December 20, 2007

A LOT OF PEOPLE OPPOSE the Southern Nevada Water Authority's plan to siphon rural groundwater to feed thirsty Las Vegas: environmentalists, ranchers and Native American tribes.

Certain animals probably aren't too crazy about it, either, like the Hiko White River springfish, the mouselike California vole and the Southwestern willow flycatcher, as well as other endangered and threatened species.

These animals may prove to be valuable allies in the fight against the multi-billion-dollar pipeline project, as opponents look to the Endangered Species Act as a possible weapon in their arsenal.

Las Vegas CityLife: PLAN's Launce Rake explains why the Endangered Species Act spells trouble for the Southern Nevada Water Authority's effort to use rural groundwater to fuel urban growth.

by MEREDITH MCGHAN

A LOT OF PEOPLE OPPOSE the Southern Nevada Water Authority's plan to siphon rural groundwater to feed thirsty Las Vegas: environmentalists, ranchers and Native American tribes.

 
Illustration by Danny Roberts

Certain animals probably aren't too crazy about it, either, like the Hiko White River springfish, the mouselike California vole and the Southwestern willow flycatcher, as well as other endangered and threatened species.

These animals may prove to be valuable allies in the fight against the multi-billion-dollar pipeline project, as opponents look to the Endangered Species Act as a possible weapon in their arsenal.

A coalition of environmentalists who are against the project -- including the Great Basin Water Network, the Snake Valley Citizens Alliance and the Sierra Club -- has hired lawyer Simeon Herskovits of the Western Environmental Law Center to advise and represent them. He's already pondering the effectiveness of the act to sideline the pipeline. "No option has been ruled out, including legal action," Herskovits says. "There are likely to be vigorous legal challenges because of the determination of the SNWA to run roughshod over the laws. We're not planning one way or another for a lawsuit, but given the number of species, it's an important legal consideration. The SNWA may try to find a legislative fix to get around the ESA."

There are 25 endangered species in Nevada, many of which are in the Great Basin, a vast region that comprises most of Nevada, about a third of Utah and portions of California, Oregon and Idaho. The Southern Nevada Water Authority says it's working well within the confines of the federal law as the agency reaches up into the middle of the Great Basin for water, but environmentalists are skeptical. But how effective a tool can the 1973 federal law be? Looking at other cases far from Nevada's backyard, the Endangered Species Act has a mixed track record.

There is some good news from next door. In a 2005 lawsuit filed by the National Resources Defense Council, federal agencies were found to have violated the act when they renewed water contracts that diverted water from the San Joaquin River at Friant Dam near Fresno, Calif., harming endangered fish and wildlife in the river and the San Francisco Bay Delta. The case was settled in September 2006, and now a bill is making its way through Congress to pay for restoring river flow downstream of the dam to improve water quality and bring back wildlife habitat and salmon runs. "The ESA says we can't exterminate species to allow development," said Launce Rake of the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada, a foe of the pipeline plan. "If the water grab goes through, it will violate laws that were written for just this sort of issue." What's happening in another Endangered Species Act-related case in Atlanta is less heartening. Currently, the Army Corps of Engineers pumps water from Atlanta's only source, Lake Lanier, to Florida and Alabama to preserve endangered fish, and to supply water to a coal-burning power plant. Georgia wants the corps to stop diverting water from drought-plagued Atlanta. In October, the state's congressional delegation introduced a bill that would lift the federal ban on harming protected species in times of drought. Rake said he thinks the water authority will use Georgia's legislation as leverage if Georgia successfully gets an ESA exemption.

"Congress aggressively wants to deep-six the ESA legislatively," he says. "If they pass legislation that the ESA doesn't count if there's a drought, it will be a model for the SNWA and they'll try the same thing here."

Another precedent-setter, according to Rake, is the Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Plan, a bill to set aside more than 8,000 acres of wetland habitats for threatened birds and fish over the next 50 years. Sounds good on paper, but many activists consider it an elaborate dodge of the Endangered Species Act.

Some predict the consequences of suspending the act will be dire in Nevada. In a paper in the September issue of BioScience, UNLV biology Professor Emeritus Jim Deacon writes that 20 species listed under the act depend on the spring water targeted by the water authority, and a total of 347 species will eventually die off if the project goes through. "Computer modeling indicates some effects will be felt in one or two decades, but it may take hundreds of years for some springs to be affected," Deacon says. "The data from the computer models is fuzzy and long-term enough that you could get around the ESA. But my interpretation is that you can't take groundwater without harming species." But Zane Marshall, the water authority's environmental resources division manager, says the water authority must go through an involved process in order to secure water rights. "Fish and Wildlife has to do a biological assessment using the best available science to determine whether an action will jeopardize the continued existence of a particular species," he said. "If Fish and Wildlife determines a species will be endangered by an action, it recommends alternatives." Bob Williams, field supervisor for U.S. Fish and Wildlife's Nevada office, did not return phone calls before press time. Marshall said the water authority has conducted a thorough study of the impact the pipeline project would have. "We've looked at more than 100 species to address inter-basin flow impacts," he said. "We've done surveys of birds, terrestrial invertebrates and plant communities. We're also working with federal agencies to do a regional hydrological model."

But Rake said that's not enough.

"Every scientist I've talked to has come to the conclusion that water tables will drop by 50 to 100 feet and that will cause extinction of rare species and defoliation of the Great Basin," he said. "The water authority hasn't played straight from the get-go. If they're playing straight, let's do some hard science. In the last two months we asked them to do a study, but they don't want to because they know what's going on. They should do a scientific study and publish it in a refereed journal like the Deacon study." Marshall, however, said the water authority has set a precedent for compromising with environmental activists. "In Spring Valley, we agreed to put a hydrological and biological monitoring program in place to mitigate problems if protesters dropped their protests," he said. "A lot of the criticism of the SNWA doesn't recognize these environmental processes. The ESA is a powerful, strict regulation, and it gives the federal government a lot of oversight of our projects." But when the act falls short in oversight, or disappears in a loophole, environmentalists are guaranteed to be vigilant despite the contentiousness of developers.

"I wish I were wrong," Rake said. "It's not fun to take on [water authority General Manager Pat] Mulroy and the development community, but they haven't been playing straight with the public for a long time."

Meredith McGhan is a local freelance writer. She can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it .  

Link to original article here.