Laserfiche WebLink
Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Basin Groundwater Management Plan <br /> Table 2-5 Estimated and Projected Agricultural Water Demands <br /> Applied Water Requirement under Average Conditions <br /> District 1996 Estimated Applied Water 2030 Projected Applied Water <br /> (Within San Joaquin County Only) Demand (af/yr) Demand (af/yr) <br /> North Delta Water Agency 37,244 37,244 <br /> Central Delta Water Agency 209,622 209,622 <br /> South Delta Water Agency 206,759 206,759 <br /> West Side ID 17,205 17,205 <br /> City of Tracy 34,192 - <br /> Banta-Carbona 42,585 42,585 <br /> Lathrop 21,225 - <br /> South Delta Area Total 321,966 266,549 <br /> Del Puerto WD 15,529 15,529 <br /> Plain View WD 11,217 11,217 <br /> North San Joaquin WCD 88,022 88,022 <br /> Woodbridge ID 102,517 102,517 <br /> Lodi 5,124 - <br /> Stockton East WD 151,210 151,210 <br /> Stockton 38,701 - <br /> SEWD Total 189,911 151,210 <br /> Central San Joaquin WCD 159,554 159,554 <br /> Oakdale ID 48,391 48,391 <br /> South San Joaquin ID 126,709 126,709 <br /> Manteca 21,663 - <br /> Escalon 1,761 <br /> Ripon 9,508 - <br /> SSJID Total 159,641 126,709 <br /> Unincorporated Areas 173,390 173,390 <br /> Total 1,522,128 1,389,954 <br /> Notes: <br /> 1. This table was modified based on comments received on the Draft SJCWMP. It was compiled from the DWR land use <br /> information linked to Private,State and Federal water district outlines in a GIs system. There are significant areas of <br /> overlap between city limits,spheres of influence,and between water districts themselves. Bearing this in mind,there are <br /> bound to be variations and differences between these estimates and those compiled using different methodology.The <br /> figures in this table represent theoretical applied water requirements for average conditions. <br /> 2. The quantity of water actually pumped,diverted and applied will be significantly different due to a variety of factors <br /> including distribution system inefficiencies and losses(ranging from 10 to 20%),climate,soil conditions,etc. The loss of <br /> agricultural land to urban expansion is illustrated by the reduction in agricultural acreage currently located within urban <br /> spheres of influence. <br /> 3. Agricultural lands in urban areas and urban spheres of influence are phased out completely by 2030. Other changes are <br /> likely to impact water demand,such changes in cropping patterns,irrigation methods,and farming of previously vacant <br /> land. However,these changes have not been quantified in any systematic or reliable basis. <br /> 4. Urban development will be undertaken by increasing urban densities through infill of spheres of influence. Development <br /> according to this guideline has yet to gain market acceptance and widespread application in the County. However, <br /> current development patterns,and their associated average unit water usage rates,are assumed to apply in the future. <br /> 5. Local urban development practices will result in new developments with similar water use rate. Water use figures were <br /> calculated for each individual urban area,and these figures were applied to future development. Each urban area has a <br /> unique unit water use rate based upon local factors,such as amounts of open space and conservation practices. As best <br /> management practices are implemented with respect to water conservation,projected water demands for urban <br /> developments may actually be conservative as compared to past conservation efforts. <br /> 6. The urban spheres of influence reflect 2030 development. The urban spheres reflect the local plans for where expansion <br /> could occur in the future,but it is possible that the development will occur in different areas,or in different amounts than <br /> predicted. The State Department of Finance predicts future populations;the projected 2030 population can fit within the <br /> spheres at current urban densities. <br /> The assumptions in Table 2-5 simplify the process of predicting future water demands. The <br /> analysis undertaken does in no way imply that other changes in urban development and <br /> agriculture are not likely, nor are the assumptions intended to discourage implementation of <br /> structural or policy changes that improve water use efficiency. For the purposes of the Plan, <br /> extensive analysis of the sensitivity of the assumptions on the projected water demand was not <br /> Northeastern San Joaquin County Section 2 <br /> Groundwater Banking Authority 76 Hydrogeology <br />