<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1522" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=4><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'"><?xml:namespace prefix =
o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"
/><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT face=Tahoma size=4><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 14pt; TEXT-TRANSFORM: uppercase; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">water
infrastructure:<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT face=Tahoma size=4><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">Editorial: A
watershed ruling<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on"><B><FONT face=Tahoma size=4><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">Los
Angeles</SPAN></FONT></B></st1:place></st1:City><B><FONT face=Tahoma
size=4><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">
Times – 11/19/05</SPAN></FONT></B><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=4><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=black size=4><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=black size=4><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'">FOR
DECADES, WHENEVER <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:State
w:st="on">California</st1:State></st1:place> began running short of water to
meet population projections, water engineers — "visionaries," they were called —
brought in new supplies from hundreds of miles away. <st1:City w:st="on">Los
Angeles</st1:City> went to the <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Owens</st1:PlaceName>
<st1:PlaceType w:st="on">Valley</st1:PlaceType> and then the Colorado River and
far <st1:place w:st="on">Northern California</st1:place>. <st1:City
w:st="on">San Francisco</st1:City> had the audacity to build a dam and reservoir
right in <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Yosemite</st1:PlaceName>
<st1:PlaceType w:st="on">National Park</st1:PlaceType></st1:place>.<BR><BR>The
days of building big dams and canals are long past. But even today, water
managers are calling for pumping greater volumes from the stressed
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to meet projected growth in <st1:place
w:st="on">Southern California</st1:place>. Their axiom is that people will come
whether there's enough water or not.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=black size=4><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=black size=4><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'">Now ,
finally, a court has challenged that mantra. The 3rd District Court of Appeal in
<st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Sacramento</st1:place></st1:City> has
ruled that managers of the delta should balance the demands of water users with
the demands of the environment. "Population growth is not an immutable fact of
life," the court said in rejecting parts of an environmental impact study on the
operations of CalFed, the joint state-federal program for managing the
delta.<BR><BR>A key finding was that the impact study was insufficient because
it explored various ways of increasing exports from Northern to <st1:place
w:st="on">Southern California</st1:place>, but it never considered reducing
exports. Cutting exports would be one way to lessen the environmental
degradation of the delta. In recent years, fish life has suffered an alarming
decline in the delta as exports have reached record levels. Experts disagree
about whether those two things are connected.<BR><BR>The state is seeking a
rehearing of the case and may appeal to the state Supreme Court. A better course
would be to revise the environmental impact study.<BR><BR>The court ruling comes
at a time when many in government and the water industry are considering whether
major changes are needed in the CalFed program. At the request of Gov. Arnold
Schwarzenegger, the Little Hoover Commission conducted a detailed study of
CalFed, which on Thursday recommended an overhaul of the program's management
structure. Water users have asked the governor to create a blue-ribbon
commission to recommend changes. If he does so, it should be a small body put on
a tight deadline.<BR><BR>State water experts recognize that <st1:State
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:State> is moving into
a new era. The periodic revision of the state water plan now being drafted by
the Department of Water Resources forecasts a future in which new demands will
be met by innovative supply mechanisms, including more sophisticated
conservation programs, expanded programs to reclaim used water, increased water
trades from farmers to urban areas and more "banking" of water in aquifers
rather than surface reservoirs. The department also predicts water problems
increasingly will need to be solved on a regional basis rather than with grand,
statewide transfers.<BR><BR>The court ruling may be heresy to the water
engineers. In fact, it's the new reality. #<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=4><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'"><A
href="http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-water19nov19,0,4085447.story?coll=la-news-comment-editorials">http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-water19nov19,0,4085447.story?coll=la-news-comment-editorials</A><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>