Thursday, May 05, 2005
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

Water pipeline plan draws united front in opposition

Agency will study impact on rural areas

Southern Nevada must control growth and look for other sources of water before it spends almost $2 billion to pipe groundwater here from as far north as Ely.

That was the consensus Wednesday during a public meeting in Las Vegas that will shape a federal study of the pipeline project proposed by the Southern Nevada Water Authority.

Many of those who spoke said any study of the water authority's plans should include an honest look at growth controls, increased water conservation, new deals for Colorado River water and the desalination of Pacific Ocean water.

"In this case, what happens in Vegas stretches all the way into White Pine County," said Jerald Anderson, who worries that the water authority's pipeline project could dry up rural valleys and wipe out wildlife and family-owned ranches and farms.

"It's not a question of money," Anderson said. "You can't mitigate extinction."

Others lamented what Jane Feldman of the local chapter of the Sierra Club called the "inordinate haste" in which the pipeline project was being developed.

"This pipeline should not be put on the fast track," said Paul Brown of the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada, who called for several years of environmental studies to establish a clear picture of what rural Nevada looks like now.

Before the so-called Clark, Lincoln and White Pine Counties Groundwater Development Project can be developed, the Bureau of Land Management must complete an environmental impact statement and grant the water authority permission to build about 345 miles of pipeline across federal land.

BLM plans to release a draft of its statement in July 2006, with the final version to follow in April 2007.

Water authority officials say the pipeline project could be finished by 2015 and supply the Las Vegas Valley with as much as 200,000 acre-feet of water a year. That amounts to roughly two-thirds of the state's annual share of the Colorado River, which provides Southern Nevada with about 90 percent of its drinking water.

Utah rancher Cecil Garland, who wore denim overalls and a baseball cap to Wednesday's meeting, tried to make his point by turning the tables on the water authority.

"I've come down here to take your water," he said. "What we'll do is sell a bunch of government land and use the money to build a pipeline down to here so we can continue to grow ... our crops and cattle."

Garland was one of several people who made the 5-hour, 300-mile trek from the Snake Valley, which straddles the Nevada-Utah border east of Ely.

Late in Wednesday's meeting, Utah resident Merle Rawlings asked how many audience members supported the pipeline plan. The only hand that went up belonged to a 22-year-old Las Vegas man who declined to give his name. The man said he favored the pipeline because he liked "the potential growth it offers the Las Vegas Valley."

"People want to move to Las Vegas, and we need water so they can," he said.

But audience member Jason Andrew Fowler said something must be seriously wrong with a project that is opposed by a united front of ranchers, outdoorsmen and environmentalists.

"These aren't people who usually agree on things, to put it mildly," Fowler said. "We damned well better listen."

More than 100 people turned out for the meeting, and 26 of them went to the microphone to speak.

Four meetings in the White Pine County towns of Ely and Baker and the Lincoln County towns of Caliente and Alamo drew more than 300 people and produced 200 separate comments.

The Bureau of Land Management will hold another meeting today in Reno, followed by three meetings next week in Utah -- May 9 in Salt Lake City, May 10 in Cedar City and May 11 in Delta.

BLM officials will accept input on what its pipeline study should include through June 15.