Water authority calls on Owens Valley ecologist for pipeline testimony

For years, pipeline opponents have invoked California’s Owens Valley as a cautionary tale and a two-word slur.

This time, it’s the water authority drawing a link between the two projects.

During a state water hearing in Carson City this week, the authority presented testimony from Terry McLendon, an ecologist who just wrapped up 10 years of work in Owens Valley on behalf of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.

McLendon testified on Tuesday and Wednesday about potential impacts of large-scale groundwater pumping on the plants and soils of Spring Valley, the vast White Pine County watershed that anchors the authority’s pipeline project.

The wholesale water supplier for the Las Vegas Valley is seeking state permission to siphon billions of gallons of groundwater a year from across eastern Nevada and pump it south through a multibillion-dollar pipeline network expected to stretch more than 300 miles.

The hearing before State Engineer Jason King concerns the authority’s groundwater applications in Spring Valley and three basins in Lincoln County.

Comparisons to California are unavoidable.

In the early 1900s, Los Angeles water officials descended on the Owens Valley in search of water for their growing city. The resulting project drained a 63-mile stretch of the Owens River and reduced Owens Lake to a sun-baked mud flat.

The events inspired the film “Chinatown” and several real-life efforts to sabotage the Los Angeles Aqueduct.

Owens Valley is still a major source of water — and environmental litigation — for Southern California.

Abby Johnson serves on the board of the Great Basin Water Network, which represents about 250 groups and individuals opposed to the proposed pipeline to Las Vegas. She said the authority’s plans pose a similar threat in Nevada, so she wasn’t surprised to hear the subject of Owens Valley come up at the hearing.

“The Owens Valley example, both in cost and scope, is sort of the elephant in the room,” she said.

But water authority officials have long dismissed such comparisons, mostly because of present-day environmental regulations that did not exist when Los Angeles undertook its water project.

Spokesman J.C. Davis said the authority contracted with McLendon in December 2007 because he is a nationally recognized expert in his field — not because or in spite of his consulting in California.

“The fact that he did work in Owens Valley is an interesting coincidence, but it’s not concerning to us because we know there is no scientific basis for the comparisons made by project opponents,” Davis said. “They’re just trying to incite fear.”

McLendon’s testimony Wednesday centered around his analysis of how lowering the groundwater table might alter the kinds of plants that grow in Spring Valley. He said changes to the wetlands, grasses and scrub brush there are unavoidable but can be managed by rotating where, when and how much water is pumped.

“Groundwater use from a renewable source can be managed in a sustainable way. If done inappropriately, it can cause damage,” McLendon said.

Examples of both can be found in Owens Valley, but current range management techniques are working there, he said.

McLendon also testified that “increased depth to water” — because of groundwater pumping, for example — would not cause problems with blowing dust in eastern Nevada as it has in eastern California.

“The dust in Owens Valley is off of a dry lake bed. Spring Valley doesn’t have a lake, it has playas. The two systems are very different,” he said.

The state hearing is set to last through Nov. 18. The authority is expected to wrap up its case by the end of next week. Opponents of the project will have about two weeks to present their witnesses and evidence starting Oct. 31.

King, the state engineer, has until late March to decide how much groundwater, if any, can be safely pumped from the four Nevada valleys.

Contact reporter Henry Brean at hbrean@review journal.com or 702-383-0350.