Water officials revise supply estimates for valley

Tuesday, Aug. 23, 2005 | 9:55 a.m.

Southern Nevada Water Authority officials today presented new estimates of how fast water supplies will run out and how much needs to be done to meet the needs of the Las Vegas Valley's ever-growing local population.

The UNLV Center for Business and Economic Research is now estimating that there will be close to 3.2 million people in Clark County by 2025 instead of the previous estimate of 2.75 million people.

That new estimate adds 450,000 potentially thirsty customers to the water authority's future rolls, Ken Albright, the authority's resources director, told an advisory committee.

The revised estimates mean that without developing new water resources, the urban area would be 84,000 acre-feet short of a year's supply by 2010, up from the previous estimate of a 32,000 acre-foot shortage. By 2035, the deficit would run to 446,000 acre-feet, up from 320,000 acre-feet.

An acre-foot is about 326,000 gallons, or about enough water for two families for a year.

John Hiatt, a Las Vegas conservationist and a member of the advisory committee looking at recommendations for handling the valley's growing water needs, was concerned that the revised numbers mean the agency would fall short of meeting the region's needs in the coming years.

Brett Hardy, a representative on the committee from Mesquite, said the revised population estimates are "a bombshell."

Pat Mulroy, Water Authority general manager, said the increase in population estimates would be handled if the agency gets the ability to develop groundwater resources in White Pine County and other targeted rural areas.

If all of the projected sources of water are developed, including diversion of the Muddy and Virgin rivers, groundwater resources in rural areas in Clark, Lincon and White Pine counties, and recovery of "banked" water stored in Arizona, the agency would have an 8,000 acre-foot surplus by 2035.

Greater water conservation would provide a more significant hedge against that thin margin of safety, Mulroy said.

"It means we need more conservation," she said.