Posted on 10/12/2004 11:15:34 AM PDT by lainie
Court brief seeks to include all basin well owners in case
Two large carrot farms are pumping more water from their wells since suing a number of water districts over the districts' usage of the Antelope Valley groundwater basin, claim Los Angeles County attorneys in a brief filed in Riverside Superior Court.
Because of the allegedly excessive pumping, water is being pulled out from the basin faster than the natural recharge rate, a dangerous condition that has contributed to ground subsidence around Lancaster, said Fred Pfaeffle, the county lawyer handling the case.
"If you look carefully through the numbers in the last five years, municipal water use (from groundwater, apart from imported aqueduct water) has remained relatively stable, but agricultural use has increased by approximately 40%," Pfaeffle said.
"That's because there are no limits … We feel that the increase in the production is by these particular (farming) interests."
Bob Joyce, an attorney for one of the two farming companies, said the accusation of increased pumping by the farms isn't true, and he said agriculture in its heyday in decades past used more water than agriculture today.
As far as the county's assertion of basin overdraft and land subsidence, Joyce said: "I don't know if it's a basin-wide problem or a localized problem because of the concentration of (county-operated) wells in the Lancaster area."
Joyce represents Diamond Farming Co., an affiliate of Grimmway Farms, which filed the initial lawsuit in 1999 to protect its supply from the groundwater basin against six water agencies: the Lancaster, Palmdale and Quartz Hill water districts, the AV Water Co., the Palm Ranch Irrigation District and the Mojave Public Utility District.
In 2001, Bolthouse Farms filed a similar lawsuit against the same six agencies and added the Rosamond Community Services District, Littlerock Creek Irrigation District and county waterworks districts 37 and 40, the latter of which supplies water to most of Lancaster and west Palmdale.
Though the parties have engaged in settlement talks for several years, the case has come to a standstill, according to county attorneys, who are asking for the court to adjudicate the Valley's basin, or decide who has rights to how much water per year.
In the latest court filing, the county also is asking permission to sue all other well owners who draw from the basin, so that any settlement includes every water user and is enforceable for all. That could mean 200 to 300 new parties could be added to the case, including approximately 70 mutual water companies and major property owners.
The two carrot growers will oppose the county's request for a cross complaint when it goes before a judge Nov. 12, Joyce said.
"It complicates the litigation and will make it very convoluted … and a huge inconvenience for a lot of other landowners," Joyce added. "It disrupts our ability to seek the very limited thing (the lawsuit is about), a confirmation of our pumping rights."
But Pfaeffle and others watching the situation closely say the issue goes much deeper than the two carrot growers' water rights.
The county wants to store water in the groundwater basin during wet years, when supply from the state aqueduct is plentiful via the Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency. Then it could withdraw the stored water during drought years.
But the county doesn't want to bank water when there are no limits on the amounts of water other users can pump.
Illustrating the impasse, one portion of the county's legal claim reads: "Unless restrained by order of the court, cross-defendants will continue to take larger and ever-increasing amounts of basin water to the great and irreparable damage and injury to the district and to the basin."
In another portion, the brief alleges that using water "for irrigation purposes is unreasonable in the arid Antelope Valley and constitutes waste, unreasonable use … and is thereby unlawful," a statement Pfaeffle seemed to back away from in an interview.
"I love baby carrots as much as the next guy, but it's a desert," Pfaeffle said. "We've all got to eat, but you've got to act responsibly when you know you have a limited, very precious resource we all need to share. Households need water, businesses need water, and you can't do away with agriculture - but you've got to act responsibly."
The opposing attorneys disagree on who has priority rights to the Valley's water basin.
The county's brief claims that its prescriptive rights to the basin, stemming from the fact that the county has pumped and provided water to district customers since 1919, are a higher priority legally than the rights of the farmers.
"It is hereby declared to be the established policy of this state that the use of water for domestic purposes is the highest use of water and that the next highest use is for irrigation," the county's filing reads.
Joyce disagrees, saying that the rights of overlying users - those who own land and draw water for their own reasonable use - have priority over the rights of appropriators, or those who would take the water to assign it to others.
Joyce said the county should have informed landowners in the Valley decades ago that it was pumping groundwater that legally belonged to the landowners.
"I think there is a significant constitutional issue here," Joyce said. "It's surprising that you can have a government entity come in and say they have been taking property (water) over time without making a showing that they did something to let the landowners know they were doing it. How do they meet the due process notice requirement under the Constitution?"
County staff members were off Monday for Columbus Day and could not be reached for comment.
Pfaeffle said his experts are relying on a study by the U.S. Geological Survey in declaring that land subsidence is a serious issue from Edwards Air Force Base south to Lancaster.
"The basin is like a sponge, and when it dries it will contract, and you can have earth separation," he said, blaming the subsidence on over-usage of the groundwater.
In the county's court brief, the county states that over the past 80 years, the groundwater basin has lost 8 million acre-feet of water, and that the current usage of the basin is 140,000 to 170,000 acre-feet per year. The county itself is claiming rights to just under 20,000 acre-feet per year; one acre-foot is the amount of water an average family uses in a year.
Joyce said the wells his farming clients use are pumping just fine, so he can't say if the groundwater basin is drying up. But he did suggest that land subsidence in Lancaster could be caused by Waterworks District 40's wells in the area.
"If there's an increased demand on the water supply, it's likely because of unchecked or uncontrolled growth," Joyce said.
If the county is claiming overdraft of the groundwater basin, Joyce continued, why has it approved housing developments that will presumably drain more of the supply?
The push by developers to construct housing in one of Southern California's last buildable, affordable areas is another of the big themes in the effort to settle the Valley's water questions.
"Our interest is in seeing the city of Palmdale grow and prosper and be a great place for the residents to raise their families and have their businesses, and they can only do that if there is an adequate, reasonably priced supply of water," said Steve Williams, Palmdale's assistant city manager of community development.
"So we are monitoring any and all the efforts as they move forward, including any adjudication and any informal negotiations."
Also watching closely are the Valley's other farmers, who also have a big stake if and when the water basin's annual allotment is divided.
"My group is trying to get some kind of settlement that will be in the best interests of everybody - the farmers, the overlying users and the community," said Gene Nebeker, a Valley farmer who is a member of the AV Groundwater Agreement Association.
"We're trying to protect the rights of all overlying users, from the little folks to the big folks, but we're not trying to do it at the expense of the water districts or the carrot growers.
"I wish the county could have waited a little longer to try to negotiate (before requesting to file the cross complaint)," Nebeker said, "but I can understand, because the county's feeling under so much pressure from the developers."
lhoward@avpress.com
ping
Perhaps if illegal immigration was curbed there might be a better balance of natural resources.
As part-owner of a private well, this kind of thing scares the hell out of me. My county started making noise about taking over private wells a couple of years ago. The mass of people who showed up at the meeting scared the supervisors so much that the topic was shelved.
They want to control everything don't they...
T'was ever thus in California.
Make the golf courses us reclaimed water period! Stop watering medians - use desert plantings. (My husband is a golfer) aside from that, design desert golf courses, called target courses. Water does grow food.............idiots.
Ban grass and lawns
(can't ya tell I hate to mow?)
In California, the big-bucks from developers keep building in spite of water shortages...then the local water sources force us onto rationing...while they are counting their money from the builders.
By the way -- in California anyway, the farmers (agriculture as a whole) USE 80% of the states water!!!!
Why doesn't Bush offer (bribe) the entire West coast with water de-salinization plants?
Sooner or later its going to become necessary, so offer it now and get some votes.
I know a local gentleman farmer and they require him to pay full price for his water, though it is for agriculture.
We get rid of the liberals in power and we get a good start in fixing all that keeps us down IMO.
We have to bring the voters to the point of voting more conservative to fix this kind of bunk.
Stories like this are one of the reasons that when I found a piece of decent mountain land in WV with a good well and several natural springs where water flows out of the ground year-round, I snatched it up.
Well, when ground water is used for agriculture, does it not return to the ground?
not directed at you, lainie
This is out of my expertise so bear with me...
But why couldn't a desalination ocean plant be built that would generate electricity much like the dams at the TVA???
just a thought, I don't know if that would be possible???
I think they already have nuclear desalination plants that desalinate water and generate electricity.
Open a catfish farm!
Water is also a contentious issue in Texas.
http://www.edwardsaquifer.net/pucek.html
Shut those selfish farmers' wells down.
They should buy their carrots at the supermarket, like everyone else!
What if everybody tried to raise their own food?
/sarc off, for those too dense to recognize sarcasm when they see it.
From the AV Press http://www.avpress.com/n/tusty2.hts
Simple solution: Send (deport) the teaming masses back to Mexico and allow LA's population to return home without fear.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.