by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright April 4, 2015
All Rights Reserved.

                Imposing the toughest mandatory restrictions on water use ever, 76-year-old six-term Gov. Jerry Brown directed the State Water Resources Board to order a 25% cut in the state’s 400 local water districts.  Water districts around the state control largely residential use but also impact farms and other water-intense businesses.  Whatever’s causing California’s record drought, snow-pack levels are at their lowest levels in years, without much prospect of a reversal in the foreseeable future.  Brown commissioned the water districts to enforce the cutbacks, including rate hikes and fines if needed for those out of compliance.  “People should realize we are in a new era,” Brown told an audience in the High Sierras, speaking in Phillips, usually covered with five feet of snow.  “The idea of your nice little green law getting watered every day, those days are past,” said Brown, urging conservation.

             Brown’s 2014 call to state residents to reduce water consumption by 20% didn’t come close to meeting targets, prompting him to impose the 25% mandatory reduction by the state’s 400 water districts.  “This will be somewhat of a burden—it’s going to be very difficult,” said Brown, realizing the uphill battle with conservation.  “Today’s order for the governor should not only alarm Californians, but the entire nation should take notice that the most productive agricultural state in the country has entered uncharted territory,” said Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), concerned about the agriculture and fish-and-game industries.  McCarthy urges Brown to back legislation to open two large desalination plants in the state.  While there’s nothing wrong with conservation, McCarthy knows the state must do more.  Desalination plants are a costly way of solving California’s drought problem.

             Instead of considering the TransCanada oil pipeline, AKA, the Keystone XL, Gov. Brown and the California legislature should partner with Canada building a TransCanada aqueduct, bringing water 744 miles from the Fraser River in British Columbia to the San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta, the northern-most tip of the California Aqueduct where water could easily flow into the Owens Valley and down existing canals into Southern California.  Relying on conservation, desal plants, future snow-pack or weather patterns should not deter California from doing what’s necessary to secure abundant water supplies in the foreseeable future.  Water from the Colorado River or Owens Valley was subject to Rocky Mountain or Sierra snow-pack, something affected by climate change.  Originating in the Canadian Rockies, the Fraser River has an average flow of 3,475 cubic meters per second.

             Considered the largest flow by volume from Canada into the Pacific Ocean, the Fraser River is the fifth largest river in Canada.  Canada’s Water Supply and Sanitation agency would be amenable to sell and supply California’s Water Resources Control Board the necessary water to end California’s drought. Canada has abundant supplies of water that currently go wasted, generating no revenue for the Canadian government.  Building aqueducts through British Columbia, Washington State, Oregon to California would be a doable project, creating thousands of infrastructure jobs for Canada and the U.S.  Conservation and desal plants can’t provide a long-term fix for California’s current drought.  Climate scientists have no crystal ball when it comes to future changes in rainfall and snow-pack.  Building a TransCanada aqueduct is the best possible fix for California’s current drought.

             Given the uncertainties of climate change, Brown and the California legislature need to look for a long-term fix, not passing the buck to homeowners for using too much water.  When water’s bountiful, few people talk of conservation because it’s not necessary.  While there’s nothing wrong with pushing conservation when it comes to water use, there’s something very wrong with not looking for a feasible long-term solution.   With Canada drowning in water and generating no revenue from its excess runoff, it’s high time to consider diverting some of the Fraser River water to Southern California.  Building another 744 miles of aqueduct could be easily done over existing state easements without any environmental consequences.  Felicia Marcus, chairwoman of the State Water Resources Control Board, needs to focus on long-term fixes to the drought, not ways to punish consumers.

             California has a golden opportunity to capitalize on Canada’s abundant water resources, create new jobs and secure the nation’s—and world’s—leading agricultural businesses.  Urging consumers to conserve more water doesn’t impact climate change or provide a reliable improvement in the water supply.  Desalination plants have their place but provide potable water at over 10-times the cost of river water running about $100 per acre-foot.  “We are in a drought unlike one we’ve seen before, and we have to take actions that we haven’t taken before,” said Marcus, looking only at conservation.  “We are looking for success, not to be punitive,” said Mark W. Cowin, director of the California Department of Water Resources,” not thinking outside the box to Canada to provide abundant water resources to the state.  Creating the TransCanada aqueduct is not so far-fetched.

About The Author