u 






o 


■0 


p 


l4 


B 


B 


a 


B 


> 


g 










b. 




o 


u 


u 


■o 


o 


a 


•o 


u. 


^ 




8! 




« 


u 


4> 














N 




10 









a 


u 




10 




o 


T3 




^ 


M 


o 










U 


e ^ 


u 


Z 


IS 




IH 


« 


O 


« 


» 


M 




o 


•O 


l^ 




4) 


<M 










JS 








« 


o> 


IM 


0) 


10 


< 


a 


T) 


10 


« 




u 












t XI 


> 


3 






J< 


ki 


3 


u 


^ 


( 


c 


IJU 






u 












1 


8 5i 


s 


(t 


s 


o: 


& 


s 


m 


g 


« 


8 


1 


i 


^ 


2 


X 


2 


10 

u 



329 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 









^ 




o 


o 


O 




U1 


in 






o 


in 


o 


VC 


o 








n 


n 






^ 


<71 


00 


m 










fc 




o 


o 


o\ 




«-l 


tH 






\o 


•H 


«-l 


r^ 


m 








^ 


VO 






<ft 


n 


•<» 








0) 


i 




VO 


'"' 


'"' 




<N 


CN 






'"' 


■^ 


"^ 


"^ 


vo 








iH 


ve 








r~ 


o 


"^ 








< 




























































u 




























































I 
















































































o 








o 




















"^^^ 


^^~' 






























o 








ct 


























a 


a 

H 




s 




















o 








«« 


























i 
§ 


0. 


S 

3 
























































_£ 






































































o 


o 


o 




r~ 










o 




o 










o 








in 


o 


o 


o 








§ 






r- 








r- 










o 














o 








00 


o 


o 


o 






1 ^ 


t 








00 




•-1 










in 




lO 










<N 








<^ 


IN 


o 


IN 
































































Eh 


^ 








r-4 




^ 










o\ 














^ 








«-i 


■* 


o 


m 




O 
U 

0. 


OS 


o 

o 
o 














































n 


>« 






2 






































































o 


in 




o 






o 




o 


o 


m 




o 




o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


j> 


Q 


Eh 

i 

< 

u 










00 




o 






o\ 




in 


n 


r~ 




CO 




r» 


o 


en 


in 


o 


o 


o 


o 




m 


u 


U 










M 




00 










t~ 


•H 






t~ 




•H 


in 


^ 


rt 


p- 


IN 


o 


o 


r- 


IN 


a 


>J 


























































t 


^ 






















m 














•-• 








rH 


m 


in 




rH 






^~ 


^^ 


^~" 




■^■^ 




^■^ 










t~ 






^■^ 


^■^ 




■"■" 




<»i 


w 


in 


t~ 


CI 


IN 


oa 


•>» 








Q 






















«» 
















CO 


CO 


00 


00 


00 


t~ 


00 


00 








■ 






















«k 
















o» 


<7> 


<71 


o\ 


o» 


o\ 


ov 


o\ 






at 
























r* 
















•H 


rH 


rH 


"^ 


"^ 


"^ 


"^ 


"^ 






^ 


5 

HI 


































































n 




r- 


M 


(^ 




00 


00 




o 


00 


-"" 


^ 


•«» 




o 






c-> 


u> 


VO 


"TT" 


CO 
















<T> 




n 








rH 


i~ 




Cl 






VO 


O 










in 


(N 


fN 


rH 


V£ 








i 








>n 




t^ 


M 


CO 




VC 


n 




00 


<N 




<N 


00 




<N 






f-i 


H» 


•«» 


va> 


00 




















r^ 


o 




o 


va> 










o\ 


■^ 




00 






M 


(N 


IN 


•* 


VO 






u 


t^ 
















tH 




»H 






































« 


^ 


























































H 


i 


























































•k 




















































































O 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 
















































O. 


0, 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 
















































o 


m 


la 


ID 


n 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 






















































IH 


u 


la 


la 






























a 


« 








A 


A 


A 


XX 


A 


a 


Si 


« 


K 


a 


« 




a 


a 




a 








c 












M 


Vi 




N 




O 


O 


O 


o 


O 


O 


O 


A 


Si 


XI 


J3 




« 


« 




• 




















« 


a 




3 


















IH 


U 


ki 


M 










•-t 




















•H 






U 


>. 


a 


a 


a 


o 


B 


B 


B 


« 


« 


■0 


O 




• 


• 




• 




















o 


o 


a 


O 


9 
















00 


CO 


a 


CO 


a 


o 


c* 


a 


o 








Q 








O 








T3 




u 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 










la 


s 


s 


ii 


s 
















c 




a 


M 




a 


e 


>J 


>J 


>:i 


>J 


J 


^ 


>J 


« 


« 


a 


a 


3 


3 












a 


a 


a 




u 


aJ 




t> 


aJ 
















u 


aJ 


aJ 


aJ 


U 






u 














a 


a 






c 


B 


Mf 


B 


B 


B 


C 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


a 


a 


B 


a 












a 


a 


o 




a 


a 




a 


O 


a 


a 


O 


« 


a 


a 


a 


« 


ID 


a 


■0 


O 


o 


o 


• 


o 












2 


z 


w 




M 


w 


< 


CO 


_s_ 


CO 


M 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


> 


J 


J 


> 


>j 






< 
(0 

a 


5 






u 


Oi 












n 

s 


r* 






Ch 






g 










rH 


h 












g 




















m 


« 












ff 










u 
















k^ 


>, 


ca 














l« 






o 




o 


M 










•< 


a 




« 








z 




O 


4= 


3 










g 


« 








a 




o, 


U 




rH 






CO 10 


*— 




aJ 








< 




e 




< 








oe 








a 




a 


< 










Ck aJ 






CO 








M 


w 


tJ 




U 












K 






■H 




•H 




« 


g 






B 


o 


• 












a. 


• 


i 




Q. 


M 








o 








a 




i3 










•< « 


3 


& 


g 










1 




>: 






o 










O 






o 




O 






g 






« CO 


tr 








flQ 


>• 


o 




X 


>< 








.^ 


B 


aJ 


Q. 










a. 


« 








< 


< 


2 








a: 


< 


<o 






< 


c 






X 


O 


B 






go 




o 




B 




















m 




ki 


o> 


in 


o 








aJ 


« 


a 










o. 


>> 


B 






U M 


« 


a 














"? 


u 


a 




m 








s 




3 


u 


3 




3 


3 




O 






O 


o 


u 


O 










g 


o 


W 




ac 


^ 






M) 


e 


CO 


u 


J 




>J 


CO 


a 


u 






< 


















rH 




1 




4> 
























aJ 








1 5 


la 


la 


V 








tc 




cc 




fj 


^ 


■0 






« 


B 


o 


M 


•o 


B 




B 


u 


B 


3 






ffi 


(0 


B 












_§. 


O 






8 


J_ 






^ 


a 


a 


aJ 




a 




■a 


u 


a) 


_s_ 












O 












>• 


P 


tu 






o 


CO 


2 


3 


o 


CO 




CO 


3 


CO 






CO a. 


3 


3 


u 


































































































«-i 




VI 




U 


















































o 




o 


•« 


VI 


fj 




VI 






























g 








Q 






B 


>. 




>. 




o 


•o 




o 




la 


























VI 






y 






o 


u 




aJ 


o 




u 






u 


3 


Oi 

































Q 












b. 


>. 


m 




>. 


a 


O 


























>i 










^ 




a 


u 




t) 


O 


aJ 


> 




ti 




a 


3 












K 




l4 








» 


>i 






4 












U 


•H 


o 




•H 


a 


« 














U 




rj 


< 


o 




•H 


aJ 

■H 






CO 


U 


o 


■g 


c> 




O 


O 


u 


X 




o 


a 


K 


< 
















c 








« 


o 


Q 




O 


b. 


IH 




a 




a 


a 




•« 






B 


la 


•J 
















A 


B 


>1 




> 




3 




b. 




« 




a 




a 


a 


a 






« 


o 


aJ 






a 












o 


x: 


aJ 






« 










B 


O 










ki 


g 




la 


o 


3 


•a 


^ 


i 












►3 


o 


■^ 




« 


a 






O 


6 


aJ 




!q 




3 


3 


10 




a 




















►5 


u 




M 


ki 


o 




O 


u 


ki 


>! 


o 




o 


o 


a 






A 


la 


VI 


o: 
























a 


a 


u 








M 


O 










M 


o 


§ 


u 


U 


O 




a 


a 












aJ 


« 


» 




fH 


i-H 






>i 


>i 


a 


O 


a 




a 


m 


« 


u 


& 


3 




3 


« 


<o 












3 


U 


o 




U 


o 


a 




« 


« 




K 










CO 








u 




3 


3 












O 


« 










TJ 




u 


n 


>, 




3 




3 


3 




CJ 


a 




-a 


CX 


aJ 


W 


OI 












X 


<J 


• 




« 


a 






9 


« 


a 


• 


■J 




.J 


.J 


a 


• 


u 


m 


• 


s 


& 


« 


« 












M 


B 






aJ 


u 


i 




aJ 


aJ 


ki 












aJ 


aJ 


• 


«j 


u 
















« 


X> 


«-< 




C 


B 




B 


B 


« 


a 


B 




B 


B 


B 


B 












rH 


i-t 












o 


« 


a 




a 


M 


rH 




O 





B 


_1 


a 




a 


a 


a 


O 


A 




c 


10 


a 


a 


« 












2 


s 


> 




M 


M 


■< 




je_ 


z 


M 


CO 




ca 


CO 


oa 


z 


CO 


» 


u 


o 


u 


u 










s 








s 










































































• 




































U 


Jl 








g 








■ 






Qt 
































u 


§ 


Eh 

M 

u 
a: 


s 


« 






3 


« 






s • 




« 


1 

O 


« 


a 


« 














1 • 






« 
a 

aJ 




n 


Q 


i 


O 











p 




rH 




l« 






■ 




■ 
















S a 






CO 










aJ 






B 


g 


B 
































* 


* 








Q 


PC 


Eh 


il 


« 


^ 


i-H 


a 


O 




2 cH 


o 




^ 




la 


B 














!• w 






C^ 






g 








M 


o 
















o 


o 


M 


o 


s 














1 -^ 








£ 










O 


o 


X 






« 






B 


aJ 




u 




u 


0. 


o. 


M 








« rH 


• 


m 




u 






•J 


s 


IS 


u 




^ 


c 


B 




X 


O 


C 


■ 


o 


a 




0. 


Ic 


« 


« 






c • 


s 




& 


u 














CO 


OI 




o 








aJ 


• 




oe 




M 




aJ 








O b. 


O 














g 


1 


>l 


c 


g 


u 


J 


§ 


9 1 


s 


■H 

e 


1 


• 


1 


s 


^ 


N 


a 


>. 




M 


I* " 


s 


a 


o 


2 














c 


1 




« 


£ 












■-I 




s 




« 


la 


10 


• 


• 






u 


« 


u 










■ 




o 


9 


•a 


a 


CL 


B *' 


B 


u 


B 


a 


B 


• 


■J 


a 


X) 


o 




tJ 


C c 


u 


a 


B 


a 










3 


• 


aJ 




_§. 




S 




a 


a 


10 


J. 


a 


u 


CO 









O 


a 


o « 




a 


O 


,c 








^^ 


3 


>• 


CO 


b. 


m 


X 


o a 


CO 


z 


CO 


CO 


CO 


o 


>j 


O 


0. 


CJ 


u 


« CO 


3 


u 


o 


o 



4i 



330 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 









i 


in 




vo 


00 






< 


m 






o 


«^ 


o 


in 


< 


"TT" 


NO 


o 


00 


in 


o 


i< 




00 


00 


r* 








<N 




o 


in 






^ 








o 


O 


00 


IN 




00 


00 


m 


f 


ON 


^ 


^ 




00 


00 


<^ 




CO 


s 


IN 




"^ 


n 






z 


IN 






ro 


IN 


M 


<n 


Z 


IN 




r« 


m 


00 


m 


z 






IN 


•N 




& 


s 




























































u 




























































X 




















































































"o" 








^^^ 


















■~^ 


































M 






























a 
u 
a. 


o 
u 


M 


i 
























•4 






























u 


o 


s 
























































« 


•< 
























































Q. 


u 
























































z 




























































D 










































































"o" 














O 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 




NO 


o 








§ 










■n 














o 


O 


o 


o 


vo 


o 


o 


o 


in 


o 


o 


o 




t~ 








U S 
5 § 


£ 








0* 














M 


00 


o 


IN 


IN 


00 


o 


o 


>• 


o 


o 


o 




ON 


IN 








E 








•4 














m 




o 


r« 


r- 


00 


NO 


o 


o 


n 


in 


o 






<N 




a 
u 
a. 

3 

u 


i 


o 
o 
o 






















in 




vo 










n 


NO 


<N 


rH 


IN 
















o 




o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 






o 




o 


m 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


in 


o 


"r^ 


o 


o 


o 


o 


g; 


a 


t 




r> 






in 


o 


o 


in 


in 






o 




o 


r- 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


r~ 


o 




o 


o 




IN 


u 




a\ 




m 


<N 


o 


(N 


CN 


•H 






vo 






tN 


o 


o 


o 


NO 


o 




o 


O 


o 


n 


m 


in 


Q 


•-) 


























































i 

z 

M 


< 

u 


1 










o> 


r- 










00 




o 




ri 


IN 


t-t 


in 


rH 


■* 


IN 


ON 


r-i 


















<N 


'« 


























rH 


NO 






00 














in 




ON 


la 


O 


IN 


vo 


t~ 






09 




IN 


VO 


ON 


,_4 




IN 


""7T" 


00 


"inT" 


,_4 


NO 


r- 


r- 


p- 








o 


00 




00 


00 


00 


00 


00 


00 






00 




00 


00 


r- 


IN 




IN 


r- 


IN 


n 


00 


00 


00 


00 


00 








u 


a> 




ON 


ON 


ON 


Ol 


ON 


ON 






ON 




ON 


ON 


Ol 


ON 




ON 


ON 


Ol 


On 


ON 


ON 


ON 


ON 


ON 






> 










•H 




*-l 
























rH 


rH 


rH 


















^ 


























































K 




























































z 




























































M 




























































^ 




O 


00 






^ 


ON 


>* 






o 


r~ 


r^ 






00 














•« 


in 


n 










n 




•H 


o 






r- 


r- 


ON 






ON 


Ol 


o 






vo 














NO 


vo 


NO 








s 


>» 




n 


o 






o 


00 


o 






rH 


rH 


o 






00 














fv| 


IN 


M 








<B 




00 


Ol 






ON 


ON 


«-l 






r~ 


in 


ON 






NO 














o 


o 


o 






o 


8 


















I-* 






























w-i 


r^ 


t-t 
































































lb 




























































(X 




























































a 






























































B 




a 


n 


u 


a 










a 


B 


a 


a 


a 


n 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 




a 








E^ 


« 




O 


O 


• 


V 










« 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


« 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 




















r-l 










rH 


rH 




rH 


•-< 










<-< 


•-I 




•-t 














J3 


« 




o 


« 


« 


« 










O 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 








o 


t3> 




tji 


o 


01 


D> 


« 


Id 


a 




» 


D» 


o> 


C» 


» 


C3> 


Ol 


o 


a 


» 


0> 


C3> 


o> 


C3> 


o> 


o> 








o 


s 




s 


s 


s 


s 


3 


3 
u 


i-i 

3 
u 




s 


s 


S 


S 


s 


s 


s 


s 


s 


s 


s 


s 


s 


s 


S 


s 










m 




(0 


ID 


01 


u 


B 


B 


C 




a 


a 


m 


a 


a 


n 


o 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


m 


a 


a 


a 










o 




o 


O 


o 


o 


e 


9 


o 




o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 










.J 




>J 


>J 


,J 


>J 


> 


> 


> 




_J_ 


J 


_J_ 


_J_ 


J 


_J_ 


_J_ 


_£_ 


_J_ 


_J_ 


J 


_J_ 


J 


>J 


_£_ 


J 






< 
0. 
























rH 


rH 


•-I 
































a: 
O 

z 


5 

u 


«( 


















U 


o 


O 


o 
















r< 
















w — 












• 








o 


O 


o 




B 




-t 








U 


(H 




• 


9 


8 






a „ 




Q 








a 






5 










U 




5 








B 


6 








S 










u. 
















u 


ki 


u 




Li 












U 










rH 






w 

< 














•o 








•o 


•o 


•o 




"O 


c 


B 








B 


M 






g 








3 




u 


J 






« 






2 


b. 


liL. 


b. 




Cv. 


8 


B 








B 


■O 






9 






o 


•J u 




a 


a 






ce 












a 




O 


B 








CO 


b. 




o 


O 


> 






o - 




le 
















a 


a 


<0 




>i 




a 














u 


u 


< 












o 


n 






• 


■J 




o 


•o 


■o 


■O 


a 


9 


B 


3 
























< t-l 




u 


O 






M 






o: 


« 


9 


9 


B 






CO 


9 


9 


9 


9 






9 


9 


U 








fc; c 

Z M 




X 


u 






3 

a 


a 




^ 


> 


> 


> 


O 


B 


>: 


B 


5 


& 


& 


& 


s 




e 


g 


§ 






« 










1 






■ 








3 


3 


3 




> 


c 


U 


< 


< 


< 


< 


u 




9 


9 


8 








w X 




Q 






« 


CO 






O. 


a 


O. 


E 




B 


B 










O 




> 


> 


ki 
















rH 






M 








« 


9 


9 


_s_ 




l4 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 







B 


8 












6 




S 


< 






a 


3C 






w 


M 


M 


bi 


Cb 


CO 


^ 


>J 


.J 


>J 


Cu 




,J 


■J 


X 
























































U 


u 


o 
























































a 


a 


a 


























































































« 








B 


a 












8 




a 


Q 


Q 








u 






















u 




B 




O 














u 














n 
























<M 


o 






•« 


U 














u 


O 


o 






K 


U) 






















o 


o 






O 




a 














M 


ki 


ki 






u 








H-l 


a 














(0 




CO 


o 


CO 


3 












o 




3 


3 


3 






b. 


a 




o 


u 
















>■ 




u 






O 










CO 
















(J 






Cb 


« 


a 










«H 


u 


IM 


(u 


IM 


















B 


B 


B 






ac 


u 


u. 




>, 




u 


u 










o 




O 




o 


u 


u 














3 


3 


3 






o 








iJ 


















o 








a 


^ 




a 






u 




X 


X 


X 








•J 


o 






o 


u 


u 










u 




tJ 


d 


u 


s 






a 


a 


a 














a: 




o 




(J 


o 














«a 




a 


o 


a 




a 


>« 








a 


a 


a 


a 


















tJ 


u 










•n 


M 










i 






•« 


<« 


o 




>. 


>, 


>< 








0. 


B 






■ 


09 


n 










o 


o 


o 


a 


Q 


a 


N« 


3 








>» 


9 


9 


9 






$ 


« 




o 


« 








5 








-H 




9 




9 








3 


3 


















rH 




■o 




Q 


Q 


n 




a 




kl 


B 


u 




u 




a 


3 








u 


3 














< 


« 




c 


e 






a 




HI 




u 


o 


u 


9 


u 


9 


B 




u 


tJ 


u 


*J 




B 


B 


B 










XJi 




3 


D» 


3 


S 


3 


a 


3 




S 


X 


2 


t» 


S 


a 


3 


u 


a 


a 


a 


3 


u 


> 


> 


> 










s 




« 


2 


o 


o 




O 


01 
« 




o 


a 


o 


s 


o 


s 


9 


a 


s 


2 


s 


o 




9 

9 


9 


9 














m 




u 


u 










ll 


u 


u 




u 












u 


9 


9 










to 






a 


u 


li 


^^ 


c 


fH 




u 


B 


u 


a 


«J 


a 


rH 




< 


< 


< 


IJ 




IH 


ki 


ki 










s 




u 


o 

.J 


J_ 


J_ 


u 


_U_ 


a 
U 




J_ 


a 

M 


± 


J_ 


J_ 


_s_ 


B 

u 


< 
■J 


J 


J 


_J_ 


J- 


3 


e 


± 


g 










• 


a 






« 


« 
ON 

> 














* 


u 












* 


« 




















U4 











M 
















• 
































u 


8 S 


M 










« 














•H 




« 
























u 












• 
m 


f^ 








8 


* 




<c5 










~ 


_ 


^ 


r< 










k> 




IJ 


§ 


w 


H C 






a 






« 










B 


B 








« 


a 












B 


B 
















JZ 


jC 














o 


00 


* 


B 






a 


o 


O 


u 






O 


1 




2 


ce 


8 B 


M 






a 


a 


(^ 






fi 













O 








tJ 


tJ 


9 




B 




^ 


o 


a: 


O 


6 ^ 


• 










■0 








c 






a 




>< 



















u 


o 




c^ 






• 


& 


E? 


> 


•o 


• 


i. 






lU 


s 


9 


B 
B 


^ 


5 


• 


& 


& 


9 




u 


8 
u 


B 
9 






«) >j 


kl 


« 




« 


« 


« 












g 




3 


O 


B 


B 




a 


■ 


h. 




8 


CO 


.H 








* m 


s 






> 


> 


a 


M 


-1 




a 


B 


N 


s 




u 


B 












u 




ti 






|4 


V ■" 




a 








o 


« 




p 


■o 





a 


9 


B 


kl 


C 


rH 


o 


O 


rH 


• 


CO 


s 












o o 






o 





o 


K 


• 


> 




9 


z 




3 


> 




£ 


U 




B 


B 








i 


ki 










o 


C 




u 


« 


« 




H 


Dl 




> 




9 


O 


< 




9 




B 


B 






B 


8 


B 














00 




0! 


« 


« 




B 






B 


O 


B 




M 




b. 


X 


U 


ki 


X 


• 







i 










B 4J 


n 




1 






u 








3 


u 






0» 


O 


u 




u 


b. 


b. 


U 


B 


U 




8 










O 9 


& 


i 


e 


S 


C 


§ 




g 


& 


B 
B 


1 


6 


9 
ki 


B 

U 


a 

B 


s 


8 






8 


£ 


zi 


kl 










■ t 




< 


3E 


* 


M 


^ 


■ 


M 


W 


> 


Q 


O 


b. 


u 


CO 


h. 


CO 


CO 


b. 


CO 


3 


X 



331 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 









^^ 


< 


o 


< 


in 


o 


00 


■«» 


"77" 


O 


m 


(-> 


< 


<j\ 


CT> 


OV 


o 


o 


"77" 


o 


o 


o 


o 


< 


■77- 


00 


r^ 


— 





— — 


VO 








5 




c< 






o 


CM 




o 


CO 


o» 


CO 




vo 


vo 


vo 




<N 




vo 


vo 




r- 




OH 




CN 




04 









</> 


S 


z 


<N 


Z 


^ 


r» 


VO 


n 


•«» 


fN 


rH 


'» 


z 


tH 


ri 


rH 


in 


vo 


Ol 


r- 


<N 


IN 




2 


»» 


01 


<N 




o« 




•» 




i 






































"-" 




























S 


< 
u 

X 




























































































o 


































■^^ 


^~ 
































o 






































Q 
u 
a. 

s 


Q 
U 


M 


i^ 






























































Q 

2 
D 


O 


S 
































































0. 


< 
o 








































































o 


O 


o 




o 


O 


o 


in 




o 


o 




O 


o 


O 


o 


O 


o 






O 


in 


o 












n 


^^~ 


"^ 






z 




o 


o 


o 




o 


o 


o 


M 




o 


o 




m 


<N 


VO 


o 


O 


o 






r- 


vo 


o 






















o: 5 


o 


5 


m 


fn 


o 




00 


o 


•H 


in 




vo 


(71 




■>» 


<N 


<N 


r^- 


m 


o 






CO 


m 


o 


VO 


VO 






•w 









M 


































































t^ 


* 


«-4 


o« 


OJ 




■» 


■* 


*H 


«H 






n 










■« 


ri 


•* 










OV 


CT) 


OV 















< 
o 


o 
o 




"^ 


■« 










"^ 




















rH 










n 


"^ 


"^ 










tn 




5 a 


o 

fH 




























































•H 








o 


o 


•w 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


O 


in 


o 




r- 


O 


fr> 


o 


o 


O 


o 


O 


o 


r^ 


o 





ui 














"0 




Q 


t-t 

< 
u 




O 


tH 


<N 


o 


o 


CO 


r-j 


o 


CO 


OV 


m 




o 


r- 


00 


o 


in 


o 


o 


o 


<N 


00 


o 





OH 


m 





OV 


OH 







U 




■» 


o\ 


<»> 


<N 


vo 


•* 


ro 


o 


<7> 


rH 


•« 




o« 






CO 


cs 


o 


n 


•^ 


rH 




rH 


r-t 


r^ 




OH 






c^ 




J 


































































:3 

1 


i 






o> 


rH 








« 


^ 


















m 












■V 


n 






















"7T" 


\0 


<N 


tN 


n 


CO 


r- 


•<» 


^ 




ro 


•»» 


t~ 


•<» 


•«» 


■« 


CD 


"vo" 


in 


<N 


"TT" 


in 


■<» 


"TT" 


VO 


•» 


^ 


"^ 








a 






OS 


CD 


o 




vo 




CO 


CO 


o 




CO 


CO 


CO 


o 


o 


o 


00 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


00 




CD 


CO 


00 


r- 


O 
U 












<J> 


o\ 


<Jl 


o 


OV 


<3\ 


<7> 


CI 


o\ 




OV 


<J> 


o\ 


o\ 


o> 


a\ 


o\ 


Ol 


a\ 


OS 


Ol 


Ov 


01 


o\ 


Ol 


OV 


o\ 


Ol 




oe 


i 






•H 


■-* 


•-* 


•-* 


rH 


rH 


rH 


rH 


rH 




rH 


rH 


t~* 


'^ 


rH 


'-* 


r-* 


rH 


rH 


rH 


rH 


rH 


rH 


rH 


t-4 


rH 


rH 


rH 


o. 




< 






























































3 

Q 




>« 


































































M 




































































oi 


r^ 


VO 


CO 








o 




•>* 


(N 


ov 


""in" 


"in" 


in 


f 


•«» 


•<» 


Ol 


m 


r~ 


t~ 


VO 


00 


•« 


OH 




CO 


— ■" 


"^ 










in 


<3\ 


o\ 


■<* 








in 




VO 




CO 


m 


in 


in 


n 


ro 


m 




n 


OV 


OV 


Ol 


<N 


C~ 


^ 




00 




Ol 








s 


n 


O 


<x> 


vo 








tN 




r- 


OV 


00 


r-i 


r^ 


rH 


<JV 


<J> 


<j> 


00 


r~ 


r< 


r~ 


00 


00 




C^ 




vo 




■» 








vo 


VC 


fs 


in 








rH 




00 


rH 


(N 


VO 


VO 


VO 


rH 


rH 


rH 


vo 


OV 


C- 


M 


<N 


00 


VO 







VO 




Ol 






u 


Eh 


































































a 




































































H 




































































b 


1 


























































































O 


o 


O 


O 


O 


O 


O 


O 

























































c 


c 


C 


c 


B 


B 


E 


E 




















E 


E 


B 












































































S4 


o 


IS 


o 


m 


o 


a 


to 


o 


m 


to 


T) 


^ 


■o 


•o 


■o 


■O 


•o 


•o 




















■a 


TJ 


TJ 










« 


« 


o 


« 


« 


« 


o 


o 


o 


o 


M 


IH 


u 


Li 


ki 


kl 


kl 


kl 




















kl 


kl 


kl 










rH 










r-l 


.-1 


rH 


rH 




(0 


10 


a 


■0 


a 


a 


<0 


■0 


« 


















8 


8 


8 










« 


« 


« 


o 


« 


o 


« 


« 


o 


o 


c 


c 


B 


B 


B 


B 


c 


B 


T3 


















B 


B 


B 








o 


Dl 


Ol 


Dl 


o« 


Ol 


Dl 


Dl 


Dl 


Dl 


Dl 


kl 


^ 


ki 


ki 


ki 


kl 


kl 


kl 




















kl 


kH 


kl 








o 


s 


s 


s 


s 


s 


s 


s 


s 


s 


s 




o 


o 


s 


« 
m 


m 


9 
ffl 


s 


m 
kl 


IS 
Dl 
C 


B 
Dl 
E 


« 

2 


B 
Dl 
E 


B 
B 


B 
Dl 

E 


s 

B 


B 
Dl 

E 


S 


s 


£ 










CO 


(D 


o 


CO 


OQ 


a 


o 


<0 


n 


O 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


> 


a 


a 


<0 


<0 


« 


a 


B 


8 


B 


B 


B 










o 


O 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


O 


o 


O 


a 


a 


<a 


10 


<o 


10 


<a 


<0 




kl 


n 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 


8 


8 


8 










J 


J 


J 


_J_ 


►3 


J 


■J 


_J_ 


J 


a 


CO 


CO 


w 


CO 


CO 


CO 


w 


01 


o; 


o 


o 


o 


O 














CO 


CO 


W 






< 
m 




























u 


O 


o 












< 
























g 


5 

u 
o: 




^ 




u 

3 


2 


3 


3 






B 




< 


B 


B 


B 


s 


s 


s 


s 


a: 


< 



























a. 


Q 


N 


* 


« 


« 






•I 


CO « 


10 


-w 
















J 


o 


rH 


3 





i-H 














z 


u 






•< 


ki 


u 


M 






CO 


a u 


u 


o 


« 


« 


a 


<a 


a 


■0 






3 


B 


B 


>, 

















a 


ki 






U 


O 


O 


oc 


ac 




B 


B 








k> 


u 


k) 


u 


o 




cr 


u 







U 














fA 


vH 


o 


f-i 


C 












« 


< O 


a 


1h 


U 


ki 


B 


B 


B 


B 


U 


kl 


<< 




> 


u 










B 








Q 


T3 


c 


o 


o 


o 


O 






u 


2 " 


CO 


a 


a 


a 


<0 


10 


a 


■I 




T3 




a 














3 






S 


a 




o 


u 


>. 






-H 


o 


« 


o 




U 


u 


U 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


00 


b. 


ce 


■o 


>, 




a. 




oe 




tr 








ki 


e 




c 


c 


c 


c 
































B 


B 


a: 






Q 




< 






a: 

> 


u 


b. 




<a 


o 


o 


o 


"S 


iH 


B 


< V4 


ki 
















b. 


« 


o 






a 


a 




b. 










S 






t> 


fc) 


u 


u 


J3 


J} 


Vh 


fc ^ 


o 








kH 


kH 


kl 


kl 




Dl 


•o 


.J 




b. 










8 










o 


•«-i 




s 


s 


s 


10 


"0 


o 






Q. 


Q. 


a 


u 


u 


U 


u 


rH 


B 


■0 




<0 








•a 













o 




£ 




C3 


O 


X 


< <a 


o 
















Q. 


•0 


kl 


B 


> 


kH 


•9 




c 










DC 




u 


T3 


U 














u 


CO rH 


rH 














9 




kl 


o 


A 




« 


•« 




8 




kl 








u 


•O 


O 


> 


c 


c 


c 


c 


B 


3 


u 


u 


B 


B 


B 








o 




O 




kl 





» 






>~i 




ffl 










« 







<B 


« 


a 


a 


a 


10 


O 


>, 


>, 


3 


3 


J_ 


•rH 


•rH 


-H 


B 






o 


O 


J_ 





i. 




a 














ae 


z 


b. 


Q 


u 


(A 


CO 


w 


CO 


(0 


J 


J 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


CO 


£ 


3 


u 


>• 


-1 









U 












fl 




















u 




<M 


<M 


















« 




















u 
u 

u 
u 

M 

■J 




u 


« 












M 






3 


O 


o 


o 
















B 


u 


B 
















U 






O 








































(J 




U 
















H 




s 


CO 












tS 






B 






>H 








& 


*H 


O 




CO 



CO 


(0 


§ 


«H 






B 






















** 


8 








u 


u 


u 








B 


o 




<M 




«M 




■0 









kH 






g: 


o 


o 


o 


s 








o 






> 








o 


o 


o 


« 




>• 


o 


o 








« 








3 






o 










o 


o 


o 




■o 




o 










o 


o 


u 


Ol 


>i 


u 










u 


>. 


u 


§ 











>, 


IJ 


iJ 




o 


u 


o 


>1 


>1 




u 


o 


o 


o 


o 








< 


u 




>• 


k> 


k> 


U 


B 


kl 


a 


B 






et 


u 


(0 


a 


> 








u 


X 






B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


fi 


B 






O 


u 


B 


B 


B 


•0 




s 




B 








a. 

< 










B 


B 


B 


•rl 






B 










o 





O 


kl 


u 














u 





ce 








U 


O 


a 




o 


o 


o 


u 




i 


o 


■O 


■o 


■O 


■o 


B 


B 


B 


« 






u 


Q 


Q 


a 


rH 






u 
















o 


a 


a 


a 




o 


B 


u 


k4 


u 


kl 








U 




M 















kl 




kl 






Q 


% 


u 


u 




•H 


■H 


■rH 


« 












10 


« 


•o 


■o 


•O 


« 


B 


kH 


« 


kl 


kl 


kl 


B 


B 


u 


8 


u 








« 


u 


% 


ki 


TJ 


■D 


•a 


a 


>H 


> 


■o 






B 


B 


u 


u 


U 


3 


o 


10 


a 


u 


^ 


u 


B 


s 


3 


Dl 


3 












S 


^ 


U 


U 


u 


C 


i3 




to 


^ 


kl 


ki 


kl 










tJ 


a 


kl 


3 


3 







B 












a 






a 








« 


3 


u 




s 


« 


« 


« 


a 


<0 


<0 


u 


kH 




Xi 













TJ 




u 










■o 


o 


o 


O 


a 


« 


<o 


•a 




10 


m 


09 


ffl 


U 


u 


U 


kl 


o 


a 


a 













B 


B 




s 










c 


kl 


u 




u 


u 


u 


« 






u 
















o 




B 


X 


u 


kH 


kH 


B 


u 


8 


8 










« 


u 


u 


B 








B 








B 


B 


B 


E 








B 




o 




kl 


u 


u 


B 


B 


•-> 


CJ 














« 


o 


« 


o 


o 


o 


10 




Id 


o 


10 


« 


« 


•0 


o 


o 


o 


_l 


3 


3 


B 


B 





B 


B 


B 


a, 


3 


8 










o 


JE_ 


Z 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


a 


CO 


3 


CO 


CO 


CO 


_W_ 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


tb 


m 


J 


X 


X 


X 


X 


CO 


s 





_u 




O 




S 








e 












« 
o 


8 




















« 










« 

• 








« 








CO 


















u 


H 












* 










« 








DC 












Q 


« 








g 










« 


CO 


8 . 






, 




« 




« 


« 








, 


• 


* 


B 












" i 


s 


o 




















rH 


8 




















u 










B 


* 




« 


a 










« 


a 


« 




« 






a 






♦ 




« 




<N 


n 






3 


TJ 






J< 


kl 













s 


oe 


tj 








a 




• 






rH 


B 


1* -^ 


a 


















O 


10 


K 


» 


e 


Oi 








5s 




is 












« 










• 




B • 


« 








M 


M 


J< 


J< 




g 


O 


r} 


B 


B 










B 






^ 




o 


a 


3 


iH 




<s 


« 




1 


< o 


o 


o 


in 


o 


« 


« 


« 


« 




a 


B 


•H 


ki 


B 


B 


« 


8 


8 














i 












kl 


3 ki 


ki 




Ol 


o 


« 


« 


o 


« 




^ 






> 


U 


^ 


s 




Dl 











Ai 


o 


c 


a 


o 




o 




a 


« 


u 


u 


c~ 


CO 




kl 


kl 


kl 


kH 


CO 


u 


3 








B 












» 


o 




1 




a 






» 


f 










rH 


u 


o 


o 


u 






u 




>. 


B 






TJ 





B 










3 


X 


Q 


kl 


u 


kl 


10 


o 




■ « 


• 
















b4 


r- 


B 


s 


« 


kl 


B 


B 


B 


e 


rH 










■o 








a 


u 


a 


a 




u 






• 


• 


• 








^ 








.o 







u 


k> 


B 


B 












u 


o 


c 


Q 


u 


« 


o 


3 


c 


B 


P kl 


<j 


u 


u 


■J 








o 








kH 




>, 


E 


E 







> 










9 




« 




g 




g 


N 


<0 




Q >■ 


>, 














c 




8 


a 


o 


B 





B 


B 


a 


3 



2 










> 


ce 


M 


CO 


CO 


<< 


CO 


Q 


S .J 


^ 


w 


CO 


CO 


X 


X 


X 


10 


X 


>j 


>• 


> 


u 


CO 


CO 


D 



332 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 









^^ 


in 


"^n" 





< 








n 


CO 


« 





>« 


~~ 





N« 





m 





^ 











n 


CH 


ON 








i 


n 


CO 


m 


>» 


(N 


c^ 


v« 


in 


m 




f>« 




CO 


ON 


in 


n 


r» 


01 





ON 


in 




r^ 


00 




u 


g 


r< 


iH 


c« 


Z 


M 


M 


n 


«« 


r> 


n 


r- 




rH 


rH 




**> 


CO 


00 


^ 




n 


CO 






























































& 


9 
























































X 


















































a 
u 
a. 


o 
u 


e 




















































i 




1 


















































1 


i 


•< 
u 




















































z 
























































D 















































































00 




















VO 


d 












l« 







in 









§ 
















\t> 


■* 






















n 



















ON 







1 i 


£ 














It 


t-l 




00 















^ 


in 






<N 


ve 


00 




ON 


ON 


r> 




M 






















































Eh 


* 


OS 


00 


o\ 







rH 




00 


p- 


in 


CO 






rH 








rH 


in 


r- 




P- 


fn 


n 




5 


o 


•-< 


•-* 


CO 


^ 














v4 






















n 








|i 


o 

o 

r-l 







































































in 

















"""■ 





(~- 


































o 


>« 




in 


m 











m 


c~ 


m 













I-I 


CO 


ON 


^ 


in 











ON 








in 




u 


t- 




00 


00 


o\ 


o\ 


'"' 


<N 


CO 


o\ 


<N 


CO 


<N 




tH 


"^ 






^ 


n 


•9 





^ 


ON 


00 


n 




g 


i 


S 


<N 


(N 


■^ 


r- 








Ol 


^ 




fO 
















'^ 


r» 


rH 


in 




rH 




M 


" 


























































fO 


<n 





n 


<N 







1- 


f~- 


in 


o\ 


^^~ 


■>• 


•«* 


m 


00 


00 


"r^ 


vo 


m 


"^ 


TT" 


^7^ 


^^ 








o 


00 


00 


00 


00 


00 




o\ 


f-i 


»» 





o\ 




00 


00 


00 


00 


00 


CO 


00 


00 


00 


00 


00 




Q 






u 


<7l 


ON 


<7\ 


<7> 


o> 




o\ 


<7> 


ON 


ON 


00 




c^ 


ON 


On 


ON 


ON 


ON 


ON 


ON 


ON 


ON 


ON 




U 

0. 

s 




3 

u 

>< 


z 

M 


tH 


iH 


r-l 




«H 




•H 




«H 


tH 


tH 




rH 


rH 


rH 


rH 










rH 


rH 


rH 




a 

































































00 


>£ 


>£ 


■» 


vo 


•* 




CO 


m 


CI 


yo 


VC 


^ 


r- 


<N 


CO 


\o 


■■"■ 





P- 


IN 


ON 


"0 








i 


r^ 


fO 


o\ 


in 




<N 


CO 




o> 


r> 


fO 


00 


00 





«» 





CO 


r- 




p- 


ON 


m 


\o 













<JV 


00 





r» 


•>» 


«» 




fH 


a\ 


o» 


r-< 


rH 


^ 




ON 


00 






vo 




in 


NO 


m 








tA 


in 


C» 


w 


in 


r- 







r« 




tH 


o\ 


ON 


t~ 


r- 


ON 


ON 






m 


m 


CO 


m 


r~ 






o 
at 


B 














■^ 








































u 


u 






















































b. 


8 




































































































































B 


B 


B 


c 


B 


B 




















































•H 


-w 


•H 














































■0 


■a 


■C3 


•0 


T3 


TJ 
































E4 














kl 


M 


kl 


kl 


kl 


k4 





































«) 


» 


« 


« 


» 


a 


« 


10 


10 


■0 


10 












































■0 


■a 


■o 


T3 


•0 


•0 


B 


B 


B 


C 


B 


B 






CJl 





01 


tji 


o> 


C3I 


o> 








D> 






















kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 









« 


<a 


«> 


« 








« 





O 










a 


a 


m 


a 


■a 


n 


« 


« 


4> 


« 


« 


« 


4) 


w 
















-H 














u 


u 


11 


i-i 


k4 


k4 


ffi 


m 


m 


m 


m 


m 





o> 


a 





a 





Q 


Q 


Q 


Q 


a 


Q 

























O 














B 


B 






























> 


> 


> 


> 


> 


> 


B 


B 


c 


B 


B 


B 


10 


a 


B 


B 


B 


6 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 






















■D 


a 


10 


10 


ID 


W 


kl 


kl 


10 


■0 


10 


10 


■0 


■0 


<0 


■0 


■0 


a 










a 


a: 


a; 


a: 


a: 


o: 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 








CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 






< 
























































5? 
























































Q. 


































9E 










H 















a: 
O 


i 










u 






< 


























b. 


B 




b4 














rH 


r-l 


B 




< 












u 














10 




•> 






B 






u 


u 


B 


a. 








a 














rH 


tJi 


B 




a. 




CO 






■0 






Z 






U 









■0 


u 










rH 




Q, 


« 


<0 


K 












CO 












n 


« 


a: 


u 


B 










0. 




< 




CO 






Ck 






0. 














a 


u 


rj 






Id 












0. 


CO 09 


Q 




>i 


kl 




B 












3 


Q. 


0. 


» 


a 







■H 


CO 


cc 


0: 


0: 




B 




O4 « 




f-t 


• 


U 


« 







a 


«_l 








a 






« 


a 


B 


<J 


o. 















kl 






a. 


cx 




3 


>i 




3 








iQ 


u 


^ 


j: 


^ 


« 


c 




« 


a 


n 


a 




>, 


<v 


Q 
B 


a. 









cr 


E 




tr 


10 






a: 


•0 


T3 


4J 


to 


•H 


kl 


kl 


s 


s 


s 




B 


■0 




a 


a 


■a 


< 


10 




< 


<M 






b. 


b. 


i 






u 


^ 







a 


(B 


bl 


CO 


« 








U 






kl 












a 




M 












u 


« 


M Dl 


3 


b: 


3 


T3 


T3 






T3 


3 








►J 


J 




•H 


rH 


*J 




« 


a 


10 


a 






b, 


Q < 






U 


B 


B 





rH 


B 






ce 











kl 


Q. 




•»H 




u 


k> 


u 




■0 








>, 










a 


Q. 













a 


Q 


>: 


M 




c 


c 


u 


B 


B 


B 




c 


Q 


§ -c 


B 


u 


C 





u 









Pi 










i 


_!. 


« 





Q 


a 


J_ 


>1 


10 


10 


10 




10 




J_ 


10 


« 


a 


« 




a 















_J_ 


a 


_X_ 


w 


_J_ 


to 


CO 


CO 




CO 


X 


CO t< 


_o_ 


CO 


u 


CO 


< 


CO 


CO 


z 












































































u 


u 
























u 


U 






■0 






















09 


■a 




























x: 




u 


x: 














































kl 


kl 


u 






u 




















Q 






























e 


3 




CO 


3 












a 


« 


« 


<a 






u 






















u 





< 






< 












U 


u 


u 





l4 


ki 

























<0 


"0 






<M 












K 



w 




CO 




CO 


s 


^ 


^ 


Q 














rH 





g 


g 


z 


z 


kl 
« 


u 
a 



k) 


kl 
« 


IM 









g 










•H 


•H 


kl 
















§ 


a 


>1 


•n 


B 


10 


« 


■0 


Q 


a 


a 


>< 










u 





aJ 


u 


c 


c 


y 
















< 


u 


B 


i 


3 


3 


z 






z 


u 










B 


a 


CO 


a 


1 


i 


2 










< 








1 


k) 






kl 


a 




-H 




















B 


B 


c 


B 




£ 


>» 


u 




i 


1 





^ 





















a 


Q 


Q 






« 














3 











B 


u 


u 


u 























tj 





CO 


CO 


00 


00 


B 


a 
















• 














Wl 


ki 


U 


ki 






CO 












10 








10 


■0 














u 
















^ 


^ 


i 


^ 


§ 


i 


> 


s 


•0 
u 


Id 


•0 
u 


kl 


ac 


0: 


•0 





g 


■C3 


T5 


C7I 
• 


ex 
« 


s 























X 


X 












« 


« 


^ 


B 




•0 


•o 


-H 





































■0 


a 


« 


10 


« 


B 


e 


10 


« 


B 


B 


a 


a 





Q 


Q 










u 


M 


u 


u 


« 


9 


u 


U 


U 


u 


U 




-H 


kl 


« 


k) 


> 












kl 














»J 





u 


u 


j< 


M 


B 










» 


t 


« 


« 


a 










B 


B 


kJ 


B 


B 










2 


« 


« 





a 


a 



















B 


s 







a 


a 


■0 


10 


« 


■0 


<0 










X 


X 


X 


X 


J 


>3 


X 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


oa 


M 


U 








u 


u 


CO 


CO 


X 


CO 


CO 




































■n 


« 


























s 


























• 


X 
























u 


g 


M 






• 




















M 




8 ^ 

H a 




« 








« 










X 

















« 




« 


« 


• 




-H 


« 


9 V 


• 










aJ 


• 






^ 


o 


M 












« 














g 


3 


9 "* 








* 




0! 










« 








« 


n 




« 
















kl 









kl 










B 








o 


















B 


« 


n 


r« 






« 


M 


fa B 




« 




>. 




u 










5 






« 






« 




M 













10 


a 


8 










« 






« 


« 




















ki 






a 




10 


> 


« 






(-1 










aJ 












0. 




a 






«-i 


£ 




10 


S 


5 


i 


9 


a: 


oe 


« 


B 


X 




a 


« 


b, 


B 


kl 


s 










K 





■ 


•*4 




u 


B 








B 


M 


• 


k< 


• 




c 


> 


10 


kl 
















C 


10 








£ 


CO 


10 


a 


a 


a 


k4 






B ^ 


M 


kl 







kl 


• 






IJ 













« 


« 


u 





u 




u 





u 


u 


« 


« 


u 






« 





kl 


a 


a 






B 










kl 


§ 


X 


kl 


M 


kl 


^ 


c 


B 


B 


B 


t> 




kl 


D B 


i 


? 


c 


a 


> 


TJ 


1 


kl 















a 


• 


8 










10 


10 


10 


3 




g 


10 




i 




s 















u 


t< 


J 


0. 


z 


K 


b. 


CO 


CO 


CO 


.J 


M 


« CO 


CO 


ae 


0: 


< 


06 


X 


Q. 



L 



333 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 











o 


^ 


<N 


p~ 


in 




in 


o 






(N 


in 


•«» 


in 


o 


o 


vo 


rH 


00 


d 


vo 


o 


"in~ 


m 


in 






O 


in 


o 








^ 




o 


Ol 


00 






o\ 


■«» 






00 






in 


r~ 




vo 




CJV 


rH 


rH 




00 


vo 


in 








r-i 


vo 




CO 


i 


rH 


iH 


■»» 




vo 




vo 


r-j 






n 


n 




in 


n 


vo 


VO 


CN 


tH 


o» 




rH 




n 


■«» 






CN 


m 


t~ 




a: 
O 


























































'-' 












X 
















































































o 


















in 


o 




























■"" 




















o 


















1-1 


o 






























Q 
u 

2 


a 
u 


< 


g 












o 

lA 


















o 


o 






























^ 


0. 


CJ 
































































S 












































































O 


o 


O 


o 


o 




<N 


c» 






o 


o 


o 


o 






O 




o 


o 


O 








o 






o 


o 


"^ 










O 


o 


a\ 


o 


o 




ro 


in 






o 


o 


o 


o 






O 




o 


o 


O 








o 






t~- 


in 






i ^ 


Q 


£ 


r4 


<ft 


U1 




o 




<N 


vo 






o 


■»* 


00 


o 






o 




m 


m 


<JV 








rH 






ts 


r- 






Pi 


^ 


•>» 


^ 


00 


r- 


r) 




^ 


00 






OV 


in 


o 


•* 






o 




<JV 


<JV 










•«» 






rH 


ro 






1 






<N 


00 


t~ 


o 




m 








f~ 


00 


^ 








o\ 




n 


«H 










VO 






r» 








u ^ 


o 
o 






r~ 


•>* 


vo 




in 








■«* 


o 


























Ol 














s § 


o 






rg 






























































o 


o 


o 


o 


o 




o 


o 






o 


o 


o 


o 






o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 




o 


o 


o 


"o 




Q 


H 
0« 






o 


o 


o 


o 




o 


ro 






o 


o 


o 


o 






o 


00 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 




O 


<Tl 


o 


o 




U 




r~ 


o 


o 


o 


o 




■« 


in 






o 


o 


•«11 


vo 






OV 


<N 


in 


in 


rH 


O 


m 


•<» 


o 




O 


00 


o 


o 




•J 


































































d 


g 


<N 


IT) 


CT> 


in 


o 




■«» 


m 






in 


o 


Ol 








o\ 




00 


00 




CS 




rH 


rH 




M 


vo 


(N 


m 










t^ 


00 




in 








Ol 


c~ 










<N 
















VO 














fe 






in 




tH 




f-i 


















































CO 

z 

M 


•< 

u 










































































■"■■■ 


^■^ 


■O" 




m 


vo 






in 


in 


[~ 


<N 










rH 


rH 


<N 


r~ 


in 


cn 


in 




O 


r- 


VO 


"o 








Q 










vr> 




vo 


00 






in 




00 


00 














00 


CO 


00 


00 


vo 




<7V 


CO 


CO 


a\ 


o 

Cl, 
O 






u 










Ol 




o\ 


<n 






<7V 


CTv 


en 


a\ 










CJN 


<J\ 


<T) 


<Tl 


o\ 


0\ 


a\ 




<X\ 


tJ> 


<J\ 


<^ 




3 


1 










" 




" 


.H 






" 


" 


" 


" 










" 


" 


rH 


rH 


" 


" 


" 




" 


" 


T-i 


" 


d 

S 




>< 






























































Q 










































































00 


VD 












00 


O 




m 


"TT" 


o 


in 


o\ 


rH 


vo 


00 


rH 


rH 


■<|1 


■<li 


o 


rr> 


t- 


00 




r~\ 


<N 












O 


o> 












00 


t~ 




n 


n 


CTV 


c^ 


<N 


r- 


CTl 


1* 


vo 


VO 


CTV 


ro 


n 


vo 


00 


■»» 




n 


00 










i 


o\ 


C~ 












vo 


■* 




(N 


<N 


in 


Ol 


O 


vo 




in 


vo 


VO 


C~ 




rH 


00 


vo 


o 




<j\ 












01 


<N 












<N 


o\ 








n 


00 


CT\ 


00 


00 


vo 


CN 


<N 


■« 


CTi 


in 


r-i 


(S 


o 




in 


r» 








u 


^ 


































































m 




































































M 


bJ 


































































b. 


i 




































































1 




3 
































































Q 




O 


































































n) 


>i 


■0 


10 


10 


10 


10 


(0 


10 




10 


10 


10 


10 


(0 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


(0 


10 


10 


10 


10 




10 


10 


10 


10 










u 




u 


l-> 


u 


u 


u 


t) 


u 




<J 


u 


u 


*J 


U 


iJ 


4-1 


u 


U 


u 


u 


U 


u 


u 


4-1 


c^ 


4J 


4J 


u 


4J 










m 


>; 


CO 


m 


(0 


to 


(0 


CO 


CO 




CO 


(0 


to 


to 


to 


(0 


to 


to 


to 


to 


to 


to 


to 


to 


to 


o 


to 


to 


to 


to 










a 


CO 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 




10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


■0 


■0 


10 


•o 


10 


10 


10 


10 










x: 




£ 


x: 


£ 


x: 


JZ 


Xi 


JS 




XI 


x: 


£ 


x: 


x: 


J3 


x: 


Xi 


J= 


x: 


.c 


x; 


J= 


x: 


X 


o 


.B 


.fi 


Xi 


.fi 










CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 




CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


X 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 






■« 




o 










































4J 




u 


















CO 




u 


















m 
























•rH 




•H 


















Cu 


Cd 


c 
« 














41 




cc 








a 
















a 




a 








BC 


(S 








cc 


























a 




oi: 


a: 




>i 










l4 




















o 


s 














TO 




■o 








« 








¥ 








u 


u 


u 








U 


4J 








z 


u 








o 






M 


o 


3 








to 


4J 


4-) 




B 








u 




u 



























10 




rH 


t) 


■0 


o 






M 


O) 




•H 




u 


o: 


o: 


a: 




u 










a 


a 








H 


X IS 






IX 


CO 




g 


10 


CO 








u 


c 


"a 


a 




i 








IJ 


10 


u 


















^ 


CO 












CO 












-H 








u 


u 


u 


10 


X 


10 






















o 




o 


















& 


n 
















X 




X 








M 


M 


u 








1 




nl 




iJ 


u 


14 






M 








o. 


u 


>H 






a 


a 


a 










u 


u 


CJ 


u 


o 








Z 1^ 


CO 




c 


u 


U 


M 


M 


u 








41 


CO 


u 


U 




u 








« 




« 




u 


u 












ff 


M U 






V 






U 


U 




•o 






B 










u 








u 


u 


u 








1.1 


o 


Dl 






^ 






w 






CJl 


Ol 






(31 


c 






o 


u 


B 


>, 






M 


u 


n 


o 


u 


CJ 




V4 


>1 


4) 


B 


B 








< 0) 




o: 




c 


c 


M 


U 


C 


10 


a: 


o: 


Dl 


01 


o 


4) 


a: 


9 


CJ 


CJ 


U 








p: 


4) 


4) 


^ 




•rH 






M 




a: u 


4J 




u 






(0 


10 










U 


> 


n 


B 




■a 








o 


4-1 


u 




g 


B 


O 


U 


IH 






ce: 




U nJ 


u 


o 


<J 


M 


l-l 


4) 


4) 


M 


t> 


u 


u 


B 


*-t 




^ 


u 




u 


u 


u 


to 


to 


to 


u 


U 


n 


10 


5 










< rH 




10 


10 


O. 


a 


rH 


rH 


a 




-H 


*H 


O 


•H 


'v 


3 


•H 




10 


10 


10 


o 





o 




J_ 


3 


10 





o 










CO CO 


_a_ 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


_U_ 


CJ 


CO 


a. 


a 


a 


_s_ 


CO 


z 


m 


a 


CJ 


X 


X 


X 


_jj_ 


J 


J 


a 


o 


X 


o: 


o: 






























o 


o 














o 


o 










o 








































U 


u 










H 




u 


CJ 










u 








































o 


CJ 






o 









CJ 










u 




















o 




c 


c 


c 




a 








•H 


•H 






B 











































Q 








o 




o 








>H 


u 






M 








u 


u 






4-1 




u 




















CO 


^ 


















u 


u 










u 




u 


O 






in 




u 


o 


















(0 


u 


u 


u 




u 








t) 


CJ 


< 




V4 




t) 




CJ 


u 






B 







CJ 




o 




o 








pc: 


■< 




1 


§ 


<9 












4) 


4) 


CO 




41 




4) 




4) 


4> 






O 




41 






o 




u 












dt 


g 




g 


lU 


lU 






rH 


o 




? 












u 


z 


U 


z 


rH 


^ 






j: 


a 








S 


o 




10 


10 


10 


to 


10 


O 







U 


(d 




(0 


O 


to 


O* 




U 


u 


M 








Cd 


$ 




u 















M 


V 








41 














to 


4) 


a 


41 


U 


CJ 






Z 


t3 


o 


■o 




3 






B 












■o 


Du 











a 





>i 


>, 




m 


cH 


4) 






rH 


a 


B 


U< 


<J« 


>i 


IH 


>1 


>« 









10 


IH 










$ 




w 


0) 


41 




4) 


4J 


4J 










!q 


M 


JO 












O 


"O 


o 




a 






a: 


2 










O 


te 


a: 


K 


X 


o: 


-H 


•H 




(0 


to 


C3I 


10 


41 


10 


M 




to 


CO 


cc 




^ 




m 




















CJ 












u 


u 




10 


■0 


U 


3 


41 


3 


2 


o 


10 


10 




Iv. 


[14 


10 






.J 


kl 
















H-l 


>u 


IM 




(M 








o 


cs 


4> 


01 


W 


4) 


u 


O 


O 










C3 


M 






U 


u 










ki 


3 


o 


o 


o 


c 


o 


h 


« 








C 


c 


U 


B 




■a 






a 


« 


T3 


•k 




o 




p" 




4) 










U 


O 








u 




Ol 


Ol 




CJ 


V 


u 


0> 




41 


10 


>i 


O 


O 





r-t 


B 




CJ 






^ 


Ol 


4J 












>i 


3 


3 


3 


X 


3 


c 


c 






•H 




ce 


B 


ce 


x: 


X 


•rH 


•rH 


u 


i-> 


10 


rH 




u 




3 


B 


s 










W 




■0 


■0 


10 




10 








IM 


IM 


4) 




O 




o 




iw 


i<H 




2 




« 




4) 




a 




2 










u 


M 


<v 


41 


41 


c 


4) 


•o 


T3 






•H 


x: 


10 


to 


10 


10 


10 




•rH 




» 


x: 


» 




g 




4) 


Vh 


■o 










« 


CO 


M 


U 


U 


o 


V< 


"O 


■a 




o 


CJ 


*j 


C31 




Ol 




tJI 


CJ 


o 




■o 


tji 


■CJ 


t) 




to 


■0 












i-t 
CO 


CO 


_i 


A 


A 


u 

M 


A 


A 


s 




10 
0. 


10 

a 


CO 


A 


A 


J_ 


_l_ 


A 


A 


-1 


_£. 


-rH 

CO 


X 


•H 
0) 


_2_ 


J_ 




o 
o: 


O 
a: 


o 

CJ 




u 

H 




e 














« 












* 


« 














« 












« 










§ 


M 
CO 


s 








« 


« 


10 






s 










4J 






« 






« 


• 










3 


























CJ 


* 














<0 












■o 












(0 


« 










K 




























n 


■H 








« 




u 




« 


« 














C~ 


g 


^ 


O 


fi 


3 










CO 






fi 






u 


0» 


b. 










« 


o 


x: 










n 






« 








O 






>i 


M 






>< 








u 


B 




M 




>< 






%4 


o 










H 












o: 




J^ 


>i 






3! 


4) 





g 


4) 




¥ 


« 






M 


4) 


>1 


41 






4) 


u 






« 


















o « 


■H 






41 


C 


4) 








& 


u 


4) 


4) 


4) 








ki 












g 


u 


M 






c 




^ 


E *" 


M 


« 




M 


U 


10 





M 


M 






0. 


0, 


M 


rH 


rH 






4) 


Q 


cs 


.H 




U 


u 


U 


u 








^ 




a 






U 


O 


U 


4J 


o 










CO 


0, 


O 




i? 


<N 


rH 


X 










u 


)H 






4) 








8 ^ 


•H 




M 






u. 


>1 














O 




10 


> 








rH 


M 


^ 






U 


u 


Ol 


k) 












CO 


« 


u 


Dl 


Ol 




4) 


01 










^ 


•C 


>i 


> 




M 


u 


ki 




U 


u 




IH 




« 


a 


A 










•I « 




u 


■H 


C 


c 


0> 


>! 


a 


3 


>» 


n 


01 


? 


to 


4) 




4) 


u 


u 


CJ 


S 






rH 


o 


u 


Xi 




•g 










1 '-' 


« 


cs 


s 


•^ 


■^ 


tjl 


09 










u 


> 


to 


e 


>! 


(S 








« 


4J 


U 




g 


•H 


o 


u 










U IS 


M 


10 


U 


M 


•o 


•W 


u 




Jj 


u 


o 


.-1 


10 


CJ 




U 


u 


iJ 


■a 


(0 


U 


s 

b. 


u 


10 












« CO 


3 


s 


s 


A 


_i. 


3 


_1 


S! 


! 


Ou 


a 


J_ 


CO 




j_ 


J_ 


A 


_1 


_1 


A 


-H 
03 


_! 


_3. 


a 


_£. 


_1 


_s_ 


J 



H 



334 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 







^■^ 






in 


m 


VO 


in 


in 


^ 


o 


o 


^ 


00 


OV 


in 


rN 


o 


o 










§ 




o 




<N 


00 






CN 


in 


'» 


r- 


C< 


o 


m 


« 


r4 






(0 


s 




<N 


f-* 


M 


.H 


vo 
















rH 




rt 
















•H 






























^ 


9 




















































































X 




































Q 


a 




i 




































1 


Q 


S 






































" 


< 
u 










































"^~' 






o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


n 


o 


o 


o 


o 




o 


O 




o 








z 






o 


o 


o 




o 




r« 


in 


o 


o 




<N 


(TV 




o 






1 ^ 


o 


PC 




iH 


V£ 


r- 


^ 


o 


»» 


tH 


OV 


r>» 


<Xi 




<N 


rH 




o 






M 


S 




in 


•9 


o\ 


iH 


o 










vo 




n 


r- 




<N 






1 


o 
o 
o 






n 


m 




<J\ 




















lO 






^^^ 






o 


o 


o 


r- 


o 


o 


O 


o 


ro 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 






o 


;5 






o 


o 


o 


o 


o 




n 


o 


<7t 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 






u 






o 


o 


o 


<N 


o 


tH 




rr 




<N 


m 


OV 


<7\ 


in 


m 






t3 








































3 


^ 




r<4 


o 


<N 




u> 










VO 




n 


<N 


(N 


r< 






< 






CO 


r- 




in 


























M 




n-i 


































^^^ 






""inT" 


"U^ 


■^^ 


"iTT" 


•* 




"""" 






<r\ 


ON 


^ 


fr» 


^7^ 


ro 










Q 




«c 


VC 




00 


11 










00 


00 


<JV 


00 


00 


00 




a 






Ci3 




<T> 


o 




<T> 


CTl 










CTl 


o\ 


<7V 


o\ 


o\ 


Ov 






1 






i-i 


rl 




tH 


tH 










rH 


rH 




rH 


ft 






ff 






2 




































W 






M 




































O 












































■"^ 






«> 


"To" 


«) 


"To" 


m 


in 


vo 




in 


O 




n 


VO 


M 


o 


00 












O 


o 


o 


<N 




o 


»» 




■>» 


o\ 




ov 


vo 


VO 


00 


<N 








s 










00 


CN 


00 


in 




o 


rH 




rH 


o 


O 


r- 


00 










<N 


CN 


CN 


■« 




vo 


vo 




o\ 


ro 




m 


•>» 


Til 


(N 


in 






o 


p, 








































(S 


fj 








































u 










































Cu 


i 










































8 




a 


10 


10 


<0 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 














O 












u 


«J 


u 


u 


4J 


10 


10 


»J 


CO 




c 


B 








B 












CD 


to 


n 


CO 


CO 


3 


3 


CO 


3 


10 


c 


B 


4) 


(S 


ID 


« 












Id 


■0 


« 


■0 


10 






10 




x: 


4> 


41 


>; 


M 


a 














£ 


£ 


£ 


^ 


x: 


O 


O 


x: 


o 


4) 






10 


n 


10 


o 












M 


M 


M 


w 


w 


u 


U 


w 


u 


_Eh_ 


O 


O 


.J 


►3 


z 


CO 






< 




ra 






































w 




a: 








































i 


a 

s 

s 














r-l 


^ 


rH 




o 

IJ 




CO 












o 












c 


B 


CJ 


B 




w 
















z 








cc 




u 


U 


T3 


U 


O 




O 


u 


U 










M 


y 








u 




10 


10 


O 


10 


<0 




10 


V 


10 










1 












CO 


to 


O 


CO 


m 


B 


CO 




CO 










Q 


s 








0, 




3 


3 


» 


3 




u 




<B 
























W nH 




c 










s: 














S 














Q O 


O 


o 


O 


ki 


4> 


u 


o 


kl 


v^ 


Cl 






OS 


z 








u 




H U 


U 


u 


U 


u 


B 


u 


<0 


u 


u 


u 






H 












u 




W 1 




u 


1 




•H 




u 














tl 


a: 


BC 


q: 




a: 


B 


B 







>i 


.-H 


>1 




4) 


x: 


J3 






M 










>: 




M « 


B 


o 




B 


X 


B 


>: 


.c 


■0 


10 






flC 




M 


u 


4J 


4J 


CO 


u 


0) 




« 


O 


D> 


o 


b. 





4J 


u 
















o 




g 3 




Cl, 


rH 


u 




u 




■0 


J_ 


s 












Q. 


a 


0. 


X 


a. 


_t£_ 


X 


o 


M 


X 


CO 


z 


u 












o 


o 


o 




o 






















8 












u 


u 


u 




U 














































o. 


u 


























o 


o 


o 


3E 


o 






CO 


CO 














o 


























£ 
















■H 












u 


u 


u 


T5 


ki 






Q 




•M 


HH 








M 












u 


u 


u 




u 
















o 








U 












o 


o 


o 


O 


o 






o 


OI 














S! 








K 




w 


4) 


<v 


U 


0) 






u 




>. 


>1 


>• 


Q 


o 














rH 






n 








■a 


u 


U 


u 


4J 


O 


u 












z 




u 


U 


u 


X 


u 


Q 


Q 


$ 


U 




•H 


•rH 


S 


s 




u 






















M 


M 


M 


O 


o 


o 
















o 




>« 


•4) 


4) 


ki 


>« 


10 


10 


B 


10 








•a 


V8 




•» 












10 


(0 


n 


Q 


B 


CO 


CO 


U 


CO 


10 


10 


10 


u 


U 




a 












10 


s 


10 




<0 


3 


3 


S 


3 


kl 


u 


l4 


[L, 


b. 




« 












o 


O 


* 


O 




i-H 






10 


a 


10 






a 


O 


















u 




O 


o 


4) 


O 


<-l 


rH 


•-< 






H 














o 


O 


u 


o 


U 


O 


U 


.-H 


CJ 


u 


o 


o 


o 


C5 




o 












■H 




<M 


«-l 


■rt 


g 


g 




g 


a 


10 


10 


u 


U 


o 

B 


•rH 












■H 


.r-l 


•W 


.^ 


-^ 


3 


u 


u 


k> 








10 


•rl 












o 


O 


o 


« 


o 


o 


41 


X3 


41 


B 


B 


B 








O 












<« 


■0 


10 


•M 


10 


iH 




M 




10 


10 


10 


o 


o 


o 


10 












Q. 


0. 


0. 


a 


a 


o 


O 


■< 


O 


CO 


0) 


CO 


>• 


>• 


CO 


a 








aa 
























« 














o 

M 




t< 








« 


• 




























z 


M 
(0 


8 












8 




• 










« 










o 


5 
























« 


rH 














a 


cc 








^ 
















10 






« 


« 


a 


OD 




y 


o 


i 






o 


M 




p 


« 




« 




B 




>. 






•o 












IS 


u 








B 






•> 




4) 






t* 






OS 








« 






« 






O 




41 


o 


4) 












g 












n 


V 








X 




U 




D> 




4) 





o 










« 






t> 






<N 






4J 


« 


U 


« 


J< 










0. 


B 






oi 







1 ^ 




4) 


^ 


s 


B 


s 


> 


3 


rH 
41 


8 










9 












1 *"* 


,H 


!2 


•* 




J 




B 




o 












t~ 


^ 


n 


kl 




3 <o 


<0 


o 




J< 




>. 


10 


u 






















« 






> 


3 


4) 


o 


,c 


B 




<e 


u 


u 












u 


u 


g 


J< 


u 




o 


i3 




10 


a 


O 


■O 


4) 




B 
















-i 






IJ 


ia 




fH 




u 


B 













_^ 




■ 


0. 


a 


_2. 


0. 


« Ul 


CO 


X 


to 


X 


CO 


M 


U 


_*. 


X 



335 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 









^^ 


r~ 


in 


o 


m 


r- 


in 




VO 


O 


< 


fS 


n 


VO 


VO 


O 


in 


■«» 


o 


in 


^ 


o 


o 


o 


■^ 


-^ 


r- 


00 


lO 


(N 


o 


— 








e 


m 


^ 


<N 


00 








r- 


o 




00 


00 








VO 


:~ 


o 


«N 


VO 


VO 


in 


<7V 


t- 


m 


m 


^ 


Ov 


a\ 


^ 






0) 


s 


u^ 


in 


r- 


«H 




•H 




t-( 


r^ 


z 


»* 


n 


in 






»» 




t-> 








VO 


m 


•« 


m 


'« 


rH 


in 






r* 










•^ 




































•-< 


















•H 








s 








































































X 




































































































O 


















m 






^■^ 






^■^ 


■^ 






































n 


















r- 
















Q 
u 
Q. 

s 


Q 
U 


M 


g 
































































O 


a. 


a, 

6 
















































































































































o 


o 


o 


O 


Ot 






o 


o 




^ 


"in" 


o 


o 




o 


o 




O 


o 










in 


o 


<N 




O 


o 


"^ 






2 




o 


o 


o 


m 








o 


o 




00 


>» 


o 


m 




o 


in 




>» 


o 










•* 


o 


00 




o 


m 


o 






o 


E 


00 


r-« 


VO 


•9 








r> 


o 




«• 


VO 


o 


tH 




fO 


(N 




o 


o 










00 




00 




o 


n 


o 




M 




































































t^ 






O 




00 










m 




n 


o 


■«» 












m 


t~ 












^ 














S 
CK 


o 
o 


•» 




I-l 
















VO 


VO 


■« 














in 


















OI 




-* 




5 3 


U 

z 

u 


o 






































































o 


O 




o 


in 


O 


o 


o 


VO 


o 


o 


o 


o 


in 




o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 




o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


"o 




a 


& 




o 


O 




o 




■« 


•« 


o 




m 


o 


o 


o 


f 




in 


in 


o 


o 


o 


in 


o 


in 




in 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 








■^ 


m 




t~ 








n 






o 


o 


o 






C~ 


04 


'^ 


OV 


o 


•^ 


o 


o\ 




n 


o 


<N 


o 


cs 




00 




t 

w 

z 


i 

5 


1 


VO 


00 

»-4 


















' 


00 


r^ 














<J> 
















in 


ro 




r1 








o 


CO 




VO 










(N 




^ 


o 


0\ 










o 


rH 


rH 




VO 








VO 


in 


o 


fO 


<N 


~^ 








Q 


o 


va 




00 










00 








c- 










ov 


00 


00 












00 


00 


o> 


o 


00 


O 


a 
u 






U 


<7> 


<J\ 




o\ 










<Tl 




OV 


<JV 


o\ 










Ol 


<J\ 


OV 




<j> 








a\ 


<7V 


Ol 


ov 


o\ 


o\ 




« 


•J 

i 


■"• 


"-" 




"-" 










■-' 




>-> 


'-' 


»H 










•-' 


>-" 


•H 
















*-* 


rH 






a 




< 
































































s 




u 
>< 
































































s 






z 

M 
































































o 












































































r> 


ro 


VO 


(V) 


VO 


•«» 




o 


00 




rH 


rH 


rH 




r- 


■<» 




r* 


rH 


*-i 


"rT" 


VO 


""<n" 


VO 


in 


VO 


r~ 


■^7" 


VO 


■™^ 


"io 










o 


O 


CV 


o 


VO 


r~ 


















c^ 






in 


(N 


<N 


oo 


VO 




t~ 


o 


o 


in 


VO 


o 




o 








s 


<x> 


00 


00 


00 


■* 


<N 




o 


<7> 




«H 


fH 


(H 




VO 


r~ 




m 






OJ 


t- 


<j\ 


VO 


CTv 




o 




VO 




VO 












u> 




t^ 


VO 




VO 


fO 




•H 


iH 


»H 




in 


»» 




00 


rH 


rH 


>» 


in 


VO 


00 


VO 


m 


r- 


CO 














[;; 




































































u 






































































Cu 


s 

a. 






































































] 


















•0 


■0 


■0 


§ 










■0 


■0 


<0 


a 


a 


■0 


10 


ID 


10 


■0 


10 


10 


■0 


a 


a 










<v 


« 


« 


« 


« 


« 


« 


o 


iJ 


•J 


JJ 


g 


g 


g 


g 


u 


4J 


U 


<j 


tJ 


t) 


u 


4J 


iJ 


u 


u 


u 


•J 


tJ 


u 










u 


u 


u 


u 


u 


D 


u 


ij 


IB 


a 


C9 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


CO 


10 


10 


m 


CO 


CO 


0) 


09 


CO 


09 


09 


09 


09 


00 


09 










iJ 


IJ 


^ 


u 


4J 


U 


u 


u 


10 


a 


10 


s: 


£ 


s: 


X 


x: 


10 


m 


a 


<o 


o 


<o 


10 


10 


« 


a 


10 


<0 


10 


10 


<0 










3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


JZ 


x: 


x: 


0) 


a) 


<S) 


« 


« 


£ 


x: 


£ 


x: 


x: 


x: 


x: 


.C 


J3 


.c 


JS 


x: 


x: 


Xi 


4= 










CO 


m 


la 


03 


CO 


00 


m 


m 


01 


01 


CO 


&^ 


Eh 


f- 


Eh 


Eh 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


to 


to 


to 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


_co_ 


to 


to 


to 
























o 






a 
























14 




3 


















§ 


5 

u 

1 








3 


3 






u 


« 


< 


E 








rH 


4J 


« 


0) 


rH 


Ji^ 


>: 




u 




o 


g 


g 


u 






14 












n 


a 






B 




S 


10 








a 


U 






J3 


b. 


Hk 








o 












o 






o 










>i 


>i 


« 


u 




14 










10 


u 


u 


u 








3 






14 


14 


3 












z 


a 


o 


6 










E 


u 




tJ 


14 


14 




x: 


CO 


iJ 


u 




z 


z 




o 




■o 


o 


<J 


o 


o 




3 






M 


10 


10 




B 


Q. 


a 


10 


10 


x: 


10 


a 


U 




u 




■0 


10 


& 








u 






10 


■0 


u 













i 




to 


w 


c 


o 


O. 


o. 


kl 


a 


iJ 


0) 






u 


■o 




CQ 


m 






14 






o 


to 


CO 




3 




14 






« 






u 


>i 


3 


3 


o 




Q 




o 


« 


u 


« 


14 






u 


14 


14 


u 


« 










« 


5 




o 
















B 


W 


W 


a 










f-H 






(J 






B 


u 


U 














14 


o 










UI 






n 


«J 






w 


M 


0> 


14 


U 


u 




o 




14 


14 


3 






14 


u 




14 


14 


14 


o 












a: 


Q H 


u 


M 


j^ 


U 


o 


« 




O 


C 


O 


4J 


iJ 


14 





14 


U 


u 


O 


IJ 


U 


10 


4J 




U 


u 


u 




« 


IH 


l4 






M u 


u 


U 


o 




u 


to 






o 




10 


■0 


Di 


m 


O 






O 


10 


■0 


o 












3 


3 


o 


O 








W 








B 






14 


>i 


u 


0) 


01 





to 




c» 


>, 


>i 




4> 


« 


ID 


>J 


14 


s 


14 


14 





O 












O 


o 


« 


kl 




•o 


■o 


O 


« 


iJ 










14 


C3> 


O 


« 




a 


CO 






tJ 


o 


t> 


<B 


u 


u 


3 


3 






ae 




h «J 


o 


U 


T3 




10 


■0 






CO 




a 


M 


B 


« 








IS 






M 


.i< 




>1 


> 


> 









O 








U) u 


u 


o 


B 


e 


u 


u 


■o 




n 


4J 


u. 


b. 


14 


» 


o 






o 






b 


b. 


» 


S 


o 


o 


■o 


T3 


o 


CJ 










< 3 


2 


2 


« 


■0 


10 


10 


J_ 


■0 


10 






O 


o 




10 


10 


14 


.r4 


.rH 






6 


10 






















U (0 


ID 


01 


X 


X 


Ck 


Q. 


ffl 


< 


o 


CO 


CO 


b 


>j 


to 


in 


m 


o 


_SE_ 


a 


0) 


2 


o 


u 


o 


u 


o 


o 


M 


to 














»H 














Xi 


o 


o 


O 






c 









O 


















o 




o 














a 




X 










3 


u 


o 


U 






M 






o 


u 


















u 




o 










O 


o 


u 


o 










u 


o 


O 






, 






o 


o 


















u 




u 










U 


o 




o 


a 










x: 
u 


14 

u 


14 


14 

4J 






8 






14 


.r4 
14 
U 
















09 

14 


14 




14 
















3 





O 








s: 


u 


t> 


c; 


o 







& 


O 







o 








(3 








« 


o 




o 








K 


« 


9 


p 


• 






a> 




o 


IS 


« 


« 


<B 




u 






o 


o 


14 




o 


CJ 








B 


« 




« 










rH 




Li 




>« 




B 


o 


B 




•-H 










B 


14 




rH 


rH 


►o 


O 


u 










U 














i 


u 


u 


O 


u 


s 






o 


a: 


u 
Qi 


[a 


u 


<B 


bi 


o 


u 


■s 




u 


u 


Z 


^ 





2 




o 


o 


14 

10 


u 




bl 








o 


•a 


<a 




<« 


u 


a 


U 
« 


1 


X 


& 


•If 


4 


<4I 




14 

10 


•« 


« 

14 




•« 


m 


■o 


c 

10 


14 

•o 






B 

M 


a 

M 


a. 


in 


oe 


gi 










CO 


u 


3 


(D 


« 




u 




« 




IB 


CO 


10 


d 


« 


14 


u. 


rH 


09 


a 


« 


14 


^ 


o 






14 


09 




IS 










•S 


a 


o 


•s 


> 


M 


CO 


o> 


o 


>i 


a 


<o 


a 




a 


2 




< 


10 


10 


14 


b. 




u 


O 


O 


V 


10 


3 


■0 










O 


O 


l4 


O 


-H 






D> 


ki 


O 


O 


O 


O 




o 






O 


o 


b. 






B 


•o 


14 


14 




o 




O 














O 






o 


^ 


O 


o 










■o 


o: 




14 












B 


<0 


^ 


"O 


tJ 


















o 


o 







O 


(0 


u 


J 




rH 


o 


O 


o 


c 




•o 


« 


■o 





o 


« 


to 


10 




Ss 


^ 


Ol» 





B 

















g 












>i 


10 








o 


B 


14 


3 


14 






14 














o 












H-l 


«M 


<u 


« 


■a 


» 


& 


« 


> 


«M 


<IH 


H-l 


CO 


« 


CO 


10 


10 


IM 


<M 


« 





rH 


rH 


o 






B 


>M 


u 


%4 














kl 




3 


10 


>< 












g 


CO 


g 


T3 


2 






U 


Xi 








10 


10 


« 
















o 


o 


o 


<J 


o 


u 




ki 


-M 




o 


O 


o 


CO 


B 


tJ 


t; 


u 


o 


z 


Z 


<« 


tJ> 


CJ> 


09 


o 


3 


o 










10 


M 


c 


10 


kl 


<o 


1 


« 


A 


o 


<0 


a 


10 


o 


a 


O 




o 


■0 


■0 


3 




t) 


o 




« 


V 




10 


_g_ 


a 










0. 


Q. 


M 


Ck 


u 


a 


a 


z 


a. 


a 


Q. 


64 


_J_ 


b. 


J 


liu 


0. 


0. 


CO 


2 


z 


z 


64 


z 


z 


O 


0. 


0. 




















« 


« 






• 
























14 










* 
















U 




































• 








u 






















Cj 




H 






« 






u 


Q 






























14 






















M 


_ 


M 


s 










u 


u 




« 


1 
















>, 






, 


10 
« 




<N 




« 


€ 












Q 




H * 










o 


o 






10 














14 


« 








CQ 




14 


« 




B 














M 


O 






« 






o 


« 






u 












« 


O 


•-< 












o 






« 








• 


CTv 


o 


O 






u 




B 


















B 










« 










3 






cc 












K 


u 








u 




O 


o 


o 




M 


.c 


* 












>l 


K 








bl 























Q 


a: 




« 




3 




>i 


u 


14 




« 


o 




« 




10 






« 


O 












Q. 


o 




H-l 






« 






>4 










OQ 




B 


CU 


0. 




« 


14 






« 


u 
















to 






14 


o 


10 












X 




rf 


M r-i 








<0 






M 


ki 


3 








B 




14 


.r4 


10 






X 






B 


■o 


14 


« 








M 










•> 




g 


o 


« 


4) 


« 


U 


x: 








3 




O 


•0 


u 


fs 








B 


10 


$ 


T3 


>:) 








• 








u« 




rH 







ID 


CD 


01 




u 


c 






o 






m 









n 


a 


a 




^ 








B 


« 












i) 






B 






kl 


>, 




i 


a 




z 


10 


14 




14 






14 










14 




o 


o 


14 










9 O 


CQ 


10 


u 




■o 


T3 


u 


« 


10 




a 






« 


14 


« 


« 


« 


« 





rH 


rH 


o 




9 


B 


14 


o 


U 












(0 


J< 


■o 




<0 


<0 








o 


j< 


u 


• 


o 


o> 


« 


•o 


u 


u 


IJ 


.c 








« 


> 


O 


a 














D c 




ki 


a 


E 


u 


M 


T3 


.rH 


o 




a 


3 


14 


M 


CJl 


Q. 


B 


rH 


rH 


U 


o 


z 


z 


>« 


CJl 


o 


CO 




3 


3 










a! V 


_s_ 


O 


o 


10 


n 


10 


J_ 


s 




o 


B 


O 








Ok 


O 


o 


o 


3 




tJ 


o 




« 








_g_ 


o 


__ 






^__ 


(i. 


Eh 


I 


a. 


Q. 


> 


u 




CO 


b 


Z 


Q 


o 


a. 


> 


> 


to 


2 


z 


z 


t- 


z 


u 


O 


bC 


u 



f 



336 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 






fn ^ O f^ »-* r-« *-» 



O O U1 00 iH 

o» o M in 00 
r« in lA in ^ 




r^ \o o^ 






ij H » 



0\ iD 00 00 00 <-H 

vo 00 in in in <N 
o\ o* o\ o\ c\ o^ 






in in in in in <|> 
.. o o o o o c 



\C CN VO r^ C 



r- vo \o 



<N CN r* <N 



03 GO 10 



CQ CO CO to CO 



OQ 03 OQ 03 



3 rH ^ 



u 
2 « 

w w 

< 
m Q 

0= § 



ce a et a 



n f: xi ^ x: s: u 



iat3Mii>iMM.~i 



x: z x: x: 



CUM ^ M M 



3 Z Z Z 



u u u u u u 



U U U U U bl 



o o o o u o 



u u <a u to u 






O Oi O. J O. O. Ch 



§1 



C U > rH Jb< 

u & u. a o 



5 5 > 

■r4 ..H aJ 



a X j< rH 



§ 8 



u u 05 ca u 



337 



Bulletm 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 











^ 


m 


in 


m 


o 


00 


fS 


■9 


00 


m 


m 


t»- 


o 


OV 


o 


~^ 


CO 


m 


In" 


o 


o 


in 


"^ 


~ 








i 


o« 


CO 


<7> 


<N 


«> 




o 


r^ 


u> 


t~ 


m 


CN 


00 




•« 




tH 


vo 




•^ 




tH 


00 


Ol 




ee 


S 


n 


00 


«» 


<N 


^ 








u> 


vo 


CN 


n 




m 








tH 








CN 


•* 


in 




g 


Q 




















































O 


< 
























































X 




































































o 










o 




"""" 






^■^ 


■"" 




■""" 






^■^ 




■^ 




















r- 










OV 




























Q 
U 
Q. 


a 
u 


r: 




















































2 


y 


I 


















































1 


i 


s 

•< 

u 












































































































O 
































































■""" 


o 


o 


o 


o 






o 


o 


o 




O 


""■ 


O 


r» 


"~~ 


CO 


o 


•»» 


o 


o 


O 


o 


~ 






z 






o 


o 


o 


o 






o 


o 


o 




o 




o 


tN 




CO 


o 


ov 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 






s 


5 




r^ 


iH 


ts 


00 






r~ 


« 


o 




vo 




■«» 


'^ 




CN 


<7> 




m 


m 


o 


o 


o 




ii 


Ht 




















<^ 


































E-> 


a! 




n 


t- 


00 


rs 






<7\ 


t~ 


•« 




vo 




c~ 






T-l 


VO 




CN 


^ 


r-' 


o 


o 




s 






00 


Ol 


^ 












CO 




vo 




00 








f^ 








r** 


^ 


CN 




u 
z 

b) 
O 


O 

o 
o 




rH 


<N 














Ol 




























tH 








o 


O 


O 


o 


o 




o 


O 


o 


O 




o 


o 


o 


■«» 


""^ 


O 


o 


■<» 


o 


o 


o 


o 


"o 




o 


>• 

M 

< 

u 




o 


O 


O 


o 


vo 




o 


O 


o 


00 




o 


o 


o 


00 




in 


o 




in 


o 


o 


o 


o 




u 




r-l 


00 


C>) 


rj 


CO 




iH 


O 


o 


CO 




o 


«-l 


t- 






CO 


00 




CO 


in 


CN 


in 


o 


























































M 


s 


r^ 


00 


<N 


n 






in 


n 


o 


in 




r-l 




^ 








vo 






,H 


IN 


r-i 


vo 






<N 


in 








tH 
































■«» 










"ST" 


"^3^ 


^*^ 


■* 






00 


r~ 


^*^ 


o> 




VO 


r-t 


vo 








in 






•« 


O 


vo 


"vo 








Q 


00 


VD 


>£ 


00 






u> 


00 


yo 


vo 




i-l 


00 


00 








00 






00 


00 


vo 


vo 


Q 

s 

3 






U 


o> 


o\ 


ON 


01 






o\ 


ON 


o\ 


(7t 




ov 


C»v 


a\ 








ov 






<Tl 


ov 


Ol 


a\ 




u 

>< 


.J 

i 




rH 


rH 


T-t 






rH 


«-l 


w 


t-l 




rH 


1-1 


ft 








tH 






fH 


tH 


tH 


tH 


g 






z 


















































o 






























































f>l 


00 


00 


00 


t~- 


o 


O 


o 


00 


o 


in 


o 




o 


m 


<N 




r- 


"TT" 


^ 


^ 


^ 


^ 


"I^ 








• 


^ 


00 


00 


00 


•« 


o 


o 


o 


00 


o 


o 








^ 


n 




tT> 


in 


CO 


00 


00 


00 


00 








s 


<N 


O 


O 


o 




r^ 


>-l 


^ 


o 


rH 




CO 




CO 


t~ 


c« 




OV 




r- 


Ol 


ov 


ov 


Ol 








r~ 


(N 


<N 


(N 


o 


rs 


<N 


CN 


<N 


fS 


o 


fS 




<N 


c~ 


m 




CN 


vo 


t~ 


c< 


<N 


CN 


IN 








g 






















"^ 
































u 
























































Dl, 


i 
























































1 
































































o 












to 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 


10 


■0 


10 


kl 


kl 


kl 










« 


« 


« 


« 




« 


« 


w 


« 


« 


a 


o 


« 


« 


« 


« 


« 


« 


■O 


•o 


« 


« 


9 


9 










u 


l-> 


U 


u 




u 


U 


tJ 


k) 


kl 


g 


o 


O 


o 


o 


O 


O 


U 


10 


a 


a 


o 


O 


V 










u 


Jj 


U 


ii 


3 


u 


u 


o 


k) 


O 


3 


a 


a 


■0 


10 


10 


a 


a 


> 




> 


a 


10 


a 










3 


3 


3 


3 




3 


3 


3 


3 


3 














t-i 




« 




q> 


rH 














to 


on 


oa 


m 


Q. 


CO 


on 


m 


CO 


CO 


0. 


0. 


Q. 


Q. 


a. 


Q, 


a. 


Ck 


z 


z 


z 


Q. 


0. 


a. 






< 
























































u 
























































0. 








































kl 
















a: 
o 


i 








a 






























10 


kl 








m 






W 






a 


X 
















c 












o 


u 






E 














b 














J< 




u 








u 




CO 


3 














z 




a. 


o: 












c 




b. 








j: 




10 






"O 






b! 










u 


ki 


£ 


u 








u 




Z 


a 


§ 


O 

B 


kl 

Q 




& 




M 


<p 






M 


6 










« 


« 












« 






oe kl 


« 












o 






U 








m 




c 


;C 


c 


u 


« 




E 




o 




kl 


U 


kl 


> 


3 




» 


kl 




t^ 






• 


k> 










3 


u 


u 






o: 


(0 


a: 


T3 


oe 


u 


1 ij 


o 


a 






rH 


« 


IM 








a 


« 






u 
> 




« 


« 


a 




Ol 




« 












a 


kl 




B 


> 


I-l 


z 


















« 


o 


>H 


O 


u 


l4 


u 


OS 


kl 


kl 


kl 




10 




u 




o 








o 


b! 








u 


Ex 


lb 


u 


u 


« 


k> 


« 




o 


o 


a o 


o 


g 


b. 


a: 




oe 


2 


o 


o: 


K 


Ot 










o 










j: 


w 


j; 


>i 


JS 


■H 


1 


^^ 












■H 






a 


j; 






K 




>: 


>: 


X 


tJ 


>1 


u 




ij 




k) 


N 


< M 


T3 


3 




kl 


> 


kl 


M 


•§ 


kl 


kl 


tj 


o 








o 


lb 


b 


CO 


n 


<o 


<u 


a 


r-i 


a 


« 


a b. 


•O 


il 


g 


« 


c 


1 


b. 


« 


« 




kl 










3 






o 


u 


« 


•M 


9 


« 


o 


kl 


3 




3 




o 


o 


S 






o 


« 


A 


g 










W 


w 


W 


J 


o 


h. 


o 


b. 


:i: 


b. 


b. 


>< W 


b. 


< 


u 


CO 


u 


Z 


u 


CO 


CO 


u 






































































to 


01 












































































































Q 


Q 


Q 




« 


« 


« 


Q 


« 




o 




O 
































D> 


01 


Dl 




O 


O 


o 









u 




u 










• 






















■rt 


■^ 


■H 




ki 


U 


ki 


01 


kl 


















o 






















U 


u 


kl 




3 


3 


3 


kl 


3 




o 




o 










•H 






















u 


u 


M 




O 


O 





kl 













u 








B 






















w 


M 


M 


u 


« 






M 






kl 
kl 




kl 
k) 


B 








^ 




















c 


« 


« 


« 


c 


oe 


o: 


oe 


« 


o: 




o 




CI 




























QC 


M 


k) 


k> 


tJ 


HI 








kl 




d 


« 


d 


« 


« 








•4 






















u 


U 


U 




u 


ki 


ki 


U 


kl 


o 




O 




ID 




o 


a 




















g 


g 





o 


O 


« 


« 


o 


« 





« 




u 




u 


g 


§ 






C 






















T3 


T3 


•o 




u 


u 


k) 


■a 


kl 


2 




B 




2 


2 


K 






















c 


c 


c 


o 


« 


a 


« 


c 


« 




<« 


10 


m 


10 








-H 




















o 


a 


« 


a 


o 


Z 


s 


S 


« 


3 


•« 




O 




b. 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 






















^ 


^ 


^ 


to 








^ 






01 




B 




« 


« 


« 


"O 


d 


Q 


a 


Q 


Q 










B 


CO 


H-t 


<M 


<kl 




iJ 


HI 


kl 


K 


kl 


k> 


kl 


kl 


< 




















O 


1 


1 




< 


o 


o 


o 




o 




o 




a 


« 


k> 


kl 


kl 
























« 


« 


« 










o 




« 




g 




00 


g 


3 


S 




M 


M 


M 


M 


IH 










a 








■o 


tJ 


<j 


u 




u 




o 


o 




W 


a 































a 


o. 


a 




a 


0> 








B 










a 


10 


10 


10 


10 










> 










s 


& 


s 




s 


a 


tM 


to 


«-i 


« 


X 


£ 


£ 




■o 


■o 


■o 


■o 


"O 










o 


> 


> 


> 




> 


« 




CO 




•o 


kJ 


U 


kl 




a 


10 


10 


10 


10 












o 


O 


o 


c 








o 




ID 


o 




o 


kl 


3 


3 


3 




> 


> 


> 


> 


> 










« 


u 


k( 


ki 


« 


K 


« 


n 


kl 


a 


kl 


10 


1. 


a 


a 


o 


O 





a 


o 


« 


« 


9 


o 










Eh 


o 


o 


o 


X 


U 


u 


o 


o 


u 


o 


a 


0. 


o 


M 


M 


to 


X 


z 


z 


z 


z 


z 




















• 




c 








































^ 












£ 









































U 
M 




t" 












o 








« 
































z 


M 
CO 




* 












kl 


« 






8 












• 






* 




« 


* 




O 


o 














X 


« 


9 






u 








« 




















tH 






O 








« 








> 




kl 






























tH 


o 


u 






* 






M 




■H 




kl 
















k> 
















u 














« 




o 




« 
















0) 










J< 






Q 


[t 


E^ 












> 






• 


^ 





« 










• 


S 






« 




kl 






£ 






« 


§ 








■w 


o 





Ol 


o 






IN 


kl 


kl 




2 










« 


kl 












>t 




oe 


u 


u 


■o 












10 


•0 














Ck 


a 






rI 







«-l 


« 


« 






•^ 




o 


« 






>x 


CO 


CO 




kl 




z 
















0. 




u 


a 


o 




ki 






a 


















10 


o 






■0 


o 


b. 










a 


(0 


« 


V4 


0) 


• 


M 







■o 


01 


Sc >i 




rH 


B 


B 


Ck 


b, 


•H 


« 


u 


B 


01 












>! 


JS 




u 


•0 


« 






>i 


kl 


« 


• « 






« 


« 


o 












10 


£ 










a 


■o 




« 


u 








« 


« 


8 a 




« 


T3 


■o 








•§ 


9 







O 










c 


k4 


o 


>, 


a 


a 


« 


« 




« 


« 


Q ^ 




a 


kl 


kl 


c 


1 




M 






u 










a 


O 


o 




u 


e 


x: 


« 


« 


kl 


•< a 


s 




•J 


a 


a 


10 


o 


■0 


o 


£ 


s 










>£ 


b. 


2 


w 


o 


b. 


t' 


t^ 


^ 


M 


o 


« X 


2 


O 


C5 


> 


U 


X 


o 


>J 


K 


u 



338 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 



W M _ 

2 ^ i 

O a. 



u 

2 . 

u ^ 



u u 



CO m 



a ^ 



n 00 o m in <7\ 
^ ^ r- r- fs rt 
sc \c r^ e^ ^ 



ro ^ in 



^ <y» «-( 



O 00 M> (N ro l^ 

r- f-* m <7t vH «# 



^ \A u^ m 



m <N vo 



fs (N a> 



(T\ (7^ 0\ Ov 



w o <^ 
a\ r* 00 



CN *N r^ r* 
o\ o\ 0\ 0> 



fo rt n i*> c* fo 

C< <N CS 0» *© OJ 



o c^ «> 



rs vo <7\ 



r> 


VO 


yo 


in 


o 


O 


o 


v« 


i-l 


^ 


VC 


o 




o 


o 


^ 


\o 


m 








^ 


•"J" 


00 


•» 


o 


o\ 




•« 


<N 


IN 


tN 


n 






(N 


a 


w 


fS 


i~ 


00 


r- 


•H 


C« 


r« 


m 


(N 


c« 


<N 


f>« 


m 


n 


r« 


v« 


t- 


n 



"O "O "O "O "O 



z z z z z >• ui 



a: 10 <-) « 

•< r^ C rH rH CO 



U U IJ u 



U bl U U 



U (9 (J C3 o: U 



^ _< _< ^ O -H 



>0 il il X) XI 
XJ 3 3 3 3 
3 > >« >< >< 



ii & 



rH rH « rH « 






5 5 5 1 



a, H 



ii iJ & 



C9 U O C 



o ^ ^ ^ u 



>, O O O X3 



^ 5 



8 • 



% 5 



B)^^^^>. CTJ 



O .C o> u 



e 5 



r-l ^ U ^ 



s & s s 



^ <0 



i 



339 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 











O 


o 


^■^ 


o 


n 


(-) 


m 


p- 


r* 


■>» 


o 


<N 




f>» 


< 


tH 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


O 


in 


in 


(A 




o 


o 


— 


o 


o 


o 








i 


^ 


ts 




o 






r- 


00 




r~ 


vs 


in 








VO 




m 


m 




o 


m 


00 


00 


00 




00 


VO 




00 


in 


00 




CO 


1 


f>4 


rl 




•9 




m 


tH 


m 


f*> 






00 




<N 


z 


o 


Ol 


in 


>» 


VO 


•» 


in 


fN 


•»» 






Ol 


in 






OV 


m 






































tH 


tH 


tH 
































U 


s 
































































■H 








X 


























































































o 


























O 


o 


o 








o 




o 


o 


o 


























m 


























n 


o 


m 








o 




o 


o 


o 


Q 


Q 
u 


r: 




















w 




























n 


<N 








•« 






M 


o 


Ut 




M 
















































r> 


fO 








M 








w 


S 


g 


^ 


1 


































































a 


O 


Q. 






































































< 

u 




































































z 








































































s 




































____ 












































U1 








o 


o 


o 


o 




o 


o 


o 




O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 








o 






"^^ 




■■^ 


^^ 


""^ 










r- 








o 


o 


00 


o 




00 


o 


o 




o 


tn 


o 


o 


o 


o 


e~ 


o 








o 


















U 1 


o 




n 








<H 


r~ 


n 






VS 


o 


o 




o 


o\ 


VO 


o\ 


o 


o 


in 


o 








in 


















1 i 

u a 


tl 


£ 










iH 


<N 




tH 






p~ 


00 




r- 


<N 


^ 


r~ 


m 


in 


o 


in 








VO 


















5 












Ot 


O 










m 










■>* 


OV 


r- 


tH 


<• 


m 








n 


















ce 


* 












r- 












VO 








f 




in 


tH 






























" 


o 
o 
o 


































































Q 






■-< 








































































00 


O 




o 


o 


o 


t~ 


o 




m 


o 


o 




o 


<N 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 








o 




o 


""""^ 


o 


^^^ 


^^^ 


^^ 


o 


>< 

H 




in 


O 




o 


o 


fN 


fS 


in 




t~- 


C-l 


o 




o 


00 


o 


o 


o 


in 


o 










C~ 




00 




00 








td 






r~ 




"t 




P- 




<N 






o 


o 




o 


■* 


in 


o 


o 


<N 


o 


C-- 












••• 












3 


s 




OB 




vo 


m 


00 










t^ 


o 




n 




fv< 


tH 


r-i 


n 


o 


n 








lO 


























Ok 












Ot 








•«» 


<N 


o 


n 




























a 


Z 

M 












•4 












r« 


















































<J\ 




<yi 


in 


m 




■O" 






in 


00 




VO 


■"^ 


00 


•<» 


«H 


n 


i/> 


"in" 








VO 






"""■ 


■■""" 


■"^ 


^■^ 


^~ 








a 




00 




00 




in 




00 






vo 


VO 




00 




VO 




VO 


VO 


00 


VO 








VO 






















u 




o\ 




o\ 


<X\ 


o\ 




a\ 






<M 


<J> 




o\ 




OV 


OV 


o\ 


o\ 


<J> 


OV 








<JV 




















>< 


■J 




ri 




w 


rt 


tH 




•H 






■H 


rH 




tH 




tH 


tH 


tH 


tH 


tH 


tH 








tH 




















:^ 






































































S 








































































z 








































































M 










































































>c 


r-l 


ol 


00 






in 


o 




•>» 


m 


,_! 


<N 


O 


,_( 


^^ 


t* 


^^ 


^^ 


^^ 


^^ 


"7^ 


^ 


in 


o\ 


00 


(N 


<s 


^^~ 


IN 


CN 


CO 








s 


o 


»a 


r- 


d 






m 


«H 




in 


in 


o 


<« 


00 


o 


O 


00 


O 


o 


O 


o 


ro 


a> 


<n 


t~- 


00 


o\ 


r-j 




n 


■^ 


<N 








o 


o 


o 


o 






o 


O 




■« 


tH 


tH 


•H 


rH 






tH 










<J\ 


rH 


tH 


o 


■<• 


tH 


p» 




o 


<-< 


t~ 








r- 


VC 


o\ 


VC 






in 


00 




c^ 


(N 


OJ 


in 


ro 


(N 


CN 




tN 


tN 


(N 


Ol 


t^ 


n 


ro 


M 


VO 


r~ 


r» 




OV 


VO 


r~ 






u 


8 






































































b. 








































































a: 








































































Q. 


















































































O 


o 




























































2 










u 


u 


O 








o 


O 


O 


o 


O 


O 


O 


o 


O 


O 


O 


O 


O 


o 


O 






o 


o 


o 






o 








p 










C 


C 


•a 


■o 


"O 


T3 


■0 


•a 


•o 


■o 


■O 


■D 


"0 


•0 


■o 


■o 


•a 


X( 


•a 


■CJ 






■o 


■o 


XI 






•a 


















2 


2 


<D 


<0 


<0 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


<a 


■0 


10 


10 


10 


10 


flj 


a 


10 


10 






10 


10 


■0 






a 










« 


la 


(0 


Q 


B 


E 


M 


u 


u 


l-l 


u 


u 


u 


M 


u 


M 


u 


kl 


u 


u 


kj 


u 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 


u 










V4 


V4 
V4 




ki 
V4 


10 


(0 


s 


s 


s 


s 


s 


s 


s 


R 


8 


s 


s 


s 


s 


8. 


s 


s 


s 


s 


8 


8 


8 


s 


s 


o> 
o 


9 



R 










o 


« 


« 


« 


o 


O 






































■0 


■0 








10 


a 
















•H 




10 


10 
















iH 


rH 


.H 


.H 


rH 




rH 


rH 


rH 


rH 


1H 
















r-\ 










V) 


M 


M 


(0 


ra 


_W_ 


u 


td 


u 


u 


b] 


u 


b] 


U 


M 


M 


M 


M 


b3 


M 


M 


M 


M 


b] 


Q. 


a. 


u 


bl 


u 


0. 


o. 


bl 






S5 


5 

u 




5 

3 


10 

3 


3 










z 








1 


« 


O 






1 


1 






kl 








T 


1 










kl 
U 






V 


>• 


>• 


>< 












oe 


K 


ji 


1 


1 


ce 




Jit 


>! 




kl 

9 


j| 








u 


X 










B 






z 


c 


z 


z 


Z 


• ki 


U 


3 




Q. 








b 










b. 


b. 


kl 


> 




X 






U 


b. 


kl 








o 














ec « 


<B 








M 


B 


B 




a 


X 


B 








O 




X 


•M 










o 




kl 


M 








i 


> 


k 


« 


« 


> 


> 


« 




s 


U 


<0 


<0 




b. 


b. 


a 


K 


CO 


CO 




.rH 


b. 


CO 






o 


s 






CJ 


tj 


>, 






a 


kl 


k4 


u 


^ IX 




ki 






o 


o 


(0 






o 








kl 


CO 






o: 


a: 


u 




B 








9 








It 


u 


V 


U 


a 


u 






M 


•H 


•H 




W 


W 










9 




CO 








-H 




O 




09 


n 


f-t 
















u 






s 


o 


JS 


1^ 


M 








kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 


> 






X 


kl 


kl 


& 


kl 


>, 








N 






a: 

M 

q: 


5 


<-i 


(0 


m 


m 


M C 


c 





u 


T3 


ID 


« 




« 


« 






o 


U 




kl 


« 


b. 


« 


0> 


V 


S 




r-t 


^ 


N 








o 






(0 

« 


oe 10 


(0 





ra 
ki 


1 


1 


1 


k4 
U 


ki 


kl 

u 


s 


1 


kl 


kl 


CO 


u 


kl 


kl 


1 


1 


O 


a 


5 




s 


s 


kl 








o 


M 


ki 


u 


§ -a 


•H 


u 


2 


2 


















9 


« 




(0 


CO 


o 








o 






10 


■0 


C3 








^ 


a 


a 


a 


M 


Dl 




M 


X 


>: 


^ 


>: 


A 


>: 


>: 


> 


> 


^ 


rH 




> 


X 


X 


X 


>i 


o> 




■o 


T3 










n) 


>i 


>l 


>i 


w 


41 


c 


Q 




U. 


[f 


b. 








a 


b. 


b. 


rH 


.H 


b. 


rH 






b. 


b. 




B 


B 




kl 


kl 


C3I 










£ 


a 


«J 


A) 


1 


J_ 


10 












o 


o 








•H 


•H 




9 












10 


o 




10 


10 












U 


a 


X 


X 


X 


U 


u 


z 


M 


M 


_K_ 


a: 


M 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


J^ 


D 


CO 


CO 


X 


CO 


U 


►J 




Q 


Q 


m 














o 









































































B 


c 










u 




O 












o 












































H 


w 










01 




U 












CJ 








































u 


u 






































































c 


c 


o 


o 










iS 




O 












o 
















& 
























w 


M 


■H 


-* 


c 


B 






































o 


























M 


M 


o 


O 






B 


u 


kl 












kl 
















B 


■^ 






















c 




u 


iJ 


f-l 








O 


ca 


U 












iJ 
















01 


u 






















o 


o 


o 


U 


<J 


u 






•H 


■rl 


O 






< 






o 
















a 


u 




















ae 




o 


o 


O 


t 


i 






u 


o 


« 






m 






« 














X 


< 


{J 






















k> 




1-1 


•H 






M 






o 




D 


Q 


a 




Q 


Q 


Q 


Q 










9 


a 


(j 








u 








2 


« 


u 


« 


« 


<a 


10 






9 


Ol 


u 












u 














B 


kl 


.H 


B 


B 








B 










kl 


« 


o 


o 
















£3 




10 


a 


D 




D 


S 


3 


a 


& 




a 


«> 


u 


u 


M 








IH 








o 


o 


3 


u 


kl 


o 


o 






U 


M 


m 






« 






>s 










z 


9 


u 




Ou 






















§. 


■o 


•o 


0) 


<v 






U 


ki 




X 






z 


X 




X 


X 


X 


X 


kl 






« 


o 




o 








O 










p. 


& 


& 


o: 


a 






M 


M 


CO 




6 


01 






a 










10 




o 


S 


kl 


o 


u 








kl 










X 








bi 


bi 






10 


o 


O 


ki 


o 


O 


10 


O 


o 


O 


o 


^ 


1^ 


f^ 




•a 


kl 


■o 






tH 


•o 










u 


o 






*M 


«M 






O 


o 


O 




(0 


« 


u 


u 


C3 


k) 


u 


u 


u 








o 


$ 


•o 


^ 




e^ 




^ 












kl 


n 


n 


o 


o 






■a 


•a 




B 


CO 


B 


B 


B 




B 


B 


B 


B 








u 


^ 






at 










« 


•D 


o 


■0 






It 


« 


(0 


a 


o 


4> 


•a 


U 


o 


« 


o 


ID 


o 


ID 


ID 


>, 


o 


01 










« 














c 


& 


o 


!* 


3 


3 






u 


ki 






< 




E 


§ 








B 




9 


B 


B 


kl 


u 




o 






« 


o 










« 


ki 


ki 


<0 


10 






& 


s 


M-l 






« 


S 








n 






■H 




0> 


9 


01 


kl 




kH 


kH 


kH 















e 


s 


01 


4> 


c 


B 


-H 


U 


■a 


x: 


kl 


kl 


•rH 


kl 


kl 


u 


kl 


a 


u 


U 





Ol 








o> 


01 












o 


O 


u 


U 


3 








o 


O 


B 


u 


o 


t> 


o 


O 


CJ 


CJ 


t) 


B 


10 


a 


a 


Ol 


Ol 


> 




u 


U 


> 










« 


J. 


« 


10 


3 


3 




J_ 






(0 


CO 






10 


■0 


a 


10 


a 


o 


10 


0) 


« 


o 




J_ 


a 


B 




3 


A 


B 










z 


X 


X 


CO 


m 


< 


u 


u 


o. 


W 


ij 


w 


w 


CO 


a. 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


X 


be 


bi: 


0. 


u 


M 




CO 


u 




O 




u 




I4 




• 






























• 


























M 




M 


§ 


M 


« 






V4 


8 












^ 


^ 




« 






* 






« 


• 










kH 
U 


* 








•a 


O 

B 


n 




M 


o 


B 


U 




t9 


c 










« 




































kl 






B 


O 


•H 


o 


o 




• 




10 


1 
















^ 






« 




« 








M 








o 




u 









>, 




s 


u 




> 


kl 


u 


« 


B 
















o 












>, 






9 








U 


X 








Q. 


B 




s 


cc 




« 


a 


u 


M 










n 




















9 






9 




u 


« 




9 


B 


* 






10 




§s 






OS 


>i 




a 
















M 


^ 


X 


j< 










>! 


X 


U 




10 




i 


9 


o 






a 


O 






^ 




a 


>: 


c 






a 


ki 


E 


M 


O 


y 


« 


« 




o 




r-^ 


kl 


10 


U 


rH 






U 


>l 


















X 


ki 


10 












s 


& 


O 


o 


« 


« 




T3 




a 


O 


« 






bt 




a 


U 


B 






f-i 


1 








IS 




o 


X 








o 


O 


a 


ae 


kl 


kl 




10 


■o 


> 


b. 


Q. 


« 


10 






o 




a 


9 




9 










p 


9 


b 




S (0 


g 




U 


c: 










CJ 


u 


o 


U 


k4 










kl 


ID 






B 


U 


>i 




B 












o 






M 


•I 3 








u 




« 


ki 






B 


s 


•H 


B 


a 


(0 




U 


01 


> 


X 


O 




9 




10 


N 










u 


T3 


k) 


Q) 


I i 


10 


B 


B 


4> 


z 


f-i 


u 


0) 


M 


Xi 




x> 





9 


Xi 


X 


kl 








>, 


w 


X 


rH 


•o 


N 










K 


•O 


10 










(0 






o. 


(J 


n 


1 




>, 




B 


Xi 




o 


>i 


Dl 


B 


B 


CJ 




kl 












x: 


•H 


10 




* -w 


o 


i 


i 


0) 


« 


f: 


1 


a 







.H 


a 


B 


O 





(TV 


o 


10 


s 




■0 





3 


0) 


10 


kl 










u 


X 


u 


>J 


a z 


u. 


a: 


2 


u 


o 


a 


CO 


«J 


u 


■d 


s 


►O 


K 


<N 


b. 


CO 


HI 


O 


•J 


CO 


00 


o 


O 



340 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 









00 




O 


o 


o\ 


^ 


r^ 


Ol 


^ 


<N 


p- 


r- 


<N 


< 


o 


r* 


Ol 


P- 


CN 




m 


o 


^ 






§ 


O 




m 


•• 


m 


m 


O 




o 


lO 


o 


<N 


P- 




00 


rH 


fH 


m 


tH 




Ol 


o 




CO 

8 




<N 




r>l 




fo 


<o 




^ 




tH 




n 


r« 


z 




m 


C« 


p« 


fl 






VO 




1; 
















M 




















rH 




Pt 










5 








«-i 


r4 








































i 


1 




















































_* 








































































o 










o 






^^^ 








^^^ 






























o 










o 




















Q 


o 
u 


M 


i 




























VO 

o 




















1 


^ 


B 


















































"^ 




"^~ 








o 


O 


o 


o 


O 


o 






CO 


o\ 


o 






o 


O 


o 


o 




o 


o 


"" 






g 








o 


o 


m 


o 


o 


o 






o 


p- 


o 






o 


o 


o 


o 






o 






i ^ 


5 






n 


o 


o\ 


ro 


o 


o 






r>i 


t^ 


<N 






VO 


<N 


o 


VO 




r^ 


o 








s 






«o 


r- 


<s 


1/1 


o 


ON 






o 


o 


P^ 






t~ 


CI 


o 


in 




o 


CI 








1 
u 








p- 


r-t 




r- 


m 


■« 






* 


o 


^ 






CO 


in 


in 


<s 












u c 


o 

o 






^ 


•H 






l« 










<N 


CI 








c» 




'-* 












5 § 


o 






















































O 




o 


O 


m 


o 


"o~ 


o 




O 


o 


o 


o 




o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 






Q 


>< 




o 




o 


O 


n 


o 


o 


o 




>£ 


o 


o 


o 




CI 


o 


o 


o 


o 


l~ 


p- 


o 






H 




vo 




<N 


rH 


r- 


n 


CO 


a» 




^ 


CO 


VO 


o 




tN 


in 


o 


o 


o 


P« 


Ol 


p- 






M 




















































a 

5 


^ 






<ft 


^ 




in 


Q\ 


o 






o 


VO 


<N 






■«» 


CO 


r^ 


CI 




<N 












t- 


I- 






o 

r1 


•H 






T^ 


M 


Ol 






tH 


in 
















^^^ 








VS 


^ 




VO 




VO 






n 


"o" 


"oo" 






f-i 


t-i 


^ 


^ 




■«" 












o 






VO 


t^ 




VO 




00 






00 


CI 


•<» 






O 


CI 


rt 


CI 




CO 












b3 






(TV 


ON 




o> 




Ol 






Ol 


Ol 


OV 






Ol 


ON 


ON 


Ol 




Ol 








s 










'"' 




"^ 




•^ 






rt 


rt 


»H 






»H 


rH 


r1 


rH 




»H 








1 


1 
















































u 






M 
















































Q 
























































^^ 




n 


.H 


ON 


iH 


Ol 


Ol 


o\ 


o 


fN 


00 


VO 


VO 


P- 


f 


VO 


P- 


P- 


C~ 


P- 


CI 


CI 


1^ 












o 


00 


r- 


O 


i~ 


r- 


P- 


rt 


<N 


00 


n 




O 


•* 


O 


O 


Cl 






00 


o 


CN 










s 


1-1 


t~ 


o 


W 


o 


o 


o 


CI 


P- 


fO 


>n 


ON 


tH 


iH 


m 


rH 


rH 


rH 


rH 


<N 


Ol 


m 










■w 


«c 


ts 


(N 


<N 




<N 


r» 


00 


in 


in 


fS 




00 


t~ 










r- 


fS 


00 








^ 


13 




















































e 


g 






















































o 


o 




O 










o 












• 










to 


to 


to 








D 


■o 


•o 




■o 










•a 












10 










10 


10 


10 








8 


■a 


a 




10 










M 












u 










kl 


kl 


kl 








u 


^ 


M 


u 


n 


M 


M 


M 


M 


u 


u 


M 


M 


M 


9 


^ 


M 


U 


kl 


9 


? 


9> 








& 


S 


« 


s 


V 


« 


« 


4) 


S 


o 


O 


O 


O 


O 


> 


o 


O 


O 


O 


> 


> 


> 
















o 


O 


O 


•o 


"O 


•O 


■O 


T3 


10 


■o 


T3 


■o 


T3 


10 


10 


10 














« 




10 


(0 


10 


10 




10 


10 


(0 






rH 


10 


10 


10 


10 
















u 


M 


g 


M 


a 


r-l 
0. 


Ck 


0. 


U 


1 


1 


J_ 


1 


1 


■0 
V 


1 


J_ 


± 


1 


■0 

u 


10 

_U_ 


■0 

u 






>< 




















M 


B 




















I-l 










s 


5 








3 








€ 


U. 


1 




















a 










§ 


K 3 






B 










X 


« 










DC 


OC 


o: 


ct 


PC 


o 










-O 












Bt 


>< 




^ 




















0. 










2 


u 
a: 


§ § 












B 


b 


a 


S 










« 


9 


9 


9 


« 


u 










H 


o u 












10 


2 















g 


g 


g 


g 


g 


• * 












M 


kl 




to 






O 




• CJ BC 




a: 


DC 


DC 


o: 












BC PC 


DC 












a c 


o 














PC 


u 






























to 


1 




a: 


» 


OS 


o: 


k4 


i-l 




u 


o 


« 


V 


« 


« 


« 


o 


9 


9 


CO to 


to 










>, 




u 








B 


w u 1 












M 


^ 


J< 


a 


a 


«t 10 


« 








"5 


< k) 


» 


B 


V 


B 


B 


1 


u 


2 " 1 


B 


g 


g 


g 


g 


o 


o 


o 








pd kl 


kl 


kl 






^ 




« 




O 




o 


O 




1 & £ 


o 




3 




3 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


g «. 


S 


o 








Ol 


N 





9 


o 


o 




£ 


10 


rH 


<-l 


rH 


rH 












> 








IH 




V4 


N 










X 


u 


M 


« 


O 


9 


o 


J< 


M 


M 


M 


^ 


< 10 


a 


^ 






oc 




o 




A 


U 


Xi 


3 


b. 


3 


(0 ki i>« 


O 


^ 


>; 


M 


>! 


b 


b. 


b. 


b. 


b. 


< 10 




CJ 










5 


U 


3 


A 


3 


3 




O 


8 £ i 


a 


O 


o 


O 


O 












a 


o 










O 


K 


Ct 


o: 


Z 


to 


►:> 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


Z 


z 


Z 


Z 


U U 


_U_ 


o: 
























o 




u 






o 






o 








o 






























u 




a 






u 






u 


u 


o 


u 
















o 


















•H 


































o 




C 




1 


B 


B 


•H 

kl 




Q 






o 

■H 
M 






o 


o 

kl 


kl 


o 
kl 




k) 

00 












a, 




Dl 




« 
Dl 


4) 
Ol 


Dl 






M 






tJ 






4J 






u 
o 




o 










PC 


•s 


u 


< 


a 


•< 


< 


< 


« 




M 






9 






rH 


o 


« 


« 




kl 












-H 


e 


M 




U 


U 


ki 


u 










« 


h. 




u 


bl 


u 


u 




k) 










B 


> 


M 


» 


o 


« 


« 


« 






5 


Q 


o 


















» 












•^ 




u 




U 


u 


u 


>« 








41 


z 


Q 


vl 


VII 


•« 


•« 


a 




§ 










Q 


o 


10 


X 


10 


10 


10 








s 


s 






s 










g 


o 












kl 


z 




z 


S 


Z 


a 


a 








0) 




a. 


00 


n 


u 


o 


u 












g 


•o 













10 




10 


X 


X 


10 






10 


10 


10 


10 






X 










^ 


o 


u 


o 


o 


o 


o 




> 






O 


o 


eg 


o 


O 


o 


o 


to 


00 


« 












u 


B 


u 


u 


u 




d 




>v 


>, 




u 


10 










10 


10 


9 










u 














u 




B 


10 


s 


o 




u 


o 


O 


o 


o 


kl 


k4 


kl 










• 





u 


1 


IH 


u 


u 


■H 







n 




u 


V 








-H 


P 


9 


u 










0> 


kl 


o 


o 


« 


« 


*M 


« 


ID 






<M 


o 


> 


•IH 


•M 


«M 


<M 


> 


> 












M 


•H 


o 


M 


o 


o 


o 




■o 


J< 


U 


t) 




•o 


a 










10 


K 


^ 










O 


> 


10 


O 


10 


a 


10 


o 


u 


O 


CO 


m 


o 






o 


O 


o 


o 






o 










s 


c 




10 








10 


K 


10 


■0 


10 


10 




■0 


10 


10 


« 


a 


10 


10 













u 


CL 


W 


Q. 


a. 


0. 


Q. 


X 


►l 


u 


u 


a. 


< 


U 


0. 


0. 


a 


a. 


u 


u 


PC 










« 










« 


* 


























rt 












H 














c 
















« 


















U 




M 


8 ■§ 








« 




z 




8 8 


. 












« 






• 


8 '^^ 






„ 


14 
3ROLOG: 




M 
















H H 
















« 














§ 

»-t 


o 


H -^ 




• 


« 




s 


§ 


* 


S i 


. 


B « 


. 


« 




1 


n 




-- 


^ 


S 9 


« 


« 


u 
to 

B 


s 




S O 












a 




« 


« 












« 




to 


00 


B 






o 






vi 








"O 


a 




n "o a 


o 








9 


it 


PC 


J< 


» 


w 


1 -^ 






U 


^ 


a: 




2 g 


U 










o 




4 M • 


^ 


ki 






CO 


u 


u 


« 


B 


c 


4 rH 




M 












« 


« 




£ 


9 


2. « 


u 


o 






O 


o 


a O 


« 






i. 9 


c 


9 


S 




>J 




>, 




^ 






o. 


r-l 


? X 


1 


•o o 






z 


b. 


-H 


u 


ki 


kl 


1 '^ 


10 


9 


u 






Oi 


1 ^ 


V 


g 


3 


§ 


JS 




U 

a 


a 1 a 

3 u ( 


§ 


1 « 


V 


k4 


a 


« 


•S £ 


o 


& 


ft 


3 o! 


1 


U 


B 
« 








• Dl 


N 


u 






<J 


(0 


a 


•» -1 P 


a 


•< B 


9 


4J 


i-H 


rH 


5 u 


kl 








X 




& 








• U 


N 


09 


B 




B 




u 


X) 


M 




•a 


u 


•H 


■o 


« 


ki 


u 


Q 




M 












i-H 


8 


,_4 


O 


"-J 


» 


4 c « 


i (J 


B 


u 


« 


> 


■0 


u a 


Dl 


rH 


rH 


3 ^ 


s 


8 


a 










ki 


10 


« 


ki 




S 


3 10 S 


10 


•J 3 


a 




2 




(0 « 




■0 


<o 


CO 








8 o 


o 


« 


►J 


X 


b. 


^ 


z 


3 k) • 


<-> 


— u 


a. 


M 


X 


- Z 


H 


M 


w 


« u 


_2. 


PC 


^ 



341 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 











r~ 


^ 


OS 


M 


^ 


■9 


o 


<« 


cs 


1n~ 


CI 


"in" 


•«» 


■9 


o\ 


r~ 


t~ 


"TT" 


TT" 


00 


t~ 


OV 


o 


i~- 


o 


00 








i 


in 


11 


r~ 


OD 


^ 


00 


m 


r> 


r» 


<N 


00 


VO 


VC 


00 


n 






fT) 








f>) 


<^ 


n 


VO 


r~ 




CO 


1 


tH 






in 


^ 


<o 


•» 




00 


m 


ro 


00 


<N 


•«» 


00 












rH 


in 






in 


<N 




8 






















rH 




tH 




rH 


















^ 












Q 




























































X 


























































































o 




























































o 
























o 
u 
a. 

3 


a 
u 


M 


g 






























in 




























5 
































































o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


*-» 


^ 




o 


O 


o 


O 


O 




VO 


o 


o 


CN 


o 


O 


o 


o 


m 


VO 


OV 






2 




o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


•* 


00 




o 


O 


o 


O 


o 




r~ 


o 


o 


t~ 


o 


O 


o 


o 


m 


in 


rH 




b3 t 


o 


5 


M 


o 


r- 


o 


(N 


o 


o 


fS 




(N 


O 


in 


in 


o 




00 


o 


(Tl 


00 


ov 


O 


o 


o 


IN 


o\ 






1 ^ 
11 


H 


£ 


o 


r- 


00 


in 


\o 


VC 


^ 






VO 


•«» 


00 


r^ 


ov 






in 


r^ 


wH 


in 


00 


00 


o 










1 
u 


o 
o 

o 


t~ 




iH 


00 




t-l 








o 


00 


^ 


in 


<N 












rH 


rH 


m 


rH 














o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


00 


CN 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 




o 


o 


O 


o 


p- 


O 


in 


O 


rH 


ov 


t- 




o 


>< 




o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 




n 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 




o 


o 


O 


o 


r« 


O 


rH 


o 




o 






u 




o 


r> 


r- 


o 


o 


o 


rH 




n 


o 


(N 


o 


rH 






(N 




n 


VO 


•f 


OV 


in 


o 




































































3 


i 


i 


a> 


fN 


■^ 


o 


^ 


■V 






•* 


f-i 


IS 


r- 


r-l 


C~ 






^-t 


f*> 




•9 


<*> 


VO 


d 










E< 


tH 






o 










in 


Oi 


r-l 




r-l 


«) 
















M 










o 

u 

0. 




s 
























































3 

u 
> 

u 

Q 


































































00 


<N 


O) 


ch 


o 


■^ 


■^"^ 




O 


fT) 




^ 


00 


00 






ov 


o 


in 


rt 


■<• 


rH 


o 












Q 


m 


00 


00 


r^ 


>* 


in 






<r\ 


VC 






in 


in 






c~ 


00 


00 


00 


<N 


t~ 


•» 












U 


ov 


a\ 


<J> 


Oi 


o> 


o> 






o\ 


<T\ 




<^ 


OV 


Ov 






o\ 


o\ 


o> 


ov 


OV 


<^ 


ov 










cc 


•J 


'-' 


rH 


«H 


rH 


•-' 


«-• 






'-< 


rH 




rH 


rH 


•"• 






rH 


"^ 


"^ 


•^ 


rH 


rH 


rH 












< 

u 

>• 


























































63 




























































2 




























































M 






























































c~ 


VC 


n 




a\ 


a\ 


o 


o 


Oi 


O 


in 


o 


in 


in 


o\ 


o 


00 


rH 


r- 


VO 




OV 


rH 


O 


^h" 


00 










VO 


m 






0\ 








o 




r- 


rr> 


o 


o 


o 


in 


I- 


r~ 


•« 


n 




o> 


lO 


00 


f) 


o 








o 


o 


o 


«-t 




\o 


o 


<J\ 


(71 


^ 


rH 


CJ\ 


rH 


o 


o 


■>» 


n 


00 


oo 


ri 


rH 




(N 


O 


•>* 


<J\ 


<7V 










<N 


n 


n 




<N 


cs 


00 


00 


<s 


OJ 


<N 


<N 


(S 






M 


(N 


<N 


VO 


n 




<N 


rH 


o 


00 


c- 






to 


8 
















































rH 










b 




























































a: 




























































a. 
































































m 


a 


























to 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


n 


















C 


to 


3 


3 




CO 


(0 






CO 














3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 




















10 


CO 


10 


(I) 


10 


10 


01 


01 


■0 


<D 


« 


o 


<p 


o 


ID 


■0 


■0 


■0 


■0 


■0 


■0 


V 


« 


« 


« 


« 








8 


l4 








u 


n 






M 














rH 


rH 


rH 


•-I 






















(1) 


to 


(0 




(B 


<v 






<v 














(0 


CO 


CO 


CO 


(0 


a 




















> 


•H 


-^ 


3 


> 


> 


3 


;3 


> 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


•H 


•rl 


•H 


-H 


-rH 


-rl 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 










10 


c 


a 




10 


■0 




rH 


■0 














B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 




















iH 


10 


10 


O 


cH 


r^ 





o 


•-< 





O 


o 


o 


O 


O 


10 


(0 


10 


10 


10 


10 





O 



















CO 
U 


u 
CO 


u 

CO 


J_ 


10 

u 


10 
_U_ 


_£. 


i_ 


A. 


J_ 


X 


J_ 


i_ 


J_ 


g 


u 
CO 


>-> 
CO 


iJ 
CO 


CO 


_£ 


CO 


_£. 


_L 


J_ 


_L 


^ 






< 
CO 
0. 


§ 




•H 


r-l 








Cl, 


b. 




o: 


o: 


u 


oe 


o: 


e 
















E^ 

a 


a 










a: 
O 




c 


CO 


















^ 






i-> 
















b. 


b. 


>: 










<a 










CO 


CO 




CO 


U 


u 


D) 


CO 


CO 




















(b 








z 


U3 




u 


c 














3 


3 


Q 


3 


3 


















CO 


CO 












CO 


10 














■0 


■0 




a 


10 






















Z 










a a 




u 


ce 










a 






10 






kH 




























s 




k 


CO 








Ci 


Ci 




CO 


CO 


-rH 


m 


ID 


u 
















IH 


M 


« 










CO 10 


ki 




o 










m 






^ 








K 










K 


K 


o 


u 










CQ 


p 


» 3 


u 




3 


u 


M 






3 


B 


B 


a 


B 


B 


■o 








B 












c 








o: 




< <0 






10 


u 


U 


10 


10 


10 


10 


■0 




■0 


■0 


c 


Id rH 






U 




O 


« 


B 


B 













iJ rH 


to 


B 








-»H 


-rH 




u 


u 


0) 


u 


u 


nj 


S c3 


B 


B 




B 






10 


<0 




0) 






^ 




CO a 


c 


u 


m 


m 


a 


i 


•i 


CO 


CO 


CO 


t3 


CO 


CO 




2 o 


U 


u 


B 


U 


£ 


£ 


> 


> 


10 


CO 








M -^ 








rH 










10 






B 


D 


















X 








w 




§ g 


g 


B 


C 


(V 


<t 


3 


3 


a 


y. 


ii 




M 


M 


x; 


J B 


B 


B 


10 


B 


rH 


rH 


rH 


r-* 


(B 


Q 






m 








10 


C31 


01 






CO 


[L. 


u. 


-rH 


u. 


u. 


Dl 


O -H 




•rH 


X 


•rH 


O 


o 






U 












w w 


CO 


J_ 


CO 


_§. 


J_ 


J. 


O 
O 


CO 


£ 


X 


a. 


X 


X 


Z 


g s 


J_ 


j_ 


ij 


j_ 


_l 


_i_ 


3 
CO 


3 
CO 


3 
U 


p 










Q 

H 








o 













M 





H 


M 


















8 
























CJ 










CJ 




O 




































c 




















E 




B 


B 
















m 


























V 


o 








CJ 


-H 


CJ 


•H 


•H 


















u 
















3 






B 


•H 


-H 






iJ 


•H 


& 


•H 


3 


3 


k) 














o 


-H 
















D" 






O 


M 


M 






CO 


M 


u 


W 


ty 


CD 
















V4 
















<0 






•H 


u 


4J 


IM 


HH 




iJ 


■0 


u 


10 


10 
















M 


u 


CM 


<M 



















u 








O 


o 


Q 


O 











o 


a 
















o 
















oe 


lo 








w 


W 








O 


ti 


« 


►:) 


►3 
















O 


V 


















Q 


Q 


iH 


r-l 


>1 


>1 


u 












u 














u 


rH 


>. 


>1 












B 


M 


M 




u 


u 


tJ 


U 


tJ 


U 


a 


u 


B 


B 


u 














a 


u 


u 


U 










» 


10 






rH 






E 


C 


s 




10 




10 


a 


s 














« 




E 


E 


rH 








5 


CO 


B 


B 





>a 


•« 


8 


s 


o 


•« 


CO 


41 


CO 


CO 


o 














•C3 



>« 


3 
O 


3 



Q 










CO 


i 


i 


o: 


n 
10 


(0 


o 


u 


u 


(0 
10 


CO 


CO 
10 


CO 


CO 


o 


Q 


Q 


Q 


a 


Q 


Q 


X 


ID 
10 


o 


CJ 


g 










•« 


10 

o 


■0 

o 


•4-4 

o 


O 


C3 


« 


IP 


(0 
10 


13 


>» 


CJ 


>a 


>» 


CO 
10 


M 


t-H 


M 


M 


M 


M 


>» 


C3 


• 


9 


4) 










o 


>r> 


►7 




o 


c; 






l4 


V 


9 


o 


« 


« 


M 


X 


X 


M 





M 


M 


M 


O 
















•-I 






3 










o 












W 


t» 


CJ 


CJ 


u 


O 


o 


U 


















10 


c 


B 


■0 


IM 


tM 


3 


3 


> 


IM 


10 


IM 


a 


10 


> 





o 


O 


■a 


O 


o 


O 


CM 


3 


3 


3 










•a 


<0 


10 


01 










10 




■o 




■a 


T3 


■0 




r-H 




o 
























M 


CO 


CO 


l4 


o 


t) 


O 


3 


l-A 





>; 





>! 


>; 




u 


U 


kl 


•0 


^ 


kl 


"u 


O 








O 










8 


CO 


CO 


_i 


_2_ 


A 


± 


_e. 


10 
_CJ_ 


10 
0. 


10 

o 


10 

0. 


10 

O 


10 
O 


10 

u 


g 


_£. 


J. 


o 

X 


± 


_£ 


J_ 


A 


J_ 


J, 


g 






















« 


10 




































* 






















« 


o 












































P 














X 






















« 












m 








U 




w 


s 




« 


« 






s 


•6 


, 












g 


s 

H 




n 




* 








a 






1/) 


Q 


M 


a: 


8 


« 
















, 




• 


* 




10 


8 






« 




« 


, 




^ 




to 




§ 


a 


O 


B « 




14 
















« 






« 


« 


s 






























« 








x: 


* 


« 












z 






a 




B 








o 




a 




Q 


cc 




■ 




e 


to 






ki 


o 
















1 




o 




O 








>! 








£ 






4 






o 






Q 


a 




CO 




a 






kl 


A 




u 


Qi 


10 








10 


J3 


x 






^ 






« 


B 










wH 


3 




10 


>i 




o 






a 


O 


» 


IP 


o 




.J 


JJ 


o 










T3 


x: 


o 






10 


■0 


?: 


■0 


u 


C3 


IV 


a 


CJ 








U 


10 


Dl 


M 






O 











a 


• JS 


M 


c 






(0 


■w 






& 








-rH 


2 


B 


M 


Q 


o 


B 


■0 


X 


X 




u 












10 


d) 


V 


(0 


>1 






« 


CO 


C3> 


a 




a 


P VO 




CJ 






■0 


« 






■0 


.a 












^ 


M 


X 




x: 












B 


•O 


« 


to 






o 


4> 


IH 


u 


a. 


E 


E 


X 


>. 












C 




o 


& 








B 


■o 




M 


g 




a 






B 


« 


C5 




« 


O 


01 


13 










K ^ 





(0 


3 


C3I 




rH 




■0 


B 


M 


■0 


3 


IS 


CJ 


u 


O 


a 




c 








u 


(0 










3 ^ 


1 


Cb 


J_ 


J_ 


J_ 


_8. 


_8. 


_8. 


CO 


_i 


S! 


A 


_s. 


S 


X 


J_ 


CO 


a 

o 


10 


_s_ 


J_ 


J_ 


A 


CO 



342 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 











r- 


VC 


o 


o 


^ 


< 


u> 


u> 


■« 


r« 


o 


o 




"n" 


o 


o 


o 






r» 




-" 








i 


in 


t~ 


o 


u> 


00 




<N 


m 


vo 


fS 


r> 


ro 




<N 


r> 


CO 


in 






IN 








§ 


i 






o 




M 


z 






^ 














r> 


















s 




















































u 




















































X 


























































o 






^ 




















OV 












^^ 














o 






r- 




















■» 














a 
u 

0. 


Q 
U 
CO 










o 
o 






n 


































i 


i 


<: 


s 






t-l 








































Q 


a. 


u 
















































Z 




















































P 




























































o 


o 




o 


o 




O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 




O 


o 




""fo" 






o 




^^ 






§ 




o 


o 




o 


o 




o 


o 


o 


m 


o 


O 




o 


o 




n 






o 








1 ^ 


E 


o 


o 




o 


o 




*H 


o 


rH 


r- 


vo 


vo 




Ol 


vo 




CI 














s 


S 


OS 


o 




fO 


<N 




o\ 


in 


VO 


ov 


ri 


«n 




M 


fO 










<N 








s 




^ 






n 


r- 






^ 


iH 






























u fi 


U 
O 


o 
o 


ir> 






•* 


r- 






































5 § 


o 




















































o 


o 




Ol 


o 




o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 




in 


o 




o 


o 


O 


■>» 


o 


"o 




Q 


M 




o 


o 




O) 


o 




o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 




o 


o 




■« 


o 


O 


<J> 


o 


o 




U 




o 


•«» 




o 


o 




in 


o 


o 


r- 


(7\ 


OV 




r- 


<T\ 




■«» 


CV 


OV 


•« 


<N 


o 




I 


g 


o 


M 




•* 


tn 




n 


o 


I7> 


<N 






















m 


vo 




Ol 






o 

r-l 


n 






r^ 


00 
























PI 




a. 

s 


•< 
u 
















































Q 










^^^ 
















































o\ 


r- 




r- 


o 




o 


r- 


o\ 


CX 




CO 




m 


m 






<N 






00 


"^ 






a 


vo 


00 




«) 


yo 




m 


vo 


00 


00 




00 




00 


CO 






oo 






vo 


vo 






U 


c» 


o\ 




o» 


a\ 




<n 


o> 


o\ 


<7> 




OV 




Ol 


ov 






ov 






OV 


<JV 










rt 


I-l 










*-i 


fH 


w-t 










(-1 


tH 






tH 






tH 


rH 






1 


►J 


















































** 


IH 
























































in 


1-1 




"~~ 


o 


c^ 


Ol 


CTl 


in 




■<» 




ov 


VO 


o 


in 


~^ 




00 




""■ 












CTl 


00 






00 


u> 


r- 


t~ 






.H 




CN 




vo 


vo 






<N 












s 




(N 


o 






in 


■* 


rt 


r-l 


o 




rH 




rH 


rH 


tH 


t~ 






tH 














in 


o 






« 


<N 


<N 


<N 


ro 




O 




in 


ro 


00 


in 






in 










^ 


f. 






r^ 












































H 


fi 








































































































^ 


« 


» 


<a 


9 


V 


w 




« 


« 


































o 
















01 


n 


































u 


g 


g 


g 


g 


g 


g 


■o 


o 


o 


■a 


•o 


■a 




■o 


■o 


10 


10 


•o 


■o 


•O 


•a 


■o 










3 


3 


3 


3 




3 


(V 


a 


a 


4) 


<v 


« 




41 


« 


^ 


U 


4) 


4) 


«| 


9 

























o 






O 


o 


o 




o 


O 


« 


4) 


O 


O 


o 


o 


o 










o 





O 








O 


I-l 


u 


u 


l4 


^1 


^ 




I-l 


H 


•o 


•a 


M 


M 


u 


u 


u 










^ 


J_ 


_1 


J_ 


J_ 


g 


^ 


± 


± 


J_ 


A 


I 




J_ 


A 


J_ 


J_ 


A 


S 


1 


A 


1 






< 




















































m 




















































Oi 
































4) 


OS 


o 
















g 


1 


« 


















M 




u 






a 




c 
























3 


1 








I 


1 


i 




c 




s 


u 
4) 






rH 
g 










z 










o 


















u 




CO 


ki 
















l4 






g 


o 














OS 






4) 


fc. 
















M 


>l 


o 






g 
















4) 


c 


u 








41 










2 


£ 
















C 


c 


c 


z 


"0 


u 


b. 








"D 














o 


c 




a: 












u 


o 


o 


I-l 


•H 


























u 


•H 






^ 
















& 


(0 


•0 




c 






a 










OS 




o 


09 


ce 


o 


o 


M 


« IK 


DC 


OS 


X 


X 


X 


0" 


I-) 




>: 


u 






j-> 












X 


ID 








U 














< 


3 


4) 


b. 








8 














O 


>, 


g 


& 




Q T3 


•o 


•o 


■o 


•o 


x> 


o 


o 


•H 




10 
















* 


O 


o 




O 


U 0) 


4> 


o 


« 


v 


4) 


>-> 




H-t 


CO 


VI 


























> 




u 


»J 


U 











o 


o 




Q 


U 


•H 


41 






a 












u 


X 


a 


o 


« 


3 


o: ^ 


M 


u 


u 


u 


M 


§ 


M 


■H 


» 


■o 






M 














«> 






J_ 


x: 




U 0) 


41 


w 


V 


d) 


« 


U 


<0 


4) 


10 






u 














X 


■J 


u 


_u_ 


O. 


s s 


£ 


s 


X 


X 


X 


u 


o 


[b 


>J 


X 






u 


























o 










































o 










o 










































u 


















































M 






u 


M 




o 








































2 


<« 




i. 


I 




u 




















i 








c 
o 


c 
o 












>l 










4-> 






































41 


u 




•a 


4 




o 




























u 


u 








ee 


U 


■rt 

o 


o 

H 


M 


M 


g 


« 

t-t 




















10 








i 


i 








i 


i 


o 


41 


^ 


If 


t-l 


u 














a 






J= 






Q 


10 

o 


10 

o 










^ 


o 




>i 


>i 


o 
















M 












M 


41 


« 










B 


O 


^ 


X 


kl 


09 


















4) 










o: 


o: 










o 


•rt 


u 


V 


O 


•o 


« 


Q 


Q 


o 


a 


Q 




a 




rH 









10 














u 


o 




V) 


u 


X 


o 














u 


Q 


s 


J= 


a 


o 


o 


<M 


«M 










9 


c 


o 


« 


« 






I-l 


w 


I-l 


M 


M 








u 


M 


M 







o 










X 


a 




X 


X 


•a 


o 










































^ 








« 




■o 


•o 


•o 


•o 


■o 




a 


■O 




10 


T3 


■o 


■0 


3 


3 










« 


h. 




x: 


x: 


« 


«-! 


« 


« 


« 


«l 


4> 




M 


4) 


01 


M 


41 


9 


u 


10 


10 










o 






o 


o 


X 


•.-1 


o 


o 


o 


o 







u 


O 


<0 


« 


O 


O 


u 


41 


41 










ii 


c 





k> 


L> 


1 





I-l 


kl 


M 


^ 


u 




c 


kl 


o 


T3 


l4 


kl 


c 


U 


I-l 










o 


a 


J_ 


« 


« 




ID 


« 


V 


4> 


4) 


4) 




4) 


4) 


3 


A 


4) 


4) 


9 


3 


3 










X 


M 


X 


X 


X 


0. 


X 


_3E_ 


_5E_ 


X 


X 




_U_ 


X 


J 


X 


X 


U 


m 


ca 












« 




































« 












»> 


« 














































u 

M 




M 

w 














s- 






« 




« 


8 


« 












•9 














o 










e 














a 












09 






t^ 


^s 


g 


X 


X 










§ 




« 








■ 


u 






X 






m 








9 


s 


s 






• 






S 

09 






£ 






* 


2 


• 




r-t 


« 




1 




* 






OS 




u 








« 


a 


% '-< 


« 






V 


M 


1 






14 


s 






^ 


« 






i 






u 






•o 




« 


^ rH 








Ol 


41 


4 


& 




U 


























« 


i fl 




kl 


« 


kl 


«> 


1 


•o 




•0 


















c 


c 




e 


u 


1 '^ 




w 




s 


V4 


li 






M 


u 


c 


« 


09 




01 








Q. 


09 


u 


>1 


^ 


o 


u 


O "O 


c 


& 


J 


U 




§ 


4) 


b. 


a 


10 




3 


1^ 


•H 

3 










a 


« 


« 


M 


X 


« 


»} 01 


a 


« 


« 


n 






a 


IM 


09 


u 


N 




■J 




>] 










o 


o 


> 






1-1 


o 


5 


£ 


^ 


« 


a 






n 




9 


10 


< 




P 
















10 


X 


a 


3 


S ^ 





u 


a 


c 


i 


r-l 


■H 


3 


•O 


a 




C 


C 










S 


i 


u 


OS 


o 


0. 


2 £ 


^ 


s 


CO 

a 


§ 


10 

U 


_1 


■0 

|lL4 


A. 


_1 


rO 


S 


b 


_s 



343 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 







"■"" 


■■■■ 


•< 


r- 




^ 


O 


CN 


o 


<N 


"<T 


t*- 


m 


00 


«> 


c~ 


-~" 


n 


00 


"^ 


rH 


o 


o 


ON 


< 


r^ 








1 


^». 


00 




n 


tH 


•>» 


m 


■«» 


rH 


o 


o 


(N 


rH 








f-i 


t- 




m 


o 


<Jl 




rH 




CO 


1 


z 










■«» 


r^ 




•* 


f-> 


■« 


rH 


>» 


00 




t- 


^ 


00 


,H 


<N 




VO 


Z 






§ 




















rH 
















rt 


•^ 


M 




^ 










g 


i 
























































X 






























































































"~" 


^^ 


^~' 


o 


o 


^^ 




















































in 


c~ 




Q 

s 
s 


Q 
U 


e 














































t^ 


t- 






M 














































rH 


t~- 




2 


^ 


g 


















































lj 


O 


a. 






















































a 


•< 




















































Q 


0, 


u 




















































55 
























































P 






































































o 


O 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


^^" 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


^^■" 


■"^ 


^■■^ 






z 










<N 


in 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


'I 




o 


o 


o 


lO 


o 


o 










u -. 


o 


£ 








rH 


00 


o 


o 


r^ 


<N 


o 


in 




o 


o 




o 


o 


o 


m 


o 


o 










u e 


M 

El 


Z 








^ 




•«f 


o 


rH 


^ 


<N 


r- 


m 


00 


m 




r- 


^ 


^ 


in 


^ 


VO 










S 


o 
o 








<-4 




VO 


o\ 




CTi 


CN 


r^ 




(N 


c^ 




fO 


(T\ 


in 


in 


in 


^ 










a: 

u 
o 












<N 


rg 












«» 


<N 




ro 


n 


•» 


vo 














% § 


o 




























*"* 




























o 


o 




m 


o 


o 


o 


O 


O 


O 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


■^■^ 


^^^ 


o 




Q 


g 




in 


o 




r~ 


m 


o 


o 


o 


O 


O 


O 


o 


o 


in 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


VO 






o 




U 




•* 


o 




<N 


^ 


o 


o 


■* 


o 


<N 


<N 


o\ 


o 


■w 


o 


m 


o 


o 


o 


o 


en 






o 




^ 


§ 


g 




irt 




n 




m 


00 




o 


M 


■* 




<N 


C^ 


C~ 


00 


m 


fO 


o 


o 


00 






t-i 






cs 








m 


M 




o« 








o\ 


■«» 


o 


in 


o\ 


ix> 


i~ 


rH 


•«» 










fn 


S 














rH 


















(N 
























< 
u 




























































in 










o 


n 


o 


p^ 


fl 


o\ 


^ 


o 


r~ 


Ol 


00 


"in" 


in 


l£ 


o 






o 








o 




00 










00 


(N 


rH 


<N 




v-i 


in 


00 


00 


<N 


<N 


(N 


CN 


in 


lO 






(J\ 


a 
u 






Cd 




o^ 










(Tt 


CM 


<J\ 


o\ 


(y\ 


o\ 


o\ 


CT\ 


as 


o\ 


<j\ 


<j\ 


a\ 


<J\ 


<J\ 






a< 




a: 


^ 




'-' 










rA 
















r^ 


r^ 


rH 


rH 


T-i 












a 




< 
u 


i 

2: 

M 


















































i 




>< 


















































o 






























































fS 


<N 


o\ 


00 




U) 


IC 


•>» 


^ 


■0" 


■vf 


•«» 


t~ 


o 


"■"" 


r- 


t~ 


in 


in 


^ 


in 


VO 


vc 


CTl 








g 


o\ 


o> 


o 


in 




CT> 


a\ 






m 


m 


m 




CN 




IC 


VO 


t^ 




r~ 


00 




00 


m 








CO 


00 


o 


c\ 








m 


m 


n 


n 


n 


o 


rH 








rH 


rH 


rH 


o 


t^ 


o 


ro 








<N 


M 


r~ 


(N 








rH 


rH 


rH 


rH 


t~* 


fM 










M 


<N 


fS 


<N 


in 




<j\ 






u 


1 

3 






















































(h 
























































o: 
























































a 
























































] 


O 


«) 


o 


10 


10 


o 


O 


(0 


10 


10 


10 


10 


o 


O 


o 


O 


O 


O 


o 


o 


10 


10 


o 


o 










c 


>J 


c 


u 


M 


B 


B 


M 


M 


M 


U 


IH 


E 


G 


B 


G 


G 


G 


G 


G 


M 


U 


B 


G 










to 


4> 


a 


4) 


4) 


m 


a 


4) 


4) 


41 


41 


41 


CO 


CO 


(0 


10 


CO 


CO 


01 




4) 


41 


09 


CO 










(1) 


■O 


4) 


■O 


■a 


4) 


4) 


■o 


■D 


■a 


•O 


T> 


41 


4) 


4> 


41 


4) 


4> 


41 


4) 


"0 


•a 


4) 


4) 










u 


10 


M 


10 


10 


M 


M 


£ 


10 


(0 


J_ 


J_ 


u 


IH 


ki 


kl 


IH 


kl"! 


kl 


kl 


10 


(0 


kl 


kl 










u. 


X 


ft. 


X 


£ 


[ti 


IL, 


as 


_s_ 


tu 


fci 


[t, 


[L, 


b. 


b. 


b. 


[lu 


X 


-J. 


Cl, 


b. 






< 
























































w 
























































Q. 
























































g 


u 








>-> 


b 










^ 




















CJ) 














z 

M 


a: a: 


X 




W 


w 


o: 


« 


<-> 


u 


o 






a 


ai 


X 


K 


^) 


^J 


f^ 






►^ 


►O 


g 




















W 
























U 




G 


B 








3 


z c 


c 








C 


G 




* 


■H 






B 


B 


B 


C 


G 


G 


B 


u 




10 


10 


G 










l-l -H 


•»H 

















s 








•H 






10 


■0 


10 






CO 


CO 


kl 






™ 


B 


5, a 


2, 




c 


B 


3 


3 


M 






u 


U 


3 


3 


3 


3 


CO 


CO 


CO 


a 








4) 






a: 

H 

a: 




g tr 


cr 




u 


U 


cr 


0- 


U 






u 


o 


tr 


cr 


ty 


cr 








•rH 








ii: 








< ra 


ID 








a 


10 












10 


10 


10 


10 








kl 


K 


kl 


kl 










2 2 


o 




10 


CO 


o 


o 


> 


s 




3 


» 


o 


o 


o 


o 


kl 


kl 


kl 


41 




U 


U 


t-i 








>-) >-> 


>-> 




u 


U 


Id 


to 


O 




^ 


o 


o 


>-> 


'-) 


'^ 


1-3 


o 


u 


u 


.c 


►o 






G 














4) 


4) 








>: 





rH 


r-1 
















o 




M 


O 


10 








§ g 


c 




■o 


T3 


B 


B 




b. 


u 


i-H 




c 


a 


c 


B 


C3I 


CJl 


CJl 


G 


G 


O 


B 












(D 




(0 


10 


10 


(0 


-H 










10 


10 


10 


10 


•H 


•rH 


•rl 


10 


<0 


O 


O 


kl 










W CO 


M 




X 


X 


M 


W 


3 


z 


Q 


_s_ 


s 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


m 


m 


m 


oe 


CO 


a: 


X 


(b 














P 






o 


O 


O 


o 


O 


o 


o 






































U 






o 


O 


U 


u 


U 


o 


u 






































t) 






o 


O 


o 


o 


CI 


o 


u 








































u 




•<H 






ft 




•H 


•H 


o 


o 




o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 




o 
















ki 


2 




>H 


l-l 


u 


u 


u 


M 


kl 


u 


U 




U 


u 


u 


CJ 


o 


u 




u 


u 














u 




u 


U 


u 


u 


U 


4J 


*J 
























a 














u 






o 


O 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


B 


B 




G 


c 


G 


G 


G 


c 




B 










OS 


« 


x: 


« 


10 




4> 


4) 


4) 


4> 


4) 


41 


4) 


O 


O 




o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 




O 


a 










u 


u 


rH 


i-H 




r-4 








rH 


rH 


rH 


(0 


CO 




CO 


CO 


■0 


CO 


CO 


CO 




CO 












3 


g 


U 






Cd 


to 


U 


U 


CO 


U 


u 






o 


-H 












a 




u 








« 


< 


< 




•H 


















T3 


•a 


u 


-0 


•o 


■o 


■o 


•o 


•o 


Q) 


•a 


u 














•« 


x: 




>« 


>« 


•H 


yH 


>« 


<JI 


•« 


U 


a 




bl 


u 


u 


u 


bl 


bl 




u 


M 










^ 


v< 



























B 














A 














$ 


$ 


a 


» 




CO 


CO 


a 


m 


u 


09 


CO 


10 


10 


o 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


4) 










S 


» 


a 


o 


a 


10 


10 


10 


« 


10 


(0 


10 


U 


U 


to 


u 


V 


u 


u 


U 


U 


» 


CJ 


> 










s 


p 


o 


£ 




U 


O 


C3 


O 


CJ 


a 


O 






•rH 














4) 















Q. 




u 


M 
















B 


B 


•C3 


G 


c 


G 


G 


G 


G 


B 


B 


CJ 














y 






o 


O 


o 


O 


o 


o 


U 


U 


IH 


CO 


U 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 


41 


kl 












u 


U 




10 


■0 


•^ 




•H 










4) 


4) 




41 


4) 


4) 


4) 


4) 


41 


BC 


4) 


41 










C 


B 


H-l 


M 


M 


*M 


•u 


<u 


<M 


■M 


HH 


KH 


.C 


J3 


10 


A 


.B 


.C 


X 


.C 


.c 




•C 


CJ) 










n> 


10 


•H 


iS 


41 




•^ 










■H 


u 


u 


u 






u 


u 


u 


u 


10 


u 


B 










■H 







•a 


•o 


o 


y 


O 


O 


O 








3 


3 




3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


CJl 


3 


10 










kl 


^ 


i? 


S 


S 


10 


10 


10 


(0 


10 


10 


10 


O 


O 


o 


O 


O 


O 


O 


O 


O 


41 


O 


kl 










b. 


(ii 


0. 


X 


a. 


0. 


Q. 


a 


0. 


0. 


0. 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


to 


X 


CO 


O 








^ 


* 




a 










« 






« 


























« 




o 




ti 


CD 




o 


















« 
























g 




K 


§ 




41 




(0 


« 


o 








, 


* 






, 


, 


« 


* 


« 


« 


« 




« 






^ 




o 


o: 
o 






a 




1 


« 


« 


































a 


t»- 




M 


« 




•H 




•«» 






< 






























rH 


•H 




Q 


o 


o: 




§ 




o 






M 




<s 


1*1 








•o 
















10 


CO 






Q 
























>1 











< 












> 








oe 




A 




c 


10 




<N 


iH 


B 




a 


B 


4) 











r-j 


tN 




« 


§ 






kl 










(9 




■0 


c 


u 






■H 


o 


-rH 










» 












M 


G 


4) 














M 


10 


10 


«M 


«M 


& 




& 


i 




•W 


>: 


u 


a 


J>! 


.!< 


■W 






9 


O 


> 








K 


bi 




e- 


o 


a 




tM 


< 


10 


41 


4) 


CO 


4> 


41 


4) 


4) 






9 






















o 


O 


<0 




<0 


(0 


> 


« 


41 


10 


« 


41 


41 


41 




,c 


M 




OS 










«J 


U 


U 


10 


10 


« 


X 


o 


B 


o 


o 




U 


ki 


01 


kl 


kl 


kl 


kl 




u 


O 














C 


c 


c 


l-l 


14 


X 


M 


f^ 


O 


►^ 


1^ 


4) 


U 


U 




U 


U 


U 


U 


10 






•H 


10 










<d 


10 


10 


4) 


4) 


o 


O 




X 






C 






s 










>J 




.M 


a 


CJl 










■rt 


•W 


■H 


T3 


•o 


M 


IH 


G 


(0 


B 


G 


10 


0> 


tJl 


tjl 


CJl 


CJl 


CJl 


M 


B 





B 










ki 


kl 


u 


S 


s 


4) 


41 


10 




■0 


10 


IH 


-*H 




o 










O 




O 


41 








__ 


__ 


b 


b 


b. 


M 


K 


W 


3 


w 


w 


u 


0) 


m 


>^ 


n 


n 


in 


a 


0. 


g 


K 


> 


:c 






bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 



S 9 



n M IN 



o ^ o\ o 1- 
o ■^ \e •* CO 

iH lO iH f-l « 



c* CO •-) r* 



u t> 

CO M 

s ^ i 

O o- 




00 r- rH (N P- ^ 



3 t^ 



tn GO (7\ 04 O 



v6 in fo 



fO (N 00 00 00 ^ 

00 lo in in I/) 00 

OS Os <T\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 



<7\ <N <N 



<7t C\ 0\ 0\ 0\ <7t 



00 <N o o\ n <N 
O^ 9^ 0^ OV ON 9t 



m 


in 


in 


00 


in 


r~ 


00 


00 


t^ 


r~ 


00 


f*l 


<-< 


o 


o> 


iH 


rH 


<T\ 


t^ 


o 


fS 



0\ 0\ CO OS 



*H CN >^ r^ 



00 VO ro 0\ OJ 

ro po f) t** r*" 
O r-i ro vfi n 



(IQ CO (0 



<D Q) 0) 0) 



g g g ^ g 



g g ^ g ^ g 



a m m m 



o> M id M M M 



V M M bu CD 



■-I li, i-t r-l .-( 
« S SB 5 S ^ 
O M a a M M 



z z z z u 



•S G 



o u o o o 



u u u u u 



> O O (D O O 



■H a -H 9 



■2 g 



O O. CO M w w 



rH « 1-t <N 



c x: £ U 



q > « > 

u q: ^ a: 

e S I 2 E 



345 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 







"■"" 


•^_ 


MM 


M 


n 


■^~ 


< 


r- 


"^ 


M 


00 


< 


in 


o 


in 


~~ 


~~ 


p» 


o 


o 


-^ 


o 




o 


n 


— 


o 


O 


o 


*N 


Ol 


cy 


— 








i 




00 


CO 






o 


r- 


n 


o\ 




CO 


o 


<N 






VO 


c~ 






CO 




m 


^ 




<n 


VO 






o 








CO 


1 






<H 




z 


00 


VO 


n 




z 


r- 


f-l 


«> 






(N 


^ 


tH 


tH 


ro 




<N 


cs 




tH 


CN 


■« 


tH 


CO 


o\ 










































































Q 














•H 


<H 










iH 








T-l 












rH 


tH 










tH 










o 


Q 
(0 






































































X 
















































































o 






o 


o 
















"o" 


o 


o 


O 




^■^ 




■""■ 


o 


^^^ 


"^^ 








^^ 


















o 






o 


t» 
















o> 


r- 


00 


ov 










o 














Q 
U 
0. 


i 














r- 








« 
















Ok 


iH 














« 














2 


^ 


g 
































































fi? 


o 


a. 




































































(t 


< 


































































a 


o. 


o 


































































z 






































































p 
















































































o 


O 






o 


O 






o 


o 


o 


m 






O 








"""■ 




o 


o 


—■— 


^■^ 


O 


o 


O 


o 


o 


■■"' 






z 






o 


o 






o 


O 






o 


o 


o 


«-i 






o 












o 


o 






o 


o 


O 


o 


o 






1 i 


o 


£ 




f*> 


o 






o 


o 






00 


ro 


vo 


00 






o 












o 


o 






o 


o 


o\ 


o 


o 






M 




































































tl 


aC 




M 


<>» 






ot 


Ol 






CN 


ot 


<N 








VO 












f*> 


■>» 






fS 


CO 


o\ 


^ 


Ol 








< 


o 




tH 


w 






^ 


M 
































tH 








«H 


m 




M 






u e 


U 


o 


































































S 3 


o 








































































o 


o 






o 


o 






tH 


o 


o 


m 


o 


o 


o 












o 


O 




■■^^ 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 




o 


r: 






o 


in 






o 


o 






r- 


o 


o 


r~ 


O 


o 


o 












o 


O 






o 


o 


in 


in 


(N 


o 










00 


u> 






« 


o 






n 


o 


" 


•^ 


00 


00 


m 












<« 








VO 


m 


rj 




n 


o 






i 




cs 


n 






0* 


e 

t4 








ro 










.H 














m 










r~ 


p- 


P- 


in 










n 


t~- 






u> 


n 






tN 


<N 


ro 




"oT 


<J> 


o\ 












<J> 


in 






CI 


tH 


0\ 


ro 


r^ 


CO 








Q 




ro 


a> 






rt 


»« 






00 


iH 


00 




CO 


o 


o 












o 


<N 








<7> 


o 




rH 


o 


§ 






u 




o» 


o\ 






o\ 


o« 






Ol 


o\ 


o> 




<Xi 


<T\ 


o\ 












<n 


9< 






<y\ 


(Jk 


<j\ 


o\ 


tJl 


<« 




1^ 






w 


tH 






»H 


r4 






r-) 


•H 


rH 




w 


w-l 


•H 












tH 


»H 






tH 


tH 


tH 


iH 


tH 




S 

s 




>< 


M 
































































a 


















































































vo 


<N 


CTl 


00 


<N 


OS 


O 


o 


"o7" 


i/i 








(~ 


00 


CO 


o\ 


00 


^■^ 




CO 


<7v 


•^ 


■«» 


t» 


■<» 


■»» 


^ 








s 








in 


^ 


00 


00 


t~ 


in 


00 


(J> 


O 


CO 








VO 


tH 


(H 


■H 


m 






CO 


ve 


o\ 


Ov 


Ol 


Ol 


Ol 


o\ 














r^ 


.H 




n 






m 


n 


o 


00 








ts 


■^ 


•>» 


r-l 


tH 








u> 




n 


M 


ro 


ro 


<-> 














a> 


00 


rH 


iH 


PI 


n 


m 


rH 


•<» 


u> 








t~ 


00 


CO 


00 


VO 






VO 


^ 


tH 


tH 


tH 


tH 


tH 


tH 






u 

as 


g 




































































U 






































































b. 


1 






































































] 




5 


s 




































































« 


l4 


o 


o 


o 


O 





O 


O 








o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 





O 


o 


o 












> 


« 


C 


c 


B 


B 


a 


B 


>i 


B 


>1 


>1 


>, 


>1 


>1 


>1 


>. 


>. 


>. 


>1 


>t 


>, 


>1 


>l 


>1 


>, 


>, 


>, 


>1 


>, 












£ 


•H 


O 





O 


O 








B 





B 


B 


B 


c 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


E 


B 


E 












z 


0] 


z 


z 


X 


X 


z 


Z 


M 


X 


M 


M 


M 


M 


M 


IH 


M 




M 


M 




M 


IH 


IH 


IH 


M 




M 


M 


IH 






a. 










« 


OS 


















ID 


CO 














































M 


M 


















fi 


B 




li 










































<-t 


• 










a 








9 


<t 




o 


































g 


5 


< 






1 


^ 










5 








a 


g 




« 


o 


U 






B 


g 




a 


a 


tD 


10 


CD 


O 


00 






5? 








s 
















U 








B 




o 




u 


O 


g 




B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


fi 


B 






z 

M 




CL 








s 
















u 








•H 


« 


B 


a 


o 




IS 


O 


« 


9 


<V 


9 


9 






s 


a 






» 








u 
u 










a 


u 
u 


14 


u 


0. 


B 


Q. 




o 


^ 




M 


g 


g 


g 


g 


g 


g 


g 










P 




oc 




bi 










CJ 






r-l 










O. 









>-i 


Ij 


u 




















m 


Q 


Q 












» 


D> 








U 


"O 


■o 


•o 


'0 






« 


5 


B 


u 


u 




« 


« 


« 


» 


» 


,. 


« 








§ 


tf 


B 


« 


>4 






B 


B 


u 






O 


■o 


o 


o 




ti 


V4 


kl 




O 






10 


^ 


u 


ki 


ki 


U 


h 


u 






M 


O 




« 


u 


kl 








u 


l4 






■H 







Q 


U 


U 


u 


f-t 


•O 


B 


« 


f: 


U 


u 


U 


U 


u 


u 


u 










O 


>! 




o 


V4 


B 


B 




o 


M 


l4 


X 




3 










a 


B 


O 


B 


























O 





1-1 




u 


■^ 


tH 


B 




U 









c 


a 


B 


B 


B 




(V 


•H 


•H 




Qi 


a 


a 


a 


a 


Ol 


a 










M 


s 


s> 


B 




> 


> 


O 


o 




B 


x: 


o 


o 


O 


10 


a 


10 


Ol 


a 


0) 


a 




O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 








M 


O 


> 


2 


* 






CO 


u 


(-1 




o 


u 


u 


u 


w 


Ol 


Ol 


•H 


(D 






a 


x: 


* 


JC 


£ 


£ 


j: 


J= 








Cb 


3 


f< 




a 


a 


O 


O 




3 






u 


u 


u 


tj 


14 


kj 


14 


ki 


■o 


> 


a 


B 






10 


CO 


00 


CO 


00 










± 


^ 




■w 


u 


3 


« 


« 






■H 


•w 


■H 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 





k4 


B 






























_E^ 


J 


M 


a 


a 


>3 


_J_ 


3 


0. 


X 


X 


o 


u 


O 


u 


z 


Z 


X 






Q 


m 


i^ 


CO 


m 


03 


(Q 


CQ 


a 


CO 












o 




"O 


o 














o 


















































u 


B 


U 
•J 


c 














c 

M 








0. 












0. 






























u 





























4 








o 




<« 


lU 




























« 


iJ 


7 


m 














(0 








S 








Ol 




3 


O 






























g 


o 


« 










u 




o 




0. 


Q. 










rH 






>, 
























U 




cu 


u 


u 










B 




u 








»J 












u 


O 


u 






















g 






a 


V 


a 




O 






l-l 


o 


a 




•» 


41 


a 








o 




a 




a 




o 


o 


O 


O 


o 


o 








8 




o 


o 


^ 


O 


Q 


O 




6 


o 


u 


o 


•o 


3 


s 


s 


X 


o 
u 


d 


u 




s 


O 


M 


^ 


o 


o 


U 


U 


V 


u 












<M 


5 




O 


P 


B 


X 





u 


B 


o 


l4 














m 






« 


O 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


c 


B 












•rf 


K 


u 


a 


Q> 


O 




IQ 


•o 


O 


m 


a 


a 


D 


CO 








D> 


i 


CO 


ID 


Ll 


o 


O 


O 


O 


o 


o 












o 




t 


<3 




n 


►o 


U 


>, 


to 


CO 


x: 


o 


« 


« 


•-> 


a 


B 


B 


o 


« 


•O 


o 


10 


CO 


10 


a 


CO 


10 












« 


<u 


u 


«« 









< 


X 




< 







iH 


iH 




-H 


■H 


-H 




rH 




^ 


l-J 
























a 


O 


w 




M 


T3 


« 






T3 






o 


« 


« 


« 


X 


X 


l4 




9 


9 




■o 


T3 


TJ 


T3 


■o 


T3 




















a 


u 


01 


D> 


■o 


U 


■0 


a: 


ot 


Ol 


0) 


01 






a 


o 


o> 


Ol 






u 


U 


U 


U 


u 


u 












s 


3 




3 


^ 


«> 


B 


B 


s 


n 




^ 


s 


s 


s 


B 


o 


o 
o 


(0 


u 


s 


s 


10 
l4 


a 
B 


10 


a 


10 


10 


10 


M 












t4 


O 


> 


^ 


2 


o 


u 


u 


X 


u 


^ 


a 








xJ 


u 


u 


a 


o 






kl 




u 


o 


u 


O 


o 


u 












0) 


U 


rH 




B 




a 


a 






B 


a 


(0 


01 


m 


<0 


4) 


o 


« 


>, 


CO 


00 


« 


























-H 


3 


•*-! 


2 


3 


o 


o 


o 


•^ 


o 


« 


o 


o 


o 


o 


« 


g 


g 


A 


B 


o 


o 




t 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 












w 


m 


W 


X 


»:) 


W 


:>: 


:>: 


X 


M 


X 


z 


_J_ 


_J_ 


►J 


»e 


5 


5 


M 


J 


■J 


M 


w 


CQ 


01 


M 


M 


to 


_w 










8 






















« 










































o 




g 
























rH 




















« 




, 






« 


« 






* 




M 


§ 


g 


s 








, 


• 








* 




§ 




« 


* 












u 






B 
X 


« 


« 






« 


* 




ov 


o 




9 










5 « 












V 


€ 
















o 


« 




■o 




VO 


m 


•* 


n 


<N 


•-' 




& 


u 


. 


H 




• 






i« 












« 


B 


<-l 


fS 


m 




M 


tH 


a 


« 


« 




« 


10 


J<! 


ii 


X 


M 


M 


M 




o 


OS 










>! 


"S 










V 




« 


« 














01 


o 


u 




ce 


u 


4> 


9 


« 


9 


9 


9 




§s 












5 


g 


O M 








« 




u 


K 


■o 


■o 


•O 




,>< 


X 


B 


B 


o 






10 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 


9 










• 




2 


£ 


m « 








« 




u 




o 


o 






« 


« 




« 






« 




U 


U 


U 


U 


u 


u 














« 


3 S 








11 








o 


o 


S 


M 


« 


9 


M 


•o 


B 


9 


« 


B 


O 


O 


U 


o 


u 


O 








Q* 


M 




•o 










u 




o 




^ 





* 


^ 


« 


k4 


u 


a 


c 





a 
































« 




u 




o 








« 


1 


a 


B 


B 


aJ 


u 


u 


w 


« 








O 


a 


a 


a 


a 


o. 


a 












■o 




kl 






« 


« 


a 


« 


^ 


B 





o 


O 


a 








Ol 


t9 


0, 




£ 

















o 












•> 


g 


o 




r -c 




o> 


JS 


u 




g 


aJ 


u 


k) 


a 


« 


« 


o, 


9 


-H 




s 


o 


A 


A 


« 


« 


« 


x: 












kl 


c 




b (D 





0> 


o 


3 


c 


i-t 


U 


u 


u 


B 


B 


B 


« 


•a 


> 


01 


B 


B 


01 




to 


(0 


CO 


00 










t_ 


« 


u 


o 




9 3 


_2_ 


J_ 


a 




3 


•H 


■»< 


O 


o 


o 


e 






2 


B 








10 


















, 


, 


b. 


(0 


M 


" 


8 B 


0. 


a 


^ 


z 


u 


U 


o 


u 


io! 


Ot 


M 


Q 


CO 


i^ 


B 


a 


o 


m 


m 


00 


m 



346 



Bulletin 160-93 Administrative Draft 



Appendix D 



Table D-3. Developed and Planned Development of Hydroelectric Resources 



^s 



•H o\ in (N (N ^ 



•H r- ^ .H 



M m X* <N 



S ^ I 






00 in 00 






o o o o o o 
o o o m <« o 
in m in o> 00 vo 



o p~ in in 



^ ^ §1 



in r> r>i *-< 











00 


M 


fN 


ro 


ro 


n 


in 


in 


in 


in 


00 




o\ 


a\ 


o\ 


a> 


Ol 


1.] 


rH 


t-i 


r^ 


rt 


rH 


:^ 












fe 













VO^QOOOOOOOOOV^QOOOOIOQO 



fS 00 <N 



<J\ 






OS 


00 


CN 


<N 


<N 


n 


m 


o\ 


o 


00 


00 


'» 






o\ 


o 


<7l 


o\ 



'O'O'O'O'O'O'O'O 



s s 



>, >, >i c 



« <V (V 0) 



2 Z M M M 



aaaaQia> > 






o o u u 



6 8 6 



I i 



g 3 



I I I I I I 



US<<<<'<'<W 



8 -.- 



CO U) CO CO CO 



m 09 a « 



a Q. O. O 



S o s s s 



O 0) 
0) « 



rt < rH rt rH 



O Ol 01 Ol 



^ CU 'O 4> A 



S 5 s s s 



IS 10 10 



Q 




-H 

o 




•n 


•H 

a 


Q 


Q 




s 


ra 


Ol 


o> 


o> 


o> 


D> 


D> 


Dl 




< 








•rt 


■rA 


■rl 










ki 


M 


M 


M 


u 


u 


^ 


U 




u 




M 
M 


M 
rH 


U 

M 
rH 


H 


u 

M 
rH 


M 


U 


Q 
M 

rH 




n 


<0 


10 


10 


m 


a 


a 


«J 


10 






















u 


u 


^ 


U 


^ 


ki 


u 


u 


U 


u 


u 


41 


v 


<D 


01 


« 


v 


0) 






9 


Oi 


a 


n, 


n. 


n 


^ 


n 






m 


R 


F 


R 


P. 


fi 


fi 


g 


g 


<B 


M 


M 


M 




M 


M 


M 


M 


»-H 





<M -M »H O 



>1 >, >, >1 >l O 



U U U » 3 



S « 



rH •rH O -H £^ 

a. a. u X o 



11 



a a a o 



bl u ot ot 

B a 

■0 <0 -H -rH 

u u g g 

o o 10 a 

CO CO 00 OQ 



<M rH >J X S 



8 8 o o o 



CO CO M CO CO U O 



347 



Draft of The California Water Plan Update Bulletin 160-93, November 1993 



Notes & Comments 









^^^ 




TH^B^OK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
STAMPED BELOW 



BOOKS REQUESTED BY ANOTHER BORROWER 
ARE SUBJECT TO IMMEDIATE RECALL 



.40% 2007 



PSL 




LIBRARY, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, DAVIS 



D4613-1 {5/02)M 




Pete Wilson 

Governor 

State of California 



David Kennedy 

Director 

Department of Water Resources 



Douglas P. Wheeler 

Secretary for Resources 

Resources Agency 



ijrVEP'-jlTY OF CALIFORNIA 



3 1 



75 0204 



2709 



•'V : 



■m 



V