Thirsty Las Vegas Eyes a Refuge's Water

Hydrologists worry that tapping aquifer beneath a bighorn sanctuary could threaten rare wildlife.

By Bettina Boxall Times Staff Writer June 21, 2004 DESERT NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE, Nev. — Water is not what comes to mind in this sun-bleached landscape of crumpled mountains and creosote-coated basins. But that's what Las Vegas thinks of when it glances across its northern border at this sprawling bighorn sheep refuge, the largest federal wildlife sanctuary in the lower 48 states. The city of water-themed casinos and ever-expanding subdivisions is looking here to begin a massive pumping project that would reach deep into rural Nevada to tap an ancient aquifer running from western Utah to Death Valley National Park in eastern California. In Nevada's scrappy outback, the plans have prompted comparisons to Owens Valley, Los Angeles' infamous eastern Sierra water grab of a century ago. Federal hydrologists worry that the first round of pumping, which if approved by the state engineer could be in operation by 2007, could starve springs on public lands. They are concerned not just for this place but for several other national wildlife refuges in southern Nevada that provide havens for endangered species found nowhere else in the world. In Death Valley and surrounding Inyo County, Calif., officials believe the pumping could jeopardize water supplies. "There's no doubt the aquifer will be drawn down. It's a question of magnitude and where it will occur," said Death Valley hydrologist Terry Fisk. "In our view, the withdrawal of water … could potentially harm our senior water rights." The Southern Nevada Water Authority, the agency that manages the region's water supplies, insists the pumping will have minimal, if any, effect. If they're wrong, authority officials say, they'll turn off the offending pumps. "We've made a commitment if one of our wells causes environmental degradation, we'll shut it off," said Pat Mulroy, the agency's general manager. The groundwater development is just one of several fronts her agency is pursuing as it hunts for more water for fast-growing Las Vegas, which gets most of its municipal supply from the fully claimed Colorado River, now in the grip of what some experts say might be the worst drought in 500 years. The authority has obtained rights to divert water from the Virgin River northeast of Las Vegas, expressed interest in buying irrigation water from other states and lobbied the federal government for a bigger share of the Colorado. "Something has to give. Southern Nevada is the economic engine in the state of Nevada," said Mulroy, who is known in Southwestern water circles for her combative style. In the last year, regional water demand dropped thanks to drought measures, reversing a more than decade-long trend when water use jumped from about 300,000 acre-feet to more than 500,000 acre-feet. (An acre-foot is the amount of water that would cover 1 acre to a depth of 1 foot. One acre-foot is enough to supply two average homes for a year.) But every month, the Las Vegas metropolitan area continues to grow by another 3,000 to 4,000 people. The groundwater system that the authority is proposing to meet new demand would take a decade to fully develop and could eventually deliver enough water to supply more than 300,000 homes. The Nevada congressional delegation introduced a bill last week that would grant the water authority pipeline rights of way across federal land. The authority would like to start here, pumping enough water from beneath the 1.6-million-acre desert range and nearby basins to annually fill a 3-mile-high football stadium. Established in 1936 to protect desert bighorn sheep, the refuge has the stark, unforgiving contours of a place where summer temperatures reach 117 degrees and annual rainfall averages 4 inches on the valley floors. More than three-fourths of it is pristine enough to have been recommended for inclusion in the federal wilderness system. "We have some very serious concerns about the effect of withdrawing that much water," said Dick Birger, a veteran U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manager who oversees the desert refuge and three other much smaller refuges nearby. "Any creature that can live in the Mojave [Desert] is already on the ragged edge. There's no fat in survival in the Mojave." At the other wildlife sanctuaries — Moapa Valley, Ash Meadows and Pahranagat — warm springs bubbling from the earth provide a home for remnant fish and aquatic life left over from prehistoric times, when Nevada was a place of lakes and plentiful water. "The species we're talking about occur only here," said Cynthia Martinez, an assistant field supervisor for Fish and Wildlife in southern Nevada. "When the water's gone, they're gone. There's no place else to put them." Refuge officials think spring flows at Moapa are already dropping because of nearby groundwater pumping started in the late 1990s by a local water district. Water managers say the drought might have more to do with the Moapa spring decline than any existing pumping, a disagreement that illustrates the quandary officials could face if Las Vegas withdraws large amounts of groundwater and springs start drying up. "Who decides who's to blame? Who decides who's having the impact?" wondered Tim Mayer, a hydrologic engineer for the Fish and Wildlife Service's western region. "It's very hard to agree on these things." The Southern Nevada Water Authority says the worries of federal agencies are unjustified. "I don't disagree that any time you change scenarios there may be a minimal impact. That is the key, minimizing," said Kenneth Albright, resources director at the authority. "Our proposal is to develop a series of resources that we can manage. We don't plan on pumping or diverting from any resources 365 days a year." But Death Valley officials are concerned — about springs that supply eastern portions of the park as well as Devil's Hole, a tiny holding just across the Nevada border. The water-filled underground cavern was the site of a 1970s legal battle resolved when the U.S. Supreme Court halted groundwater pumping by a nearby ranch that was threatening to wipe out its resident endangered fish. And a few miles to the west, officials in Inyo County are nervously following the pumping plans. "We are cautioning Nevada to be careful," said Greg James, special legal counsel to the county, which has had protracted battles with Los Angeles over Owens Valley water exports. "Once the water is going to the city, it's very hard to get it back, and it's hard to restore the environment that's been affected." The Las Vegas pumping would draw at least in part from a vast underground aquifer known as the carbonate aquifer, after the type of rock it occupies. It extends from beneath western Utah through eastern and southern Nevada to Death Valley in eastern California. Several miles thick, it holds an enormous amount of water, much of it stored for thousands of years after falling as rain or snow during much wetter eras. "It's a huge aquifer system," acknowledged Dan McGlothlin, supervisory hydrologist for the National Park Service's water rights branch. "But the recharge in relation to the storage is so small, and if you look at it as a bathtub with water spilling over — if you draw water down so you no longer have flow over the top of the bathtub, you have essentially dried up the springs." How quickly and by what amounts the aquifer is recharged is a pivotal point in the pumping debate. "The real issue for water development is the current rate of recharge, and the major area of contention in science is determining that," said Kimball Goddard, who runs the U.S. Geological Survey's Nevada water program. If significantly more water is withdrawn from the aquifer than is annually replenished through rain and snow, the aquifer level will drop. Environmentalists complain that there is no room for mistakes in places like Death Valley and the desert refuge. "Nobody is denying Nevada has a need for more water," said Don Barry, executive vice president of the Wilderness Society and a former Interior Department official who oversaw the Park Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service during President Clinton's final term. "I just think a national wildlife refuge should be the last place you go to get it." Barry and others are especially critical of the water authority and the Sacramento regional office of the federal Fish and Wildlife Service drawing up a plan to drill monitoring wells on the desert refuge. They contend the agreement helps the authority skirt a tough legal standard that says activities on federal refuge lands can't interfere with wildlife conservation. "It really looks like a political deal in the making, and the short end of the stick goes to the refuge," maintained Jamie Rappaport Clark, executive vice president of Defenders of Wildlife, who directed the Fish and Wildlife Service from 1997 to 2001. Steve Thompson, the California-Nevada director for the service, defended the agreement as the only way his agency could learn about the groundwater beneath its land. "We don't have the resources to look into that. We need help," he said. "They offered help to do that. But it doesn't guarantee them anything." If the state engineer approves the pumping, Fish and Wildlife would still have to grant access to the water authority for full- scale pumping on the refuge. If the agency doesn't get it, Albright said, wells could be drilled outside the refuge on adjacent federal land. The desert refuge claims are just the beginning. There will be many more to come as Las Vegas pursues applications to pump water under a swath of Nevada extending from Ely to Las Vegas. The pumping system ultimately would reach more than 200 miles north into White Pine County, where the 8,500 residents are eyeing the plans warily. "Some fear that we'll tap into something and adversely affect farms and ranches and the ecosystem," said Paul Johnson, chairman of the county commission. Johnson predicts Las Vegas won't stop in White Pine. "They're going to be like a junkie looking for a fix of more water," he said. "We really think there is a growth issue. They can't just continue to grow at the rate they are without a much larger solution than the water we have."

Western drought worse than Dust Bowl

By ANGIE WAGNER Associated Press Writer 06/18/2004

LAS VEGAS -- The drought gripping the West could be the worst in 500 years, with effects in the Colorado River basin even worse than during the Dust Bowl years, scientists at the U.S. Geological Survey say.

"That we can now say with confidence," said Robert Webb, lead author of the new fact sheet released Thursday. "Now I'm completely convinced."

The drought has produced the lowest flow in the Colorado River on record, with an annual average flow of only 5.4 million acre-feet at Lees Ferry during the period 2001-2003, adjusted for the effect of Glen Canyon Dam. By comparison, during the Dust Bowl years, between 1930 and 1937, the annual flow averaged about 10.2 million acre-feet, the report said.

Scientists use tree-ring reconstructions of Colorado River flows to estimate what conditions were like before record-keeping began in 1895. Using that method, the lowest five-year average of water flow was 8.84 million acre-feet in the years 1590-1594. From 1999 through last year, water flow has been 7.11 million acre-feet.

"These comparisons suggest that the current drought may be comparable to or more severe than the largest-known drought in 500 years," the report said.

Environmental groups say water managers should take heed.

"The water managers, they just continue to pray for rain," said Owen Lammers, director of Living Rivers and Colorado Riverkeeper. "They just say, well, we hope that things change and we see rain."

Lammers said the report reinforces the need to figure out a better way to manage the Colorado River before reservoirs run dry.

"Once our reserve supply is gone, we have no plan of action for what to do," he said.

The report said the river had its highest flow of the 20th century during 1905 to 1922, the years used to estimate how much water Western states would receive under the 1922 Colorado River Compact.

The compact should now be reconsidered because of the uncertain water flow, said Steve Smith, a regional director for the Wilderness Society.

"We've got to figure out a new way of distributing the water that exists in the Western United States and be a lot more deliberate about our cautious and efficient use of the water," he said.

The report didn't surprise water managers.

"The big lesson is communities cannot afford to put all their eggs in the proverbial basket. You need .. a diverse portfolio of resources," said Adan Ortega, spokesman for the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, the largest wholesale water supplier in the country.

Ortega said the water district is increasing water storage, buying water from farmers and investing in alternatives to the Colorado River.

Vince Alberta, spokesman for the Southern Nevada Water Authority, said water use in southern Nevada this year is actually down and the authority continues to enforce watering restrictions, impose fines for water waste and promote conservation.

"I think we can be successful managing this drought, but it's going to take a unified effort with everybody making sacrifices," Alberta said.

Herb Guenther, director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources, said the agency continues to plan for a continuing drought.

"It's serious, but the sky is not falling. Of course, we wish it would in the form of rain," he said.

Webb said predicting when the drought will end isn't easy because the Colorado River is difficult to forecast.

"It's sort of a split-personality river. It has headwaters up in Wyoming as well as headwaters in Colorado," Webb said. "Those two regions tend to respond to different things. ... We can't explain it very well."

Droughts seldom persist for longer than a decade, the report noted. But that could mean the current drought is only half over.

"If you're a betting person, you will bet that we will come out of this drought next year," Webb said. "It's a very severe event and these things tend to end fast. There are other indications, though, that suggest that this drought could persist for as long as 30 years.

"We don't really know."

------

EDITOR'S NOTE -- Angie Wagner is the AP's Western regional writer, based in Las Vegas.

Heat's on agriculture

Unrestricted growth and unrelenting drought threaten the future of farms and ranches in the Mountain West

By Gary Nabhan for Headwaters News

Something unprecedented in scale but chronic in its effects on our livelihoods and landscapes is happening all around us in the American West: drought. Recently, the water level of Lake Powell has dropped more than 100 feet, and federal agencies predict that the lake may be empty by 2007. In central Arizona's Verde Valley, eight of 10 springs have dried up, and irrigators have been told that they must cut their deliveries to forage crops by a third. Drought-driven bark beetle infestations have killed off more than two-thirds of the trees on a million acres of New Mexico, Colorado and Arizona, increasing fire hazards that can further diminish rangeland productivity. While some of these changes are "natural" and largely beyond our control, most have been aggravated by having already-scarce water supplies shunted from working landscapes in the West to cities where both growth and per capita use remain largely unchecked. In a survey of residents living in every county of Arizona, less than a third of the urban dwellers in metro Phoenix and Tucson felt their consumption patterns had been affected in any way by the drought, whereas well over two-thirds of rural dwellers had already suffered impacts on their economic and food security. In a recent forum aimed at advancing food security and sustainability in the West, I was asked which was the worse threat to the future of Western ranching and farming, drought or land conversion for urban sprawl? If we step back a moment, and look at the course of Western history, it becomes clear that there is a curious but insidious connection between the two. It is now dawning on many Western livestock producers that pre-drought levels of cattle, sheep and hay production in the region will never again be achieved, at least not during our lifetimes. The reason for this is that whenever a prolonged drought occurs in the rapidly urbanizing West, more water is permanently shunted away from agriculture to maintain the growth of cities and their suburbs, which then further subdivide and fragment the West's working landscapes. Take a look at the fate of Arizona's farms and ranches since the prolonged drought began to worsen around 1997. Because farmers in the state have faced diminished irrigation supplies, higher water prices, reduced yields and rising input costs, they are currently shouldering nearly a quarter more debt than they did at the start of the drought. The average number of Arizona farms and ranches lost each year over the past half-century has been 82, but since the onset of the current drought, it has increased to 100. Many of the region's prime farmlands have been converted to condos, retirement homes, malls and golf courses that demand more water be permanently allocated to them. Ironically, there are ample indications that while farmers are adopting water-conserving practices that have cut their per-acre use by one-fifth over the past quarter-century, per capita urban use in Western cities has increased by one-quarter over the same period. What many fail to see is that current water allocation policies exacerbate the meteorological drought faced by farmers and ranchers, creating a "political drought" that threatens to undermine our food security. The facile assumption of such developer-biased policies is that the food production lost in the West due to urban expansion can always be made up by importing meat, vegetables and grains from offshore sources. But as Americans are quickly learning, food produced and imported from beyond our borders may be fraught with perils: mad cow disease, contamination from E. coli and salmonella, high pesticide residues and farm worker abuse. In a recent public opinion survey undertaken for the Center for Sustainable Environments by the Social Research Laboratory at Northern Arizona University, it became clear that well over half of consumers contacted are deeply concerned about the quality, safety, traceability and production proximity of the food they eat. And yet, while such strong concerns are prevalent among every economic class and ethnicity now living in the West, they have yet to influence state and federal water and land policies that determine how secure our food future will be. Let's look in detail at what the public wants that our federal water projects, land-use agencies nor land grant agricultural colleges are not currently offering. Recognizing that local food production contributes to food security and safety, 59 percent of Arizonans surveyed strongly support and 33 percent somewhat support setting aside a portion of each community's water supply to be used exclusively for local food production. Surprisingly, 80 percent claim they would be willing to pay as much as 10 percent more than their current food bills if locally produced food became accessible to them. In addition, 24 percent of those surveyed are concerned enough about meat safety to want to purchase more locally produced and packaged range-fed beef and lamb. Of those, 71 percent claimed they would pay more for range-fed beef and lamb produced and direct-marketed by neighboring ranchers, given current concerns about meat safety and traceability. While this should be good news to the farmers and ranchers forging the marketing efforts of the American Grassfed Association, there remain many obstacles in the way of both producers and consumers. One of them is the disappearance of smaller-scale slaughterhouses and meat-processing plants near where range-fed and grass-finished beef and mutton are produced. In the aftermath of the mad cow scare last winter, federal agencies began to close down some of the few small-scale meat processors, claiming that they didn't have enough inspectors to frequently monitor such operations. This was an infuriating move in the wrong direction, since most critics agree that large feedlot and slaughterhouse operations run by the likes of ConAgra and Tyson are more likely to chronically violate food-safety rules. Range-fed cattle and sheep are among the few food-production strategies that do not require large water diversions to function, and conservation-oriented ranchers in particular need the hurdles lowered to provide their neighbors with fresh, safe, sustainably grown meat. Westerners will inevitably face further impacts of drought driven by erratic and changing weather conditions. But it is time to end the agricultural water shortages caused not by drought itself but by greedy developers who push our region's population beyond the carrying capacity of our land and its water supplies. Such "developer-driven droughts" threaten to rob the West of its food security and the health of its rural communities, while leaving no water in our rivers and lakes for fish or wildlife. To arrest these trends, the Center for Sustainable Environments has launched a marketing campaign for regionally grown food products grown with water-conserving practices: "Get Your Fresh From Canyon Country." It is time that water-conscious consumers and environmentalists help farmers and ranchers stay on the land through this era of record drought, rather than standing by passively while land developers further diminish our region's chances to have a sustainable food future.

Dr. Gary Nabhan is co-author of a new policy paper on drought, water scarcity and food security in the West, available at www.environment.nau.edu

Saturday, May 29, 2004 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

EDITORIAL: Reclaimed water a go

Another way to conserve

The county sanitation district's push to use more "reclaimed" water in an effort to conserve the valley's drinking supply makes good sense.

Some people, of course, might be squeamish about irrigating parks and other areas with treated sewage. But their fears are misplaced.

In the first place, it's nothing new here. Many golf courses already use reclaimed water -- and have done so for years without any problems. Henderson and the city of Las Vegas have reclamation facilities.

In addition, the technology exists today to ensure recyled water is virtually indistinguishable from drinking water.

"Reclaimed water at the standards we have is as clean or cleaner than the drinking water in most of the world," said Marty Flynn, spokesman for the Clark County Water Reclamation District (which recently upgraded its name from the less appealing "sanitation district").

The district hopes to have a pilot program up and running by the end of next year at the park near Sam Boyd stadium. It hopes to expand that to other area parks within a few years.

The cost of building additional pipelines and pumping stations throughout the valley to handle the non-potable water will run into the millions, but can be accommodated under the existing sewage rate structure.

Given the current drought -- and the valley's limited water supply -- it's wasteful to maintain the region's parks and playing fields with drinking water. As the technology surrounding reclaimed water advances, Southern Nevada would be foolish not to take advantage of it. LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL ¥ SATURDAY, MAY 29, 2004

May 9, 2004, NYTimes

For 28 Cows and Precious Water, a Man's Got to Sit in Jail

By CHARLIE LeDUFF

WILLCOX, Ariz., May 4 — "Sometimes a man has to die for what he believes in before anyone knowed he truly believed it," said Wally Klump, a 70-year-old rancher who sits in jail because he refuses to remove some cows from federal land.

Mr. Klump has spent the last year behind bars for repeatedly thumbing his nose at a judge's order to remove 28 cows from the Dos Cabezas mountain range here in southwest Arizona, land owned by the Bureau of Land Management but ranched by the Klump clan for 100 years.

Last week, Judge John Roll of Federal District Court summoned Mr. Klump from solitary confinement and asked him again if he had had a change of heart. Mr. Klump said he had not and was returned to jail. Now Mr. Klump promises to spend the rest of his natural days behind bars in canvas shoes instead of on the open range in cowboy boots.

"It's a land grab and a water grab," Mr. Klump said. "The government's trying to steal my land."

Mr. Klump acknowledges, however, that he and his family do not own most of the land, but have the common-law claim to the use of nearly 500 square miles of it. He said he believed he would lose his claims to the coveted groundwater if he did not have cattle drinking it.

At the heart of the dispute, Mr. Klump says, are liberty, water and preservation of the Western life that he will not idly watch evaporate.

"I want to show the American people how to live," he said in the visitors' room of a private jail in Florence, a two-hour drive northwest of his ranch near Willcox. The Klumps own about 50 square miles of land.

Government agents have decided not to round up Mr. Klump's livestock as they have done in the past, since he has threatened to shoot them dead. While this is impossible from behind bars, his family remains on the land and the government prefers not to provoke them.

Mr. Klump said he had never been in jail before. He has never been to New York or Los Angeles or even Amarillo, Tex., for that matter. He is tall, his body without a trace of excess. His face is severe, his hands soft from disuse, and he walked about the jail with a defeated shuffle.

"Ownership by the government is tyranny," he said. "Ownership by the rich is feudalism. The people become slaves. I'm talking about land and liberty. I'm doing this for the people. Not for me."

And here he wept, drew a laborious breath, wiped his nose in disgust at himself and said, "Shoot."

Without enough private land to raise a profitable amount of livestock, ranchers have long leased adjacent land owned by the government. The arrangement for decades was friendly, even when the government rearranged the process in 1934 to stop desperate cattlemen of the Dust Bowl from killing each other.

Mr. Klump said the government even helped his father put a barbed wire fence around his allotment. Ranchers used the allotted land pretty much as they saw fit until the mid-70's when environmental regulations severely curtailed agricultural operations and grazing rights. It is these grazing rights Mr. Klump is charged with violating.

At the same time, agencies like the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service staked claims to water that had been claimed by ranchers decades ago, in case the ranchers should ever abandon their properties or forfeit them.

The West is growing at a pace that has it tapping every water source. The population of Arizona, for instance, is expected to grow by 40 percent in the next 20 years.

Despite spending $5 billion on an aqueduct to deliver Colorado River water 2,400 feet up and 335 miles across the state, Arizona still draws about 45 percent of its water from the ground. Every year the subterranean water is depleted by 2.5 million acre feet and officials wonder where the future's water will come from. Recycled toilet water is one idea. The retirement of ranchers is another.

"Anyone whose livelihood depends on the water is feeling the pinch," said John Lavelle, a spokesman with the Arizona Department of Water Resources. "You can't blame a man like that for feeling threatened."

About 20,000 ranchers have their cattle grazing on federal land in the West, and how the land and water regulations are being enforced is the key to their survival or death.

Wayne Hage, a Nevada rancher, lost his grazing and water rights for what the government said was mismanagement of public property. His case has been wending its way through the federal courts for more than a decade. He argues that under the Fifth Amendment the government cannot take property without paying for it and that grazing permits and water rights are property.

"The essence on Western lands is water," Mr. Hage said. "And water has reached the status of oil. The easy way for the government to get it is take away your grazing rights. We won't let that happen without a fight."

And in this spirit, Wally Klump refuses to remove the cows from the land.

"If I take the cows off, they'll take the root of my water away," he said. "My family withers on the vine."

The dispute with the Klumps has nothing to do with water rights, said Mike Taylor, deputy director for resources for the Bureau of Land Management in Arizona, though he confirmed that the government has staked claims on top of Mr. Klump's.

"We do not covet his water, O.K," Mr. Taylor said. "There is no desire for that. All we want from Wally is compliance with grazing regulations. That means removing the cows."

One of the original settler families in Arizona, the Klumps have battled the bureau since the late 1980's. The Klumps lost lawsuits and countersuits and appeals. The government confiscated cattle and sold them at auction. It canceled easements and claims to smaller springs. It placed liens on private parcels of property. It seized bank accounts. All were humiliating losses for the Klumps. This time, Mr. Klump said, he got fed up with losing.

Citing the constitutional right to own firearms, Mr. Klump has threatened to take "Second Amendment action." He has threatened to do so in a paid advertisement in a local paper. He has personally threatened to do so in the sheriff's office. He said it again to a visitor in jail.

"The Second Amendment is my ace, and they know it's my ace," he said. "The founding fathers gave the individual a gun to fight the tyranny of the government. What's that mean? The bearer can kill someone in government if the reason is justified. But it's never been tested. I told them, you take those cows, I'll kill you as mandated by the Second Amendment."

Believing him, the government has refused to remove the wayward cows, instead letting Mr. Klump corrode in prison, passing the time with the Bible and the music videos on Black Entertainment Television.

The prisoners support Mr. Klump, clap him on the back and call him old-timer. The townsfolk of Willcox supported him until he started talking about killing people. Now they say he should take down the barbed wire, let the government on the public's land and take the cows off.

"He lost a whole lot of support in town with talk like that," his brother Wayne said. "It's a fine line between a nut case and a man with principle, but you got to understand that even if you whip a lamb so many times, he'll come after you."

Wayne Klump is a tall, erect, real-deal cowboy struggling with an icy sense of guilt.

"I wonder if I took those cows off myself, would that get Wally out of jail?" he asked. "I don't think Wally would like that though."

Parched Vegas

With growth, drought both relentless, the desert metropolis faces a crisis

By Stuart Leavenworth -- Bee Staff Writer - (Published May 2, 2004)

LAS VEGAS - Every night in this neon-lit town, the fountains gush, the gondolas float down Venetian canals and lava spews from a faux volcano on the strip.

Given this lavish display of liquid entertainment, it's hard to believe Las Vegas is gripped by drought. But after betting on the Colorado River for decades, the city is holding a losing hand.

East of Las Vegas, Lake Mead is nearly half-empty. The river that feeds it has shrunk to half its normal size. Drive around the suburbs and you will see lawns being ripped out and landscapers planting desert shrubs.

One thing you won't see is Vegas slowing down.

Since 1964, Las Vegas has grown faster than any U.S. metropolis, from 130,000 to 1.6 million people. It is an economy grounded in gaming and golf course retirement living, industries that now compete for a diminishing resource.

"Las Vegas is a city of illusions," said Jeff Van Ee, a Sierra Club activist who has led a quixotic battle for slower growth in his adopted town. "Ever since the days of Bugsy Siegel, people have come to Las Vegas to gamble and win. And now we are gambling again."

Vegas' current gamble focuses on the good will of neighboring states, which it will need if the Colorado River doesn't quickly turn around. Unlike Arizona and Southern California, southern Nevada doesn't have large amounts of water banked in underground reservoirs, or big farm districts that might be willing to sell some of their supplies.

Arizona and California water leaders are in discussions with Nevada about ways to help it bridge the drought, but some fear that Las Vegas easily could become dependent on their in-state supplies.

"The real issue, in my opinion, is the incredible growth of Las Vegas and the fact they don't have any water to meet that growth," said Sid Wilson, manager of the Central Arizona Project, which provides water for farms and cities in that state. "They have maximized what they can do for local groundwater development, and it may be some time before they can obtain other supplies."

Named after the meadows that periodically sprouted in this valley, Las Vegas gets a mere 4 inches of rain a year and probably would be sparsely inhabited still if not for Hoover Dam. The filling of Lake Mead provided southern Nevada with a secure supply of 300,000 acre-feet of water - enough for at least 600,000 households. Many thought that supply would quench southern Nevada's thirst for centuries. They guessed wrong.

"The crisis started in the late 1980s, when we began to see major increases in water consumption because of growth," said Patricia Mulroy, the hard-driving general manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority. Up to that point, the Las Vegas area was consuming 3 percent to 4 percent more water each year. Suddenly, water consumption was growing by 20 percent annually.

To better manage its supplies, the Las Vegas Water District joined forces with other agencies to form a regional water authority, with Mulroy as its captain. One of Mulroy's early actions was to sit down with major casino owners, such as Steve Wynn, developer of the Bellagio, and seek money for a major conservation campaign. Wynn quickly wrote out a $100,000 check, she said, and urged others to match it.

Why would big casino owners finance a conservation crusade?

"Because the perception of Las Vegas running out of water has huge financial effects on Wall Street. That just starts rippling through everything," Mulroy said. "The banks start getting squeamish about giving loans. The whole economy of southern Nevada could crater."

Helped by casino bucks and development fees, Mulroy's agency has launched what some say is the most aggressive outdoor water conservation campaign in the nation. The Southern Nevada Water Authority pays homeowners and businesses $1 per square foot to tear out water-sucking lawns and replace them with native plants or artificial turf. The region is removing a football field worth of lawn every day, she says, and is spending $20 million to $30 million a year to do it.

Bill and Erminia Drobkin are two homeowners who recently jumped at the water authority's offer. Owners of a Las Vegas pawn shop, the Drobkins in 1995 bought a 7,000-square-foot home with a 1.5-acre yard. After they installed lawns, their water bills quickly soared to $1,000 a month, partly because of rising utility rates.

So over the last few years, the Drobkins have torn out all their grass and re-landscaped the yard with Mediterranean-style gardens, pergolas and strips of artificial turf.

"We like it a lot more now," said Bill Drobkin, who says the couple's monthly water bills have dropped to about $200 in the summer. "All you have to do is get out your leaf blower and blow the turf."

Water authority officials say the incentives and restrictions helped reduce consumption between 2002 and 2003, but not without political fireworks. Some golf course owners have griped about strict limits on watering, and last year, owners of business parks blocked a proposed ban on nonresort fountains. Some homeowners complain that they pay high water bills to subsidize the exuberant water displays on the Vegas Strip, a notion Mulroy says is misguided.

"The idea that hotels are wasteful water users is perception, not reality," said Mulroy, noting that nearly all of the strip casinos utilize recycled water for their fountains.

Moreover, she said, the big hotels generate a lot more economic benefit than do thousands of people watering their lawns.

"The hotels consume only 3 percent of southern Nevada's water and they generate 70 percent of the state's gross product," she said. "They employ 50 percent of the people in southern Nevada and use a lot less water than a microchip producer in Silicon Valley."

A 51 year-old native of Germany, Mulroy never set out to become a Las Vegas water wonk. In fact, she can vividly recall her first visit to Vegas, when she stayed in a hotel room with a mirror above her bed.

"It was so bizarre," she recalls.

Needing a job, Mulroy joined the Las Vegas Water District in 1985, and despite little experience in the male-dominated world of water management she quickly was running the place. Now, in trying to ride out the drought, she says, one of her top goals is to avoid impacts on local employment.

"People aren't going to stay at the Venetian if the canals are dry," Mulroy said. "The minute a hotel starts losing business, it starts laying off people."

In the eyes of many Las Vegas leaders, the cheapest source of readily available water is residential water, which accounts for 65 percent of all water used in southern Nevada. Most of that water is used outdoors, often in ways that are woefully inefficient.

On a recent afternoon, one could see excess sprinkler water flowing down street gutters in two upscale neighborhoods, Desert Shores in northwest Las Vegas and Lake Las Vegas in Henderson. Both neighborhoods have large artificial lakes, which are prone to evaporation and are regularly refilled.

Some business leaders say such practices must change in Las Vegas, regardless of how long the drought continues.

"We have to recognize we live in a desert," said Tom Warden, government affairs manager for the Howard Hughes Corp., which is developing a relatively water-efficient community called Summerlin on the west side of the city. "Las Vegas uses more water per-capita than Phoenix, which gets more rain. We have to acknowledge the resource."

Right now, southern Nevada's main water resource is shrinking Lake Mead, which provides about 90 percent of the region's supplies. Prior to the drought, Mulroy hoped to store surplus Colorado River water in Arizona and Nevada water banks - an option that is vanishing as Lake Mead ebbs.

As of last week, the reservoir had dropped to an elevation of 1,135 feet, about 58 percent of capacity. Lake Powell, the upstream reservoir that feeds Mead, was 42 percent full, with about half its normal inflow.

If Mead drops 10 feet more, Interior Secretary Gale Norton will be required by law to shut off "surplus supplies" to California, Nevada and Arizona. And if the lake drops another 42 feet, she may start cutting the basic water entitlements of the three lower-basin states, something that never before has happened.

Wary of federal intervention, Mulroy and her counterparts in the Colorado River basin are discussing projects that until recently were thought to be decades in the future. They are talking about interstate water banks and desalination projects. Southern Nevada is trying to secure groundwater rights in outlying counties and tap water from two sensitive tributaries of Lake Mead.

"The battle has just begun," she said.

Along with supply problems, the water authority is grappling with increasing pollution as Lake Mead drops. Las Vegas' treated effluent flows into the Las Vegas Wash, a canyon that has been heavily eroded over the years. From there, it flows back into Lake Mead itself, where the organics-rich water tends to hang on the top of the lake - near the city's intake pipes - when the reservoir is low.

To secure cleaner water, Mulroy is studying plans to relocate both its intake pipes farther out into Lake Mead, a project that could cost hundreds of millions of dollars.

"It is a time problem," said Mulroy. "How fast can we build these kinds of facilities? We could have quite a crisis."

Even some of Mulroy's environmental critics say they sympathize with her situation. As head of a water agency, said Van Ee, Mulroy doesn't have authority over residential development. Water conservation is helping, he said, but the population boom easily could outpace it.

As a result, Van Ee says, southern Nevada could end up fighting decades of water battles, both in state and within the Southwest, as demands increase.

"It is clear Pat Mulroy will do whatever it takes to keep the water flowing," Van Ee said. "I don't know how long she would last if she had to tell Las Vegas, 'I can't get you water to grow.' "

Related link

Las Vegas Valley Water District: Drought Restrictions

About the Writer ---------------------------

The Bee's Stuart Leavenworth can be reached at (916) 321-1185 or sleavenworth@sacbee.com.

Looming Colorado River shortage forcing tough choices in the West By Seth Hettena ASSOCIATED PRESS

10:03 a.m. May 1, 2004

GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK, Ariz. – The Colorado River runs cold and fast through the Grand Canyon, a postcard picture of the water wealth that greens farms and slakes the thirst of booming cities.

But there's a lot less to the Colorado than meets the eye.

Five years ago, the vast reservoirs at both ends of the Grand Canyon were essentially full, brimming with water for showers, kitchen sinks, irrigation and ornamental fountains. Today, they are both half empty as drought in the region enters its fifth consecutive year, making this the driest five-year period on record.

The river supplies water to 25 million people in seven states and more in Mexico.

But with no end to the drought in sight, the Interior Department may be nearing the first declaration of a water shortage on the Colorado River, said Bennett Raley, the department's assistant secretary for water and science.

Such a declaration would mean a cut in the amount of water that can be drawn from the river, Raley told reporters during a 224-mile rafting trip through the canyon in April.

"If current trends continue ... the secretary would be forced to take action certainly within three years and potentially within two," unless the states offer a solution, Raley said.

The severity of the cut would be up to the interior secretary, but even a small reduction would ripple across the West. The 1,400-mile-long river grows U.S. and Mexican crops, generates electricity, supports a huge recreation industry and delivers water to some of the nation's driest and hottest cities, including Phoenix and Las Vegas.

Drought is already doing what environmentalists could only dream about: It's draining Lake Powell, the reservoir just upriver from the Grand Canyon that submerged hundreds of miles of scenic canyons and countless archaeological sites.

Powell is so low that hikers are beginning to explore glorious sandstone canyons once submerged under 100 feet of water. The lake has fallen to 42 percent of capacity, its lowest since it was filled in 1970.

At the downstream end of the Grand Canyon is Lake Mead, the huge lake formed by Hoover Dam. It is at 59 percent of capacity and could reach the same state as Powell as early as 2008.

Las Vegas is almost entirely dependent on Lake Mead for water, and is worried about the effect continued drought could have on its explosive growth. The city is stressing conservation to avoid a self-imposed drought emergency, and water managers are ripping out water-guzzling lawns.

In a shortage declaration, Arizona would be the first to suffer. Under a 36-year-old compromise the state now regrets, Arizona would lose all the Colorado River water that now goes to Phoenix, the nation's sixth-biggest city, before California would lose a single drop.

Colorado, Utah, New Mexico and Wyoming are worried as well. Under a 1922 accord they would be required to cut their own water to guarantee a supply to California, Arizona and Nevada.

While the states depend on a steady source of water, nature is anything but steady. A study of tree rings at the headwaters of the Colorado River found evidence of a drought as recently as the 16th century that lasted 20 years.

In fact, tree rings have led scientists to believe that much of the past century was unusually wet and that more dry years could lie ahead, said Robert H. Webb, a hydrologist who studies the Grand Canyon for the U.S. Geological Survey and is co-author of "Floods, Drought and Climate Change."

"We have no idea how long this drought is going to last," Webb said. "Every indication says this one's gone beyond all our past experience."

Raley is pushing the states to do something unusual: share the water. The best chance of avoiding a shortage may lie in California, Nevada and Arizona working together to help each other. One possibility is an interstate water bank in Lake Mead that the three states could share.

However, when it comes to water, the states are more used to bickering than cooperating. Arizona and California waged legendary battles over the Colorado, including Arizona's comical effort to stop construction of a dam intended to divert water to Los Angeles by sending five soldiers to the river in 1934.

During the rafting trip, Raley asked three water managers from Arizona, California and Nevada what they would do, hypothetically, to prevent the interior secretary from declaring a shortage next year.

As they discussed the problem, the age-old feud between California and Arizona flared again.

"I'm not going to be looking to California to help me out. I'm not figuring Arizona's going to do much to help California until the reservoirs turn around," said Sid Wilson, general manager of the Central Arizona Project, the 336-mile concrete channel that carries Colorado River water to Phoenix and Tucson.

Wilson did say, however, that Arizona is trying to help Nevada.

Pat Mulroy, general manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority, says she will have to turn to Arizona or California for help if the river continues to shrink.

But Mulroy isn't optimistic.

"All the legal mechanisms are set up for disaster," she said. "We can't seem to get the idea that if we share we get so much further."

Water woes

Arizona must plan for vagaries of Colorado River

Apr. 18, 2004 12:00 AM

The West's long-running drought is forcing many communities that depend on the Colorado River for water to impose tough conservation measures. For the third straight summer, Denver and its suburbs will face water restrictions. Las Vegas has imposed limits on watering lawns, washing cars and using patio misting systems. Lake Powell, which straddles Utah and Arizona, is at its lowest level ever - 42 percent of capacity. The reservoir feeds Lake Mead, which stores water for Arizona, Nevada and California. If the drought continues for another two or three years, Powell could be dry by 2007. Downstream, the picture is a little better, but not much. Lake Mead is at 59 percent of capacity. For greater Phoenix, the drought is a paradox. No mandatory restrictions on water use are in place here because there's no need, according to officials. Voluntary conservation measures are working. New code requirements for toilets and shower heads have helped reduce water usage. Thus, backyard pools are full. Green lawns dot the landscape. Yet behind this happy face, Valley reservoirs operated by the Salt River Project are at about 48 percent of capacity. The forecast for inflows is only 42 percent of normal. SRP is in new territory because it has never experienced a long drought; this one is in its ninth year. To reduce reservoir withdrawals, SRP has reduced allocations by one-third, pumped groundwater and purchased surplus Central Arizona Project water. The CAP has truly served its purpose as envisioned - it's the region's lifeline. And it's essential to understanding the Phoenix region's unique status. Through the CAP aqueduct flows 1.5 million acre feet of Colorado River water each year. It's enough water for more than 6 million people, but 400,000 acre feet is for agriculture and the rest is shared between cities and tribes. Because cities aren't taking their full allocations, SRP has been able to buy CAP water. Arizona's Water Bank has been buying water too, prudently storing enough for about 7 million people. It's water that will supplement city supplies in times of shortage. Tim Henley, the water bank's director, says modeling of various drought scenarios indicate the water won't be needed until 2025. That's the good news, and helps explain why few people in metropolitan Phoenix are worried, unlike rural Arizona towns that don't have a CAP. But there's a fear that the drought might last 10 more years. And with Lake Powell so low, Colorado River basin states are starting discussions on what to do in times of shortage. Nobody's faced this dilemma before. There's no criteria; no guidelines because it's never been this bad. Arizona has the most to lose in the battle for water. That's because in exchange for the CAP authorization Arizona agreed to junior status - in times of shortage it would lose its water first. Arizona probably could withstand a 33 percent reduction, or 500,000 acre feet of its CAP water. Recharge programs and agriculture would be the victims in such a scenario. Cities would feel the pinch if the shortages were greater. State water users will meet next month to try to reach an agreement on how to handle a shortage. Arizona would take that agreement to talks involving all seven basin states - Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, and Wyoming in the upper basin and California, Nevada and Arizona in the lower basin. Obviously, Arizona would like to revisit its junior status. Whether other basin states would agree to do so is hard to say. By law, the upper basin must deliver into Lake Powell 7.5 million acre-feet each year for use by the lower basin states. But what happens if states decide not to release the full amount, claiming they've released more than the minimum for years? Or what happens if they must choose between fulfilling an obligation to the lower basin or shutting off supplies to Colorado's western slope? It's clearly a new, uncertain time on the Colorado River. It's essential that the basin states discuss these issues of shortage while there's still time. Moreover, it's important for the Valley to understand what it means to live in a desert, and to conserve water.

Sunday, March 21, 2004 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

BATTLING THE DROUGHT: The water use myth

Despite major casinos' splashy use of water, their actual water consumption is small

By ROD SMITH GAMING WIRE

Gaggles of visitors stroll up and down the Strip, agog over the spectacle, especially features such as the fountains, the tropical landscaping, and the assorted pools and water features.

"Awesome. But you'd think when they tell us we have to order water (in hotel restaurants), they'd tell them they have to shut down the water works and cut out the tropics," notes Maggie Sullivan of Boston.

That's part of the myth of Las Vegas.

Southern Nevada Water Authority General Manager Pat Mulroy says that in reality, hotel-casinos consume a very small proportion of the water used here.

In fact, she says, local hotels account for 7 percent of the area's total use, even though their visitors account for an average of 14 percent of the people in the valley at any given time.

Another reality is that water consumption in Nevada is actually low on a per capita basis compared with the nation. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, Nevada ranks 36th in population but 41st in water consumption among the 50 states.

Finally, Mulroy says the amount of water hotel-casinos consume is miniscule on average, compared with the total amount of water that is piped into the hotels. In truth, most of the water goes to room use and other guest amenities, all of which is then returned to the system, purified and recycled into Lake Mead for everyone to use again.

"I don't care about (hotel-casino) use (because) 80 percent of the water goes back in the system. It has no impact on water consumption," Mulroy said.

However, she said the authority does care about the hotels' landscaping and cooling towers, even though they account for only 20 percent of the water piped into the properties.

"That's the exact opposite of the typical (residential) customer who uses 70 percent of their water outside," Mulroy said.

University of Nevada, Las Vegas professor and casino industry expert Bill Thompson agreed with Mulroy.

"The biggest water problem in the valley is personal lawns. If we have a major crisis, the government should mandate that we not water our lawns at all until the crisis is over. We could then proceed to dealing with waste at casinos, but we need to recognize that this is a minor part of the problem," he said.

Mulroy does note, however, that the averages can mask enormous discrepancies in relative water use between different hotel-casinos and what they may be doing to cut their consumption.

How much water a hotel-casino and its guests consume depends on the size of the property and the amenities they offer, Mulroy said.

For example, water consumption at Circus Circus is very low per room, 51,000 gallons a year. Even though it is an older property, it has few water features, little landscaping and no spa or similar amenities. It therefore illustrates that what happens inside the resort is more important than its age, she said.

On the other hand, water consumption per room at casinos such as Sunset Station and Green Valley Ranch is very high, 346,000 gallons and 752,000 gallons, respectively, because they have few rooms but vast amenities.

Still, Station Casinos adheres to watering restriction guidelines in Henderson and Las Vegas, and most of its restaurants have implemented a policy of only offering "water upon request" and a plan to minimize the use of linens to reduce water needed for laundering.

By comparison, MGM Grand, the largest single hotel in Las Vegas, uses more water than any other property in Las Vegas, but only modest amounts on a per room basis, 94,000 gallons, thanks to modern water management systems.

For example, more than half of the total acreage at MGM Grand and the surrounding land owned by parent company MGM Mirage has been converted to xeriscaping, or landscaping using low-water consumption, desert plants and ground materials. This compares with 1995, when 85 percent of the total acreage was turf and 15 percent was xeriscaped.

Turf requires 60 gallons of water per year per square foot, compared with xeriscaping, which requires 20 gallons of water per year per square foot.

MGM Grand has further increased water efficiency by using two water wells to supply water to the cooling tower for air conditioning, irrigate the landscape and operate its water feature, all of which amounts to saving the water authority about 120 million gallons of water a year.

On the other hand, the tourists gawking at the fountains at Bellagio are not all wrong.

Of the top 10 hotel-casino water users, Bellagio uses more water per room than any other Strip property by far, but that is not to say it is snubbing its nose over the issue.

The casino company recently removed more than 20,000 square feet of turf from the MGM Grand property and converted it to rock mulch and xeriscaping, converted more than 1.5 acres of shrub-landscaped areas from overhead spray irrigation to drip irrigation to save up to 80 percent of its water, and replaced all parking lot planters with water-wise landscape.

Mandalay Resort Group is similarly managing its water resources.

Mandalay spokesman John Marz said his company has replaced thousands of feet of sod at its hotels with water smart landscape or removed it altogether.

"We've also removed a waterfall from The Adventuredome (at Circus Circus) and set timers on fountains at Mandalay Bay so that less water evaporates. And we've replaced most of our spray sprinklers with bubblers at Circus Circus and Excalibur," he said.

Similarly, Boyd Gaming Corp. has launched a turf conversion project at the Stardust this year to replace roughly 132,000 square feet of grass landscape with xeriscaping of native desert plants and flowers.

Each of Boyd Gaming's nearly 40 restaurants has also implemented a water upon request program to eliminate waste from unconsumed glasses of water.

Also, in an unusual move for Las Vegas, the company has turned off the decorative water features at Sam's Town and the Stardust.

Mulroy said the authority is generally pleased with the consumption and conservation programs the hotel-casinos have in place, specifically because such a large proportion is recycled.

"They need to do more, but only because of the leadership role they need to play. It's a symbolic value," she said. "The same thing went on in Southern California. Look at Anaheim. You can imagine how much water Disney uses, but nobody wanted to shut them down.

"I've had this conversation with the hotels. I understand their dilemma. They sell an escape from reality. You can leave the real world behind. Their worry is when customers see the real world intrude, it'll hurt the tourist industry."

Gaming companies have also heard such pleas from regulators, and some are working to reach conservation goals cooperatively.

For example, Station Casinos is providing related messages on property marquees urging residents and other businesses to be water-smart in order to encourage community participation. Also, sessions with employees bring them the latest information from the Henderson Water Watchers and the Southern Nevada Water Authority.

"We partnered with the city of Henderson to have representatives come in and conduct employee information and awareness seminars on issues concerning the drought. We did the same with the Las Vegas Valley Water District for our non-Henderson properties. The water district set up informational tables back-of-house with brochures identifying ways in which our team members can save water," said Station Casinos spokeswoman Lesley Pittman.

Thompson agreed that water features and lavish landscaping could prove critical to the gaming industry and the economic development of Las Vegas.

"We have to recognize that the splendor -- like it or not -- of our casinos is a very big part of the (economic) engine that makes Las Vegas work for all of us. I want to see the engine run strong well into the future. If some dramatic use of water that is not harmful to the supply in terms of the overall picture is attempted by casinos, I would say 'lay off' -- their dramatic games keep us all in business," he said.

Since hotel-casinos are relatively modest water users, Mulroy said there is little the water authority can do with them to conserve added amounts of money.

"We raised rates and they pay the top tier. So when you look at their consumption they pay more per gallon and more in total (than anyone else)," she said.

However, on their own, the hotel-casinos can still play their symbolic role and take steps such as taking out tropical landscaping and replacing it with xeriscaping, "that's where they can make a difference for Las Vegas," Mulroy said.

Las Vegas Thirsts for More Water

The fast-growing city may tap rivers and groundwater from outlying counties, to the dismay of some rural residents.

By Ken Ritter Associated Press Writer March 7, 2004 LAS VEGAS — After nearly two decades of busily converting desert into sprawling metropolis in the fastest-growing region in the nation, southern Nevada finds itself beset by a four-year drought and straining against limits in the water that it can pump from nearby Lake Mead. Las Vegas is turning to rural counties to the north to quench a thirst that the nation's largest man-made reservoir can't sustain. Plans include drilling wells and building a $1-billion pipeline to tap rivers and groundwater from neighboring rural counties. The Southern Nevada Water Authority says there is enough water out there to let the population of the Las Vegas area nearly double in the next decade — to more than 3 million — without drawing more from the Colorado River, which supplies Lake Mead. But some at the head of the proposed pipeline worry that their high desert valleys and ranches will dry up if precious underground water is pumped to Las Vegas. They say the obvious solution is being ignored. "You have growth in an area that doesn't have water and the decisions aren't how to control growth, it's how to get water," said Paul Johnson, chairman of the White Pine County Commission in Ely, 250 miles north of the Las Vegas Strip. Farrel Lytle, who lives in Eagle Valley — an enclave of about 30 homes, a trailer park and a bar near Pioche — is worried that his community will go the way of California's Owens River Valley. "That country dried up. It lost its water to a big city," Lytle said. Johnson too sees parallels in the early 1900s Los Angeles water project that drained a valley about 200 miles north of Los Angeles and turned Owens Lake into a dust bowl. The 1974 film "Chinatown" was loosely based on the episode. "All of these preceding disasters are examples that people use when they talk about transferring water," Johnson said. The Southern Nevada Water Authority last year settled a 1989 water rights claim that it staked across vast stretches of Lincoln County, and is negotiating with White Pine County, the next county to the north. White Pine's five-member commission suspended talks last month to address community opposition to water-sharing. "The community is very divided on how to deal with this," Johnson said. He acknowledged that 8,800 people living in a rural county the size of Massachusetts may be no match for business and political interests in Clark County — which includes Las Vegas and 1.6 million of the state's 2.3 million residents. "We're trying to save our water," said Gary Lane, a truck-stop owner, cattle rancher and alfalfa farmer outside the White Pine community of Lund, 210 miles from Las Vegas. "We're looking at our pumps and our springs running dry if the water is pumped out." No one really knows how much water exists beneath the desert. State Engineer Hugh Ricci estimates that there are millions of acre-feet. "The question is, where can you get it and how much can you get?" Ricci said. Water officials say they'll need to drill test wells to determine whether the supply is finite ancient water trapped underground, or is replenished by springs and scarce surface precipitation. In 2003, Nevada led the nation in population growth for the 17th year, according to the state demographer. About 80% of new residents moved to Las Vegas or nearby. The Lake Mead reservoir behind Hoover Dam is at its lowest level in 35 years, at 1,140 feet above sea level and 65 feet below its high-water mark. It is still more than half full, with about 5 trillion gallons of water. A growth study delivered to the Southern Nevada Water Authority on Feb. 26 did not refer directly to water. But it came the same day that the authority received a report on plans to reach far to the north to meet future demands. One project calls for tapping groundwater in northern Clark County by 2007. Another would draw water from the Virgin and Muddy rivers before they empty into one end of Lake Mead. The third would extend the pipeline north to Lincoln and White Pine counties. The growth study, by Las Vegas-based Hobbs Ong & Associates, was commissioned to determine whether growth control would work as a means of drought management, and to provide an answer to other states relying on the Colorado River that wonder why so