Quantification Settlement Agreement
The impact on the surrounding environment has been cited by opponents, who argue that the policies of the agreement are severely damaging the Salton Sea and Colorado River.
Most notably, "salt, selenium and pesticides are carried into the sea with agricultural return flows, which originates largely from Imperial Valley farms.
"[2] With the post-World War II population growth in Southern California, there has been an increasing demand for water sources to supply both urban and existing agricultural areas.
[3] The agreement was a compromise that divided available water resources between the environmentally fragile Imperial Valley and the more heavily populated areas of Southern California.
Among California agricultural regions, the Imperial Valley uses a substantial portion of the Colorado River water that is allotted to the state each year.
"[6] At one time a thriving ecosystem formed following an irrigation accident in 1905, the Salton Sea has increasingly faced higher levels of salinity in addition to shrinking water volume.
[3] In addition to the purported environmental benefits, the Quantification Settlement Agreement is of particular importance to the Imperial Valley region due to the economic conditions of the area.
In a recent article for the New Yorker, Dana Goodyear noted that "The deal gives Imperial billions of dollars to spend on improving efficiency on its farms and its irrigation infrastructure, which in some parts is primitive.
[3] The Imperial Irrigation District faced significant criticism in 2012 when it was reported that it was not conserving as much water as stipulated under the Quantification Settlement Agreement.
[11] In July 2013, the Sacramento Superior Court entered a final judgment upholding the agreement and dismissing all current challenges,[12] but the San Diego County Water Authority still anticipates another round of appeals.
Although residents of the Imperial Valley have been the main opponents of this measure, some observers have embraced the agreement, arguing that it is the most realistic and pragmatic solution to the water crisis in the area.
In an article, Jim Lochhead notes that "By forcing California to live within its means, the QSA provides reassurance that our ability to develop water in the Colorado River Basin is for the time being, secure.
The State of California has connected the Quantification Settlement Agreement to the Salton Sea crisis, and has attempted to highlight the planned environmental restoration benefits of the compact.
"[16] Stewart compared this to the much larger $60 billion high speed rail project the state has approved, and is critical of the government's priorities.
Other opposition arguments include poor conduct of the parties involved in litigation and the seeming lack of commitment to restoring the Salton Sea.
Elizabeth Varen, in an article for the Imperial Valley Press, noted that Judge Ronald B. Robie refused to recuse himself as the environmental group POWER fought the QSA in court.
