Statement of Michael J. Spear

Deputy Secretary of the Resources Agency

Before the Senate Natural Resources and Wildlife Committee Hearing

November 7, 2001

Santa Monica, California

 

 

My testimony will provide an overview of the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) water transfer’s relationship to the problem of the Salton Sea (Sea).  When I am through you will hopefully have a rough idea of the environmental and economic consequences of the decisions to be made and the implication of not making those decisions quickly.

 

            First, the easy one.  The IID transfer is a necessary and fundamental feature of California’s water future.  Without the transfer both Southern and Northern California water problems become more severe.  You will hear more about this from the next panel; suffice it to say the transfer and the QSA need to be completed on time, next year.

 

            The transfer will, however, accelerate the increase in salinity of the Sea and hasten the point in time from late next decade to late this decade (just 7-8 years from now) when the fish of the Sea begin to disappear.  That is the central point everyone needs to understand.  The transfer makes it imperative that policymakers, whether concerned about water, the environment, or the budget, and most are concerned about all three, know there will be significant consequences whether they act or not.  To save the Sea, approximately as we know it today, a decision must be made, funded, and implemented  within this decade.  It is almost impossible and likely cost prohibitive to delay a Sea restoration decision for more than a couple years once the transfer starts.

 

            Some background about the Sea.  At its current elevation of –227 feet below mean sea level the sea has a maximum depth of 51 feet, is 35 miles long and 15 miles wide.  It is the largest lake within the state at 234,000 acres or 366 square miles.  Visually, the Salton Sea is no Lake Tahoe, but biologically it is very rich.  The productivity of the fishery is thought to be one of the highest in the world, and it is one of the birding hot spots in the nation with over 400 species.  During migration the Sea is home to most of the world’s population of some fish eating birds like eared grebes and white pelicans.  Increasing salinity will cause the loss of the fishery and that could threaten with extinction certain bird species.

 

            The recent concern for the Sea stems from dramatic bird die-offs of the mid 90s.  In 1992 150,000 eared grebes died of unknown causes.  In 1996 thousands of white pelicans and a 1000 of the federally and state listed brown pelicans died from avian botulism.  These events triggered the Congressional interest led by the late George Brown.

 

            This Congressional attention led to the passage of the Salton Sea Reclamation Act of 1998  which called for restoration and cost sharing options for the Salton Sea by January 2000.  A draft report was released last year.  The alternatives were met with criticism and a draft report on new alternatives is due soon.

 

            Preliminary information from the new alternatives, assuming a water transfer and a new base inflow to the Sea of 1.2 million acre feet (maf)/year and future inflows of 1.0 maf/year, a probable scenario, shows capital costs for restoration in the $250 – $350 million range and the present value of annual operational costs in the range of $100 – $500 million.  The only option that controls both sea salinity and a sea elevation is also the least expensive.  It includes on land salt ponds and land use conversion.  But it has the drawback of requiring double the land area (90,000 acres) of some other options.  A third party economic impact analysis, to analyze the effect on Imperial Valley economy and jobs of this land use change has been completed.  The study shows a gross dollar output loss of $20 – $60 million and the loss of 500 – 1000 jobs depending on the type of crops not planted.  Some of these losses would be mitigated by construction jobs and water and land payments.

 

            What is not yet clear is the cost of doing nothing to restore the Sea after the transfer begins.  The effects of the increase in salinity have already been mentioned but there will also be a decrease in sea level elevation by as much as 1 foot per year for the next 15 - 20 years.  A 12 feet drop exposes 40,000 acres or 1/6 of the sea bottom.  The air quality and odor effects on downwind land and people are not known but may be significant.  Of course land and recreational values of the sea will drop.  Costs to ameliorate such effects, if possible, are unknown.

 

            The draft report to Congress is due out next spring with a final by the end of next year.  Assuming the Federal administration, Congress and California make a decision soon after the report is submitted, there is time to restore the sea even with a transfer, if restoration is the choice.

 

            In summary, the information needed for California to move forward comfortably with the IID transfer is now coming into focus.  There are feasible options for Salton Sea restoration, if that is our choice.  With this information California can protect its water future by working aggressively on the transfer.  California can also make wise decisions about the Salton Sea and insure that costs are borne equitably by the Federal, State and local interests.

 

For More Testimony