{"id":302031,"date":"2023-05-30T05:35:00","date_gmt":"2023-05-30T12:35:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/calmatters.org\/?p=302031"},"modified":"2023-05-30T10:10:08","modified_gmt":"2023-05-30T10:10:08","slug":"mono-lake-water-diversion","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/calmatters.org\/_es\/environment\/water\/2023\/05\/mono-lake-water-diversion\/","title":{"rendered":"Los \u00c1ngeles ha tomado agua del ic\u00f3nico lago Mono durante 82 a\u00f1os. \u00bfCalifornia lo detendr\u00e1?"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t

In summary<\/strong><\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\n\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t

Environmentalists say it’s past time for California water officials to halt Los Angeles’ diversion of Mono Lake’s tributaries. But L.A. officials insist that water is a tiny but vital part of the city’s water supply.<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\t\t\n

Lea este art\u00edculo en espa\u00f1ol<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As trickling snowmelt in the Sierra Nevada slowly raises Mono Lake \u2014  famed for its bird life and outlandish shoreline mineral spires \u2014 advocates are pressuring state water officials to halt diversions from the lake\u2019s tributaries to Los Angeles, which has used this clean mountain water source for decades. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Environmentalists and tribal representatives say such action is years overdue and would help the iconic lake\u2019s ecosystem, long plagued by low levels, high salinity and dust that wafts off the exposed lakebed. The city of Los Angeles, they argue, should simply use less water, and expand investments in more sustainable sources \u2013 especially recycled wastewater and uncaptured stormwater. This, they say, could help wean the city off Mono basin\u2019s water for good. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In December, the Mono Lake Committee, the basin\u2019s leading advocacy group, sent a letter to the State Water Resources Control Board requesting an emergency pause on water diversions from the lake. The water board hosted an online workshop<\/a> to discuss the matter in February, and it is now considering further actions to restore the naturally saline lake.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Geoff McQuilkin, the Mono Lake Committee\u2019s executive director, said the lake will probably rise another four feet in 2023 \u2014 reason, as he sees it, to double down and halt exports. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThis is a year to take advantage of,\u201d he said. \u201cWe\u2019d like to lock in these gains.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

But the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power is pushing back. The agency began diverting the Mono basin\u2019s water in 1941, and officials say this supply, though a minute fraction of its overall demands, is a vital part of its portfolio, which includes water imported from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and the Colorado River. The agency also has brushed away claims that the basin\u2019s wildlife \u2014 especially nesting birds \u2014 are threatened by the city\u2019s diversions. \u201cThe Mono Basin ecosystem remains healthy<\/a>,\u201d the department recently stated. Moreover, the city has already cut exports from the lake\u2019s tributaries by 85%, starting in the early 1990s, when landmark hearings triggered tighter rules on sending the basin\u2019s water to Los Angeles. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThat\u2019s approximately 70,000 acre-feet per year,\u201d said Anselmo Collins, the city water department\u2019s assistant general manager of the water system, during the February workshop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Mono
Mono Lake on the eastern edge of the Sierra Nevada on May 20, 2023. Photo by Sierra Farquhar for CalMatters<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Historic diversions to Los Angeles amounted to between 80,000 and 100,000 acre-feet, and more, of the basin\u2019s water annually. Beginning in 1995, that was cut to between 4,500 and 16,000 acre-feet annually. Mono advocates say that\u2019s still too much.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The state water board has remained tight-lipped about how it may respond to the demands from Mono Lake\u2019s advocates. Samuel Boland-Brien, a supervising engineer with the board, said the agency plans to hold a hearing, though he couldn\u2019t say when, to discuss options for recovering Mono Lake.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Its surface elevation is currently around 6,380 feet, and in the past 30 years it has never risen much past 6,385 \u2014 still seven feet below a target recovery level of 6,392 feet, established in 1994<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe need to reach that level isn\u2019t optional,\u201d Boland-Brien said. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

While existing rules on Mono Lake diversions are designed to manage the basin\u2019s ecosystem \u2013 broadly categorized as public trust resources \u2013 they don\u2019t take into account the needs of the basin\u2019s indigenous residents, namely the Kutzadika\u2019a tribe<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dean Tonenna, a Kutzadika\u2019a botanist, said his people were left out of the 1990s negotiations that led to the existing diversion rules. \u201cThe tribe has not been meaningfully engaged in any of the discussions or workshops that led to the decision,\u201d Tonenna said. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

He said <\/strong>\u201ca racist legacy\u201d led to the lowering of the lake and still compromises his people\u2019s connection to the ecosystem. Now, he and other local tribal members want their interests considered. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThat\u2019s the funny thing \u2014 it\u2019s such a drop in the bucket. I think the department recognizes they don\u2019t need the water, but they just keep it because they have a right to it.\u201d <\/p>Bruze Reznik, executive director of the environmental group Los Angeles Waterkeeper<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Brian Gray, a senior fellow and water law expert with the nonprofit Public Policy Institute of California, said the dilemma over how to restore Mono Lake could prompt a review of the historical decisions that gave Los Angeles ownership of a share of the basin\u2019s water. If state officials conclude that the basin would benefit from having more water, he said, the water board \u201cwould have an obligation to reconsider its water rights decision, and specifically address the question of whether Los Angeles should be cut back, partially or completely.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The lake\u2019s defenders insist this would have almost no impact on the city\u2019s water supply. The city\u2019s 2023 Mono Lake diversions will amount to about 1% of the district\u2019s annual water use<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sean Bothwell, executive director of the California Coastkeeper Alliance, said opportunities for water recycling and stormwater capture, as well as simply using less water in the first place, could more than make up for the relatively small amount of water the city draws from the Mono Lake basin. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe Department of Water and Power really does not rely on this lake … so why continue to destroy Mono Lake when they have these other options available?\u201d he said. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Boland-Brien noted that the 1994 decision called for \u201ca hearing\u201d if the target lake level wasn\u2019t reached by 2014.  When that time came, the lake was 12 feet below the intended level, and dropping, for a severe drought had begun. Lake advocates agreed to give it more time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now, nine years later, the lake level is about the same as it was then, but there is still no firm date \u2014 or even an approximate one \u2013 for when that overdue hearing will occur.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThat\u2019s where a lot of the focus is now \u2013 when will that hearing be scheduled, and what will be determined in terms of whether additional actions are necessary?\u201d Boland-Brien said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The legacy of Mono Lake<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

For decades, essentially the sky was the limit on exporting Mono basin water to Los Angeles. The legal cap, written into the city\u2019s water rights, was 167,800 acre-feet per year, with no considerations for the environment or local users. Exports ranged as high as 156,000 acre-feet \u2014 a peak recorded in 1978 \u2014 and in the 1970s and 1980s, exports averaged more than 80,000 acre-feet annually. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

This rate of diversion put the lake on pace to eventually disappear \u2014 a fate met long ago by Owens Lake, 125 miles to the south of Mono and sucked dry by the same aqueduct system. By the 1980s, Mono Lake\u2019s surface had plunged 45 feet. Half the lake\u2019s volume was sacrificed for Los Angeles taps, toilets, lawns and pools, and its salinity level doubled, according to the Mono Lake Committee<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

A landmark lawsuit<\/a> challenged the city\u2019s diversions in 1979, and a court injunction halted exports in 1990. After weeks of hearings in 1993 and 1994, the state water board ordered the city\u2019s water department to reduce its diversions to a maximum of 16,000 acre-feet \u2014 deemed a sustainable level. The goal was to draw the lake over 20 years back to the target of 6,392 feet. Officials determined that this would protect native shrimp, flies, birds and geologic features, while preventing lakebed dust from endangering local communities. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The new rules included some key triggers: at a lake level below 6,380 feet, diversions are cut by 72%, and below 6,377 feet, diversions are banned.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But in the past 29 years, the lake level has only partially recovered.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe\u2019ve given it almost 30 years with the rules they established in 1994, and it hasn\u2019t worked,\u201d said Martha Davis<\/a>, a board member of the Mono Lake Committee. <\/p>\n\n\n\n