June 1996 Issues Online June 2007 April 2007 February 2007 December 2006 October 2006 August 2006 June 2006 April 2006 February 2006 December 2005 October 2005 August 2005 June 2005 April 2005 February 2005 December 2004 October 2004 August 2004 June 2004 April 2004 February 2004 December 2003 October 2003 August 2003 June 2003 April 2003 February 2003 December 2002 October 2002 August 2002 June 2002 April 2002 February 2002 December 2001 October 2001 August 2001 June 2001 April 2001 February 2001 December 2000 October 2000 August 2000 June 2000 April 2000 February 2000 December 1999 October 1999 August 1999 June 1999 April 1999 February 1999 December 1998 October 1998 August 1998 June 1998 April 1998 February 1998 December 1997 October 1997 August 1997 June 1997 April 1997 February 1997 December 1996 October 1996 August 1996 June 1996 April 1996 February 1996 December 1995 October 1995 August 1995 June 1995 April 1995 February 1995 December 1994 October 1994 August 1994 June 1994 April 1994 February 1994 December 1993 October 1993 August 1993 Select any issue from the menu in this bar.

Demanding Demand Management

Brown lawns and abbreviated showers are facts of life for Californians during drought-time. Industry and agriculture, as well, tighten their belts when the reservoirs run dry. After the rain returns, however, water use habits often rebound to their high, pre-drought levels. The question which Californians now face is whether they will meet the increasing water needs of their fast-growing state through drought-style demand management - i.e. the reduction of demand through greater water conservation and efficiency - or by building new dams, reservoirs and canals.

The CALFED Bay-Delta process, now in the stage of narrowing long-term "options" for meeting increasing water needs while restoring the Estuary's health, is grappling with this contentious debate by developing a common program for demand management within each of its ten current options. CALFED's Bay-Delta Advisory Council (a public advisory group) has established a work group whose goal is to determine which water efficiency measures should be recommended and how they can best be implemented. According to chairperson Judith Redmond, the work group will concentrate on broad policy questions rather than getting stuck in the specifics of how much water will be reduced where.

CALFED's Rick Soehren says the work group is considering a flexible approach that allows local districts to "put together the best mix of water supply, water conservation, and water recycling for their service areas given regional conditions and changes in the water supply picture based on the outcome of the CALFED process." While receiving the strong support of local water districts, this flexible approach concerns the environmental coalition which fears some districts would leave water use efficiency out of the picture. Soehren agrees that regulatory and financial incentives will be necessary to ensure that adequate measures are implemented.

The Westlands Water District is one agricultural water district that has set an extremely positive precedent for local districts' ability to achieve significant water use efficiency. In the wake of the recent five-year drought, the district invested heavily in water-saving equipment and improved farm management practices achieving a per acre water use reduction of over 10% by 1992. The District's Tracy Slavin says other districts have had similar successes that are "just not as widely published." During the drought, Slavin explains, many districts experienced such reduced water supply and increased water costs that investment in drip-irrigation sprigets, pre-irrigation sprinklers, and other more efficient equipment became necessary for survival.

But environmentalists believe that even greater water savings are possible from improved irrigation efficiency and from shifts in cropping patterns away from low-value, water-intensive crops such as alfalfa and irrigated pasture. They are concerned that conservation measures which they view as partial, on the urban scene as well, will be accepted as adequate demand management. Without stronger emphasis on demand management, they fear the CALFED process could prematurely reach the conclusion that new water moving and storing infrastructure is the best solution to California's perpetual water shortage.

Environmentalists have reason for concern. Despite a clear consensus supporting increased demand management, most water agencies involved with the CALFED process seem to think that new water infrastructure is a foregone conclusion. The California Urban Water Agencies' Byron Buck says, "Conservation is part of the solution, not the total solution. California will gain 12 million people in the next 20 years. Conservation can not meet all of the increased demand." The Natural Resources Defense Council's Ronnie Weiner insists that better management of the existing resource could stretch beyond what anyone is willing to see. "Looking to cement as the first solution is what got us into trouble in the first place," she says.

Contact: Judith Redmond, (916)756-8518; Byron Buck, (916)552-2929; Ronnie Weiner, (415)777-0220

«To @@(newsletter_title)@@ Index

[ ABAG HOME | SFEP HOME ]

Copyright © 2002, San Francisco Estuary Project