Water network says conservation is the answer, not pipeline

By Cy Ryan

Monday, Jan. 30, 2012 | 9:33 a.m.

The Great Basin Water Network says Las Vegas should impose tighter conservation restrictions and raise water rates to discourage waste instead of building a $15 billion pipeline to shift water from rural Nevada to Clark County.

The network, a major opponent of the pipeline, said protesters feel "approval of the applications will sanction and enhance the willful waste of water allowed, if not encouraged by the Las Vegas Valley Water District, contrary to public policy."

It says the water rates in Las Vegas are low compared to other western cities and an increase would result in reduced use. And it says the "Las Vegas Valley population is big enough" and the state should encouraged controlled growth.

The network has submitted a proposed order for state Engineer Jason King to consider when he makes his final decision near the end of March.

The water district submitted its proposed final order Friday asking for rights to 104,854 acre feet annually in four rural valleys and for King to set aside 450 acre feet for future growth in those areas.

An acre foot of water is 325,851 gallons.

The district said the project, to span 20 years, is needed to meet the future growth of Las Vegas and will not harm rural Nevada.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints also has submitted a proposed ruling saying approval of the applications would interfere with the water rights of its Cleveland Ranch in Spring Valley.

It says the 7,000-acre cattle ranch produces 1,750 head of beef a year, which is about 35 percent of the beef production needs for the church's welfare program.

More than 500 people signed up in rural Nevada to protest the applications.

The basin network said granting the applications "would result in the disappearance of wetlands, sub-irrigated meadows, swamp cedars, resulting in the potential for invasion by nonnative species and increased dust emission from bare ground and dried playas."

Approval of the applications of the district would have "devastating impacts to rural communities and their economies and to the environment," said the network.

It says the water district has imposed water conservation measures since 2007 but has not done nearly what other western states have done. The network said "there is substantial additional outdoor landscaping water use that could be dramatically reduced."

In its proposed ruling, the network suggests this language: "The state engineer finds that if the applicant were to implement a more aggressive and effective conservation program, the purported need for the pipeline project would be eliminated."

The network suggests the state engineer find "Further growth is not in the best interest of the Las Vegas community. Neither would it benefit Nevada and the nation. Rather than give Las Vegas more water, the state should encourage growth control, water economy, a sustainable lifestyle and the building up of other communities."