Department of Water Resources California Water News: Supply 1/11/10

El Niño may still give us a wet winter, weather experts say

Sacramento Bee-1/8/10

By Matt Weiser

El Niño was predicted to dominate the weather this winter, but a look out the window suggests that forecast has fizzled.

Sacramento rainfall so far this winter is merely normal, and the Sierra Nevada snowpack is only 84 percent of average.

But don't give up on El Niño just yet.

Several weather experts predict El Niño will soon crank open the faucet and blow away the cold, gray skies that have gripped the Sacramento region for weeks. They expect much wetter weather through March.

"I'm not wringing my hands terribly much," said Tim Barnett, a climate researcher at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego.

"Odds are good to see some pretty good storms later in the winter," he said. "How much rain, nobody can really tell you. All I can tell you is, it will be in the upper third of all the wet years."

John Monteverdi, a professor of meteorology at San Francisco State University, said he expects El Niño to begin showing its hand in California next week.

"There are lots of indications that a pattern shift is about to occur," he said.

A crucial point is that El Niño typically doesn't deliver its punch until later in the winter. So it's too early to fear a fourth drought year.

"I don't expect a whopper," said Maury Roos, a hydrologist at the California Department of Water Resources. However, he added, "I'm optimistic we will wind up getting a fairly decent January and February, probably above average."

El Niño is defined as a warming of the equatorial Pacific Ocean that's typically in place around Christmas – hence the name, which is Spanish slang for "Christ child."

This warming of the vast Pacific typically alters weather patterns throughout the Western Hemisphere. In the United States, the Northwest usually gets drier and the Southwest wetter.

Sacramento and Central California, however, sit between these effects, so El Niño effects here can go either way. The Sierra Nevada snowpack – all-important to the state's water supplies – is also hard to predict in an El Niño winter.

Yet El Niño is often overhyped in the media because it has, on occasion, brought memorable and sometimes damaging storms to California.

"There is no doubt that we're having an El Niño," said Bill Patzert, a climatologist at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena. "Now, that doesn't mean it's going to rain. The impact of the El Niño has often been exaggerated."

Patzert doubts this year's El Niño will bring major rains. He said its effect is muted by another phenomenon called the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, a longer-term change that is actually trending toward cooler ocean temperatures.

This winter is considered a moderate El Niño, meaning the ocean warming isn't as great as the historical maximum. This makes rainfall predictions even more difficult.

In an updated forecast released Thursday, the National Weather Service said El Niño strengthened in December. The service still predicts improved odds for above-average precipitation through Jan. 20, especially for Central California, and continuing through March.

In the near term, though, expect more fog through Monday, followed by a chance of rain Tuesday and Wednesday.

A more ambitious prediction comes from Gregg Suhler, whose company, Dynamic Predictables in Columbia, Mo., developed a unique forecasting tool called ATLAS.

Unlike traditional forecasting that relies on climate observations and historical trends, ATLAS uses thermodynamic principles to tap into recurring energy cycles that drive global weather.

Simply put, Suhler said, there is a certain amount of energy in the atmosphere that has to be spent every year in the form of storms. If it isn't – for instance, during a stretch of drought years – that energy eventually builds up to produce very big storms on a regular cycle.

Suhler said that cycle for the Sacramento River basin is about 16 years, and is starting to come back around again.

As a result, Suhler predicts 15 to 20 inches of rain in the Sacramento River watershed in February. If it comes to pass, this could refill some of the state's most important reservoirs, from Shasta to Folsom. It also could cause damaging floods.

Normal February rainfall in the city of Sacramento is 2.8 inches.

"January and February are looking to be a really wet sucker," Suhler said. "We want people to know about it."

He developed the forecast after DWR expressed an interest. The state didn't come through with funding, so he shared it with The Bee.

The ATLAS computer model has been presented at science conferences but has not been published in a peer-reviewed science journal yet, Suhler said.

Experts in conventional forecasting are skeptical.

"Over the last decade, we've had a lot of false alarms about El Niño," Patzert said. "As you look back in the historical record, there really haven't been that many of what I call 'macho El Niños.' "

On the other hand, it's worth looking at the winter of 1994-95. It started out dry. Californians feared that one of the worst droughts in history – officially recorded from 1987 to 1992 – wasn't really over.

Then El Niño caused major floods in many areas of the state in January and March 1995, including $220 million in damage and 28 deaths.

"It turned out to be a heavy year when it was done, but it was a late bloomer," Roos said.#

http://www.sacbee.com/301/story/2446837.html

Enough is enough with desalination lawsuits

North County Times-1/10/10

By Ted Owen

Opinion   

As 2009 ended, the latest attempt to derail the Carlsbad Desalination Plant was rejected by the Coastal Commission. The celebration was short-lived, as two fringe environmental groups, undaunted by yet another defeat, kept up their assault on the project by filing yet another request that the Commission revoke the permit granted to Poseidon Resources in 2007.

For those of you keeping score, that's five lawsuits and another five permit appeals spearheaded by lawyers representing the Surfrider Foundation and Coastkeeper. To date, these challenges have been rejected. In fact, during the last six years, every permitting and regulatory agency has approved this desalination facility and every court petitioned to overturn the approvals has declined to do so.

A recent public opinion survey conducted by the San Diego County Water Authority showed that a whopping nine out of 10 county residents support seawater desalination, and every state and federal elected official from San Diego County has endorsed the project. No matter what your opinion of the project is after all these years, there is no doubt that it is supported by sound science and the law. With construction of the project under way, environmental extremists have no chance of stopping the desalination facility from being built.

So why do they keep up their antics? Because these obstructionists hope to delay this new water supply and add so much cost that Poseidon will eventually be forced to abandon the project. This is foolish.

Nine San Diego County public water agencies have entered into long-term contracts to purchase every drop of water the plant will produce during the next 30 years, and the only thing the opponents are achieving at this point is driving up the cost the ratepayers will have to pay for the plant's drinking water. San Diegans already struggling in tough economic times should be incensed.

It is a shame that San Diego's news media have failed to press opponents to justify their continued opposition. Instead of asking the tough questions, the news media have lackadaisically reported that a new litigant, the California Environmental Rights Foundation, has joined the fray. Who is this group and where did it come from?

The truth is the project's chief antagonist, overzealous litigator Marco Gonzalez, recently represented the Surfrider Foundation, until Surfrider abandoned its legal strategy when it determined that a significant number of its members did not agree with its position on desalination, and there was little chance they would ever prevail in court. So Gonzalez started the group, an organization with hardly any members, designed to lend credibility to his continued legal assault.

Other than the obvious ethical questions, why is this fact important? Because Gonzalez, under the auspices of his foundation, has twice petitioned the Coastal Commission to revoke the project's permit. However, his foundation has no legal standing to request revocation because it was not a party ---- and it did not even exist ---- at the time the commission considered and approved the permits that are the subject of its revocation request.

In his latest permit revocation request, Gonzalez wrongly charges that Poseidon misled the Coastal Commission when it approved the project's greenhouse gas mitigation plan, a condition to the development permit. Never mind that the desalination plant doesn't emit greenhouse gases or that the Coastal Commission does not have the legal jurisdiction to require air quality mitigation, Poseidon did make this voluntary commitment.

In response to Poseidon's voluntary commitment, project opponents attempted to use the greenhouse gas mitigation plan to load up the desalination facility with unprecedented costs they hoped would result in the project's financial collapse. No good deed goes unpunished.

Project opponents were unsuccessful, but now that the Coastal Commission has four new members, Gonzalez is trying to revisit the issue in hopes of generating a different outcome. This tactic begs for review by the attorney general, as the Coastal Commission cannot unilaterally place additional requirements on a vested permit simply because opponents did not like the original decision.

In the end, Poseidon will get past this challenge, too. The public record on this matter is unmistakable and the commission, recognizing the revocation request is frivolous and without merit, will not compromise its integrity ---- and risk a lawsuit ---- to cater to project opponents.

Gonzalez was recently quoted on signonsandiego.com saying he does not care if his legal challenges are ever successful; his objective is to endlessly file appeals in hopes of delaying the project until it finally collapses. This legal conduct might be why Surfrider parted ways with him. Or it could be because opponents have found themselves marginalized by their unjustified opposition to a project that has proven to be environmentally benign.

Consequently, these groups have lost membership and revenue, and if they continue this senseless, obstructionist behavior, they will cost the ratepayers a lot more.

My wish for the new year is that opponents will stop with the nonsense and allow the region to get on with the business of creating high-paying jobs and providing a reliable water supply.#

Ted Owen is the president and chief executive officer of the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce.

http://www.nctimes.com/news/opinion/perspective/article_b38297ec-f2f2-528c-8535-a3fb5a531649.html

New San Bernardino law aims to save water

Riverside Press-Enterprise-1/9/10

By Darrell R. Santschi

San Bernardino developers will be required to submit complicated, carefully calculated landscape plans that conserve water in order to build in the future, under an ordinance recently approved by the City Council.

The ordinance, required under state law to conserve California's drought-shriveled water supply, applies to landscape areas measuring more than 2,500 square feet, including public projects, according to a city staff report.

"It only applies to fairly large developments, commercial developments or unusually large residential developments, where in all likelihood you are going to have to hire a landscape architect," said Deputy City Attorney Don Dimichele.

He said the state Legislature enacted a law nearly a decade ago requiring cities to either adopt a model ordinance prepared by the state Department of Water Resources or enact an ordinance of their own that would be at least as stringent as the state model.

The law only recently became applicable to charter cities such as San Bernardino, Dimichele said by phone.

Under the new ordinance, he said, "You have to prepare documentation that shows what your landscaping is going to consist of and it has to be calculated in advance how much water this landscaping is going to require."

Developers would apply a complicated formula that takes into account how thirsty the plants are and how efficient the proposed irrigation system would be.

"Grass is the thirstiest thing I know of," Dimichele said, so developers would be encouraged to plant drought-tolerant vegetation.

The new ordinance dovetails with an ordinance drafted by Dimichele and enacted on Aug. 17 encouraging private homeowners to replace water-gobbling grass lawns with desert plants and other water-saving vegetation.

That ordinance shields property owners from being cited by code enforcement officers for neglecting their lawns when they obtain a permit to kill off their grass and replace it with succulents and other plants that require less water.

Permits expire on the May 31 following their issue, Dimichele said, because proponents of the ordinance said the planting season for such plants is generally in the winter.

Most people would be expected to stop watering their lawns in the summer to allow them to die in time for the planting season.#

http://www.pe.com/localnews/rialto/stories/PE_News_Local_W_nwater10.4705855.html

California cities adopt landscaping rules in water conservation effort

Inland Valley Daily Bulletin-1/10/10

By Andrew Edwards

New landscaping laws require local governments to establish "water budgets" for future developments.

Water officials often say that 70 percent or so of H20 used at homes goes to plants, not people. The new measures are designed to reduce water use for the yards and gardens of future homes, businesses and government buildings.

"There's going to be a higher focus on drought-tolerant landscaping," said Jeff Simonetti, senior vice president for government affairs of the Baldy View chapter of the Building Industry Association.

The new laws are one more step in developers' approval process, Simonetti said. He did not, however, describe the new measures as a major hindrance to future construction efforts.

Future projects could meet water-saving requirements by setting aside yard and garden space to native plants instead of turf. Other options include greater use of recycled water for landscaping and technology designed to stop sprinklers from watering plants if nature has already done the job.

A 2006 state law, the Water Efficient Landscape Act, required all California cities and counties to adopt water efficiency laws or allow Sacramento-crafted measure to take effect. The act set Jan. 1 as the deadline for municipalities to pass their own laws.

The San Bernardino and Chino city councils both adopted their own laws within the past week.

Chino adopted a law drawn up that a group of Inland Empire agencies called the Landscape Alliance crafted for western San Bernardino County.

The alliance also included the Inland Empire Utilities Agency, Ontario, Fontana, Rancho Cucamonga, Chino Hills, Montclair, Upland and other water agencies.

The San Bernardino and Landscape Alliance measures give local officials authority to craft water budgets for future developers' projects and government construction designed with more than 2,500 square feet of landscaped area.

The threshold is 5,000 square-feet for future projects initiated by homeowners.

The laws include a highly-technical system of calculations designed to be used by planning officials to determine the maximum amount of water that can be used at future homes and businesses that have enough landscaping to meet the laws' criteria.

"It's going to be a learning process for both sides (planning officials and developers)," San Bernardino city planner Terri Rahhal said.

The provisions for water budgets, Rahhal said, will shape developers' plans but she doesn't expect future homeowners to be burdened with onerous water rules.

"It's to get things planted in the first place that people can take care of and water efficiently," she said.#

http://www.dailybulletin.com/search/ci_14161084?IADID=Search-www.dailybulletin.com-www.dailybulletin.com

Water Conservation Could Limit Suburban Lawns

N.Y. Times-1/9/10

By Susan Sward

John Boyle, a 51-year-old venture capitalist in Menlo Park, built a new home on his property more than a decade ago largely to create a big lawn where his children could play football or baseball.

So Mr. Boyle, who is also a city councilman, is particularly sensitive to the idea that a proposed municipal ordinance to cut landscaping watering would prohibit other people from doing the same. He says he applauds conservation but is against the government dictating how to do it.

“I think it is important, where possible, for people to design their yards the way they want,” he said in an interview last week.

The all-American suburban lawn, the backdrop for everything from the illustrations in old Dick & Jane readers to House Beautiful, long ago began to fade in the drought-prone suburbs around San Francisco Bay.

But now a 2006 state law, designed to conserve water by altering landscaping practices, is taking effect, and the changes that began three decades ago are likely to accelerate. One proposal being considered in Menlo Park could restrict lawns on new or reconfigured landscapes to no more than 500 square feet per dwelling unit or to no more than 25 percent of the landscaped area, whichever is larger.

Cities and towns around the Bay Area are scrambling to meet the state-imposed deadline to adopt water conservation landscaping ordinances intended to drive down their outdoor usage — which in this region is usually 50 percent or more of total household use — and many are considering ordinances tougher than the model ordinance prepared by state officials.

The communities must report to the state what they have done by Jan. 31.

Environmental groups call the coming changes a major step forward. But some homeowners — particularly in towns along the peninsula like Los Altos Hills, Palo Alto, Menlo Park, Atherton and Hillsborough with a tradition of water-intensive landscaping — dislike the idea of government limits on gardening choices.

Others think the proposals are too complex. Asher Waldfogel, a citizen adviser to Palo Alto on water use issues, said of that city’s proposed restrictions: “With this ordinance, you’re subject to water use audits, you’re financially held responsible to mulch your lawn, to aerate, dethatch, prune and fertilize. It’s an unenforceable regime that doesn’t make sense.”

Neighboring Menlo Park, like Palo Alto, is trying to design its own ordinance. This approach is allowed by the state law as long as the local ordinance conserves at least as much water as the state’s model. Mayor Richard Cline is not yet sure what form his town’s ordinance will take, but he is sure that it is likely to offend some residents.

“There is a keen sensitivity on the part of many people to any measure that would seem draconian in the sense it would reduce their ability to have a lawn of their own in the size they want on their own property,” he said. “The sensitivity is rather acute.”

But that is not the only reaction, he added. “The other side says, ‘It’s our planet, it’s our climate, we need to conserve water,’ ” he said. “I think that side views a big lawn as a luxury — not something a homeowner has to have.”

The history of local lawns is relatively brief. Kathleen Brenzel, the editor of the garden section of Sunset Magazine, said that when the Spaniards moved in, they brought Mediterranean plants suited to the dry climate. But, she said, “As the influx of people came from the East, they said, ‘Oh, we want our green lawns,’ they wanted English-style gardens.” Sunset’s own seven-acre campus in Menlo Park includes large areas of lawn.

But those who prefer lawns often overestimate the amount of water their turf requires, said John Harpootlian, the chairman of the Los Altos Hills Water Conservation Committee. In two-thirds of Los Altos Hills, where home lots must cover at least one acre, water comes from the Purissima Hills Water District. Per capita residential water use in that district is the highest in the area; the town of Hillsborough 25 miles to the north is close behind.

One of the reasons “we are high is because our lots are larger,” Mr. Harpootlian said. He added, “Households that put in large lawns are always going to be a problem.”#

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/10/us/10sfwater.html?scp=1&sq=Water%20Conservation%20Could%20Limit%20Suburban%20Lawns%20&st=cse

Whispering Sands park to get new water line

Desert Sun-1/11/10

By Kate McGinty

Construction will begin today on a water line at Whispering Sands Mobile Home Park that has been shut down because the property owner and residents could not afford a permanent connection, the Mission Springs Water District said.

Federal stimulus money will pay for the $249,728 project.

“Our efforts to connect Whispering Sands to the MSWD system span many years, and they are now paying off,” said Arden Wallum, general manager of the water district. “This is the last mobile home park on Palm Drive that had its own well and wasn't connected.”

The well that served the 50 residents was shut down by the health department after it became contaminated, according to the water district.

The Mission Springs Water District, which had not previously served the park, set up a temporary water connection in June 2009 to provide potable water.

Construction of the 400-foot line should be wrapped by the end of the week, followed by inspection and testing. It is slated to be in service within several weeks.#

http://www.mydesert.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=20101110314

Progress noted on recycled water project

Pasadena Star-News-1/9/10

By Mike Sprague

Officials from opposing sides of a proposed recycled wastewater line failed to reach an agreement in a meeting lasting more than two hours Saturday, but said that progress was made.

The issue is over a $100 million, 12-mile-long recycled water line that Central Basin Municipal Water District wants to build from Pico Rivera to Vernon.

District officials say the line is critical to mitigate drought problems by lessening the need for drinking water.

But the district's critics - a group of water utilities including cities, companies and special districts - say they are concerned their customers will end up paying for the line because Central Basin won't be able to sell enough recycled water to make it profitable.

Saturday's meeting was the second involving the agencies. More than 30 people were present.

Rep. Grace Napolitano, D-Santa Fe Springs, who had called the first meeting on Tuesday between the southeast-area utilities, also was present Saturday.

Napolitano said it's important the agencies be united to get federal funding for this area.

So far, so good, said Paul Rowley, district manager for Golden State Water Co., which has customers in portions of the southeast area of Los Angeles County, including Norwalk, Santa Fe Springs and unincorporated South Whittier.

"We're making some headway," Rowley said. "I don't think all of the questions have been answered but we're making progress."

Officials said Saturday they believe the atmosphere was better.

"It's less adversarial," said Jim Glancy, director of water resources for Lakewood. "Our comments are not meant to be a knock. We want to make (the project) as successful as it can be."

Those critics gave the district 33 written questions this week. They discussed some Saturday and Central Basin General Manager Art Aguilar promised the written answers would be sent out Monday.

Another meeting will be scheduled in a couple of weeks, they said.

On Saturday, there was a lot of discussion about the proposed water line's financial viability.

Jorge Rifa, Commerce city administrator, said the cities and other utilities are concerned because the process is like buying a car.

"We're not only co-signing the loan but we're making the payments," Rifa said. "The ratepayers are 100 percent on the hook."

Aguilar responded that no public works project gets done without somebody paying the bills.

In this case, it's important to lessen the need for drinking water because there's less of it available, not only in this area but also Southern California and even California, he said.

"We have to get new sources," Aguilar said. "Recycled water is the cheapest. Desalinization is far more costly."

And the days of relying on low-flow shower heads and toilets as ways of reducing water usage have already been maximized, he said.

Aguilar has promised that phase two of the project - from Montebello to Vernon - would be delayed until Central Basin knows who its customers will be.

He also said his staff would analyze whether construction on a proposed $10million water tank should be delayed.

If that is done, phase one probably would be more economically viable, said Christopher Schilling, chief executive officer for Park Water Co., which serves Norwalk.

Central Basin serves a population of more than 2 million people from 24 cities in southeast Los Angeles County.#

http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/rds_search/ci_14159368?IADID=Search-www.pasadenastarnews.com-www.pasadenastarnews.com

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

DWR’s California Water News is distributed to California Department of Water Resources management and staff,  for information purposes, by the DWR Public Affairs Office. For reader’s services, including new subscriptions, temporary cancellations and address changes, please use the online page: http://listhost2.water.ca.gov/mailman/listinfo/water_news . DWR operates and maintains the State Water Project, provides dam safety and flood control and inspection services, assists local water districts in water management and water conservation planning, and plans for future statewide water needs. Inclusion of materials is not to be construed as an endorsement of any programs, projects, or viewpoints by the Department or the State of California.