Who gains from saving nature
Ledger 1 : 30 — For every dollar the world invests in protecting or restoring nature, thirty dollars are spent on activities that degrade it. (UNEP, State of Finance for Nature 2026)
Cases / Water use · United States · 1998–2026

Salton Sea and the 2003 Quantification Settlement Agreement: Imperial Irrigation District water sold to San Diego and to Coachella or Metropolitan, California

Nature's voice · report
In 2003 about 1.2 million acre-feet of water a year flowed into me; in 2022 about 1 million did, the Legislative Analyst's Office wrote, and evaporation consistently outpaces what flows in.
Did nature suffer? Yes. Harm is on record. Accounts differ ↓
In my name
Recorded
  • On 25 July 2026 my surface stood at -243.8 feet (NGVD 1929), the Pacific Institute's page recorded; in January 2018 it stood at -236.0 feet according to Wikipedia. Pacific Institute
  • I have shrunk by more than 60 square miles, 19 percent, over the past 30 years, according to the Pacific Institute. Pacific Institute
  • My salinity ranged from 68,000 to 86,000 mg/L in November 2024, according to the state's 2025 annual report as cited by Wikipedia; the Pacific is 35 g/L. Wikipedia
  • The lakebed I have left exposed carries dust containing selenium and arsenic from the farm runoff that fed me, the Legislative Analyst's Office wrote. California Legislative Analyst's Office
  • Children living within 7 miles of me wheeze more on dust days, a USC study found. USC News
Details not on record: 1 none on record · 1 insufficient · 1 not measured · 4 disputed · 2 unclear See the gaps
Accounts of the harm differ
Whether the QSA contracts relieve the State of its commitment to restore the Salton Sea
  • Communities and civil society Opponents of the QSA: Claimed the contracts relieved the State of its restoration commitment, according to IID's trial counsel. Allen Matkins
  • Courts Sacramento Superior Court (4 June 2013), as reported by IID's trial counsel: The QSA contracts do not relieve the State of its commitment to restore the Salton Sea. Allen Matkins
  • Government and regulators Legislative Analyst's Office (2024), quoting Chapter 613 of 2003: "any future actions to restore the Salton Sea will be the sole responsibility of the State of California." California Legislative Analyst's Office
Share of regional dust that comes from the exposed lakebed and the health weight given to it
  • Researchers Pacific Institute (2025): The only multi-year estimates indicate lakebed emissions are "less than one percent of total dust emissions in the region"; exposure control is more feasible and cost-effective than source suppression. Pacific Institute
  • Researchers USC (Environmental Research, 2024): Dust events had a greater effect on wheezing and sleep disturbance in children living within 7 miles of the Sea. USC News
  • Researchers University of California, Irvine (American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 2025): Higher dust exposure was linked to lower lung function in children, most strongly among those closest to the lake. University of California, Irvine

Under the 2003 Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA) package, Imperial Irrigation District agreed to make conserved Colorado River water available to the San Diego County Water Authority (200,000 acre-feet a year, per the Court of Appeal) and to Coachella or Metropolitan (100,000 acre-feet a year). The three water agencies' environmental-mitigation liability was capped at US$133 million (present value) and the State of California was made liable for the excess. Annual inflow to the Salton Sea fell from about 1.2 million acre-feet in 2003 to about 1 million in 2022; the 15-year mitigation inflow requirement expired at the end of 2017.

about 1.2 million acre-feet to about 1 million acre-feetAnnual inflow to the Salton Sea, 2003 compared with 2022
California Legislative Analyst's Office, 26 February 2024. Earlier projections had expected inflow to fall to between 700,000 and 800,000 acre-feet by 2022. The LAO added that evaporation consistently outpaces inflow.

Status As of October 2026: the transfers continue; the mitigation inflow requirement ended at the end of 2017; the Sea's surface was at -243.8 feet on 25 July 2026; the sources reviewed give no cumulative payment total to IID.

What?
Imperial Irrigation District agreed to make conserved Colorado River water available to the San Diego County Water Authority (200,000 acre-feet a year) and to Coachella or Metropolitan (100,000 acre-feet a year), with a US$133 million (present value) cap on the water agencies' environmental-mitigation liability and a 15-year mitigation inflow to the Salton Sea. California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District
Where?
Imperial Valley and the Salton Sea (Imperial and Riverside Counties), with water delivered to San Diego County and the Coachella Valley. California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District
When?
Transfer agreement 1998; QSA executed October 2003; mitigation inflow to the end of 2017; litigation 2003 to 2014. California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District
Who?
Gained
  • Imperial Irrigation District — Receives payments from San Diego (almost US$148 million in 2022, roughly half of its water-side budget, per Voice of San Diego) Voice of San Diego
  • San Diego County Water Authority — Obtains just over 40% of San Diego's water supply from the transfer (2022, press) Voice of San Diego
  • Imperial Valley farmers — Received US$161 million from 2003 to 2017 to leave fields unplanted Voice of San Diego
  • Ronnie Leimgruber, Imperial Valley farmer — Said the San Diego transfer had made his farm more efficient than it was 20 years ago and had not made him more money Voice of San Diego
Lost
  • Imperial County businesses indirectly affected by fallowing — About two-thirds of a US$50 million mitigation fund (US$30 million so far) went to businesses indirectly hurt by fallowing Voice of San Diego
Harmed
  • The Salton Sea — Inflow fell from about 1.2 to about 1 million acre-feet a year (2003 to 2022); elevation -243.8 feet in July 2026 California Legislative Analyst's Office
  • Children near the Sea — 24% of 722 children surveyed had asthma; dust events were linked to more wheeze and to lower lung function USC News
Why?
California had agreed to limit its Colorado River use to 4.4 million acre-feet a year and had exceeded it in the 1990s; the QSA budgeted the state's share among agencies and framed conservation measures and water transfers for up to 75 years. California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District
How?
IID conserved water (including by fallowing and canal lining) and made it available under the Transfer Agreement; a Joint Powers Agreement allocated mitigation costs, and State statute set prices for water sold to the Department of Water Resources and Metropolitan. California Public.Law
6 of 6 questions (what, who, where, when, why, how) have an answer on record

What happened

The record, in order.

The Salton Sea was formed when the Colorado River flowed into the Salton Sink for two years after a flood cut a break in the river bank in November 1905, according to the California Court of Appeal's 2011 opinion on the QSA. After the river was returned to its channel in 1907 the Sea would, the court wrote, have evaporated but for agricultural drainage from the Imperial, Mexicali and Coachella valleys; by the late 1970s about 1 million acre-feet of irrigation return flow a year entered the Sea from Imperial Irrigation District's (IID) area alone, about 71 percent of all inflow. IID, organised in 1911, is the sole source of fresh water for the Imperial Valley and diverts water equating to a consumptive use of about 3.1 million acre-feet a year, 98 percent of it used for agriculture. California had agreed to limit its use of Colorado River water to 4.4 million acre-feet a year and, the court recorded, used between 100,000 and 800,000 acre-feet more each year from 1990 through 1999.

In 1998 IID agreed to transfer up to 300,000 acre-feet of conserved water a year to the San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA), which the court called "the largest agricultural-to-urban water transfer in United States history". In 2002 IID, SDCWA, Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) agreed that IID would make 100,000 acre-feet a year available to Coachella or Metropolitan, "leaving 200,000 acre-feet annually for San Diego"; the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) approved the Transfer Agreement in December 2002. When no QSA was signed by the end of 2002 the Secretary of the Interior reduced IID's 2003 allocation; IID obtained a preliminary injunction and the Secretary reduced Metropolitan's and Coachella's deliveries instead. The QSA and a number of related agreements were executed in October 2003. The Water Education Foundation describes the QSA package as allowing "as much as 200,000 acre-feet a year" for up to 75 years, with a 105,000 acre-feet a year IID-Metropolitan transfer and an Imperial-Coachella transfer of as much as 103,000 acre-feet a year. California's Fish and Game Code s.2081.7 sets prices for water that IID transfers to the state's Department of Water Resources (DWR): 800,000 acre-feet "in exchange for payment of one hundred seventy-five dollars ($175) per acre-foot", up to 800,000 additional acre-feet at no further charge beyond the mitigation fund payment, and a Metropolitan option to buy up to 1.6 million acre-feet at "not less than two hundred fifty dollars ($250) per acre-foot", with the proceeds going to the Salton Sea Restoration Fund.

The environmental-mitigation terms were set in a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) among IID, SDCWA, CVWD and the State. The Court of Appeal recorded that the three water agencies' aggregate liability was capped at "a then-present value of $133 million", with the State "solely responsible" for mitigation costs above the cap; the court held that the agreement "does unconditionally obligate the state to pay the excess mitigation costs". The court added that mitigation of the transfers "is not the same as 'restoration' of the Salton Sea". The LAO reported that the QSA required the JPA to provide US$30 million (in 2003 dollars) as seed money for state-led restoration, deposited in the Salton Sea Restoration Fund; adjusted for inflation the amount is US$68.5 million by 2047, paid at about US$1.58 million a year by IID, CVWD and SDCWA. By 30 June 2024 the JPA estimated cumulative contributions of US$262 million from its members and cumulative expenditures of US$193 million. A SWRCB order of 2002 required IID for 15 years to provide inflow to the Sea at levels sufficient to maintain the salinity that would have existed without the transfer; the LAO wrote that the requirement "expired at the end of 2017" and that, in the 15 years from the QSA to the end of that inflow, "the state did not implement any major management projects at the Salton Sea". A 2007 Natural Resources Agency study recommended a "preferred alternative" costing US$9 billion that funding constraints made infeasible.

Payments to IID are recorded in the press at several dates. Voice of San Diego reported in 2018 that the Water Authority paid IID US$650 per acre-foot and Imperial farmers paid US$20, that farmers received US$161 million between 2003 and 2017 to leave fields unplanted (at the peak nearly 400 fields on 34,000 acres), and that a US$50 million mitigation fund for indirectly affected areas was split US$30 million from San Diego and US$20 million from Imperial "on paper". In 2023 the same outlet reported that San Diego pays "nearly $730" (US$730.10) under the QSA against a starting price of US$258, and that San Diegans paid IID almost US$148 million in 2022 for just over 40% of San Diego's water supply, payments that fund roughly half of IID's water-side budget. Litigation followed: IID filed a validation action on 5 November 2003 and Imperial County and others filed CEQA suits; a Sacramento trial court held the JPA unconstitutional, the Court of Appeal (Third District) reversed and remanded on 7 December 2011, the Sacramento Superior Court upheld the QSA on 4 June 2013, and on 19 May 2014 the Ninth Circuit affirmed a ruling that the Secretary of the Interior had not violated the National Environmental Policy Act or the Clean Air Act in approving the related federal agreements.

The Sea has continued to shrink. The Pacific Institute's page recorded a surface elevation of -243.8 feet (NGVD 1929) on 25 July 2026, the last day of operation of the USGS gage, against -236.0 feet in January 2018 as cited by Wikipedia; the Pacific Institute's August 2025 report said the Sea had shrunk by more than 60 square miles (19%) over 30 years. Wikipedia, citing the 2025 annual report of the state's Salton Sea Management Program, gave salinity as ranging from 68,000 to 86,000 mg/L in November 2024; the Pacific is 35 g/L. The LAO wrote that the exposed lakebed carries dust containing selenium and arsenic from the agricultural runoff that fed the Sea. A USC study in Environmental Research (2024) recruited 722 children and reported asthma in 24% of them, and a University of California, Irvine study in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine (2025) linked dust exposure to lower lung function in children near the Sea. Restoration activity under the State Water Board's 2017 order is recorded in the separate record on the Salton Sea Management Program.

  1. 1905Colorado River breach floods the Salton Sink for two years; the Salton Sea is formed
  2. 1998IID agrees to transfer up to 300,000 acre-feet of conserved water a year to San Diego
  3. 2002IID, San Diego, Coachella and Metropolitan agree the 200,000 / 100,000 acre-feet split; SWRCB approves the Transfer Agreement in December and orders 15 years of mitigation inflow
  4. 2003QSA and related agreements executed in October; IID files validation action on 5 November
  5. 2007Natural Resources Agency study recommends a US$9 billion preferred alternative, judged infeasible
  6. 2011Court of Appeal reverses the trial court's holding that the Joint Powers Agreement was unconstitutional (7 December)
  7. 2013Sacramento Superior Court upholds the QSA (4 June)
  8. 2014Ninth Circuit affirms judgment for the Secretary of the Interior and intervenors (19 May); IID petitions the SWRCB over the pace of state action
  9. 201715-year mitigation inflow requirement expires at the end of the year; SWRCB approves a stipulated order in November
  10. 2022Annual inflow about 1 million acre-feet; San Diegans pay IID almost US$148 million
  11. 2026Sea surface at -243.8 feet on 25 July, the last day of the USGS gage

What was said

Claims, in the words of those who made them.

“does unconditionally obligate the state to pay the excess mitigation costs”

“any future actions to restore the Salton Sea will be the sole responsibility of the State of California.”

“It's market value for Colorado River water but it's below market value for all new water development.”

Dan Denham, general manager, San Diego County Water Authority · 2 October 2023 · Voice of San Diego

“a fair price is what a willing buyer and a willing seller agree upon.”

Dan Hentschke, former general counsel, San Diego County Water Authority · 2 October 2023 · Voice of San Diego

“The San Diego transfer has made my farm way more efficient than it was 20 years ago,”

Where accounts differ

Each party's account, side by side, with its source. The record does not settle these points; it shows them.

Effect of the IID-San Diego transfer on Imperial County's economy
Government and regulators
Imperial County and IID (their own economic models)

Their models projected harm to county businesses.

Voice of San Diego
Researchers
An independent panel of economists

Concluded Imperial could still come out ahead.

Voice of San Diego
Government and regulators
San Diego County Water Authority

Its assistant manager said "we had dueling economists and no matter who you work for, that's never a good thing".

Voice of San Diego
Whether the QSA contracts relieve the State of its commitment to restore the Salton Sea
Communities and civil society
Opponents of the QSA

Claimed the contracts relieved the State of its restoration commitment, according to IID's trial counsel.

Allen Matkins
Courts
Sacramento Superior Court (4 June 2013), as reported by IID's trial counsel

The QSA contracts do not relieve the State of its commitment to restore the Salton Sea.

Allen Matkins
Government and regulators
Legislative Analyst's Office (2024), quoting Chapter 613 of 2003

"any future actions to restore the Salton Sea will be the sole responsibility of the State of California."

California Legislative Analyst's Office
Share of regional dust that comes from the exposed lakebed and the health weight given to it
Researchers
Pacific Institute (2025)

The only multi-year estimates indicate lakebed emissions are "less than one percent of total dust emissions in the region"; exposure control is more feasible and cost-effective than source suppression.

Pacific Institute
Researchers
USC (Environmental Research, 2024)

Dust events had a greater effect on wheezing and sleep disturbance in children living within 7 miles of the Sea.

USC News
Researchers
University of California, Irvine (American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 2025)

Higher dust exposure was linked to lower lung function in children, most strongly among those closest to the lake.

University of California, Irvine

How it looked

What was shown, beside what was recorded.

Shown

  • The QSA and related agreements described as "the largest set of consensual water transfers in the history of the United States".
    Allen Matkins, trial counsel for IID · Allen Matkins
  • The transfer described: "It became the largest agricultural to urban water transfer in the United States."
    Water Education Foundation · Water Education Foundation
  • The Joint Powers Agreement described as "the principal mechanism for ensuring that required mitigation" for the transfers that were to "be fully paid for".
    Joint Powers Agreement, as quoted by the Court of Appeal · California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District

Recorded

  • Annual inflow to the Sea fell from about 1.2 million acre-feet in 2003 to about 1 million acre-feet in 2022, less than the reduction projected.
    California Legislative Analyst's Office
  • The three water agencies' liability for environmental mitigation was capped at a present value of US$133 million; the State is liable for costs above the cap.
    California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District
  • The 15-year mitigation inflow requirement expired at the end of 2017; the state implemented no major management projects in the 15 years after the QSA.
    California Legislative Analyst's Office
  • The Court of Appeal (2011), the Sacramento Superior Court (2013) and the Ninth Circuit (2014) each ruled for the agencies in the QSA litigation on the points decided.
    US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • The Sea's surface stood at -243.8 feet on 25 July 2026 and the Pacific Institute reports a loss of more than 60 square miles over 30 years.
    Pacific Institute
  • The sources reviewed give no cumulative total of payments to IID since 2003.

In nature's name

What was promised in nature's name, the money that moved, and what was measured.

Promised

  • “any future actions to restore the Salton Sea will be the sole responsibility of the State of California.” — Chapter 613 of 2003 (SB 654), as quoted by the Legislative Analyst's Office (2003) California Legislative Analyst's Office
  • “the principal mechanism for ensuring that required mitigation under [state and federal environmental laws] for the[ water] transfers w[ould] be fully paid for” — Joint Powers Agreement, as quoted by the Court of Appeal (2003) California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District

Money moved in nature's name

WhatKindAmountPeriod
Cap on the combined environmental-mitigation liability of IID, the San Diego County Water Authority and the Coachella Valley Water District (present value at the time of the Joint Powers Agreement; the State is liable for costs above the cap)
IID, SDCWA and CVWD (payers); State of California (excess)
California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District		Budget$133m2003
Seed money for state-led Salton Sea restoration required of the QSA agencies (in 2003 dollars; deposited in the Salton Sea Restoration Fund)
IID, CVWD and SDCWA
California Legislative Analyst's Office		Pledged$30m2003
The same seed money adjusted for inflation, paid by 2047 (about US$1.58 million a year through 2047)
IID, CVWD and SDCWA
California Legislative Analyst's Office		Pledged$69m2003–2047
Cumulative contributions to the QSA Joint Powers Authority, as estimated by the JPA (estimate to 30 June 2024; adjusted for inflation and accrued interest)
JPA members
California Legislative Analyst's Office		Raised$262m estimate2003–2024
Cumulative expenditures of the QSA Joint Powers Authority, as estimated by the JPA (estimate to 30 June 2024)
QSA Joint Powers Authority
California Legislative Analyst's Office		Spent$193m estimate2003–2024
Statutory price for 800,000 acre-feet of IID conserved water transferred to the Department of Water Resources (per acre-foot, adjusted annually for inflation; total payment is not stated in the sources reviewed)
California Department of Water Resources (buyer); IID (seller)
California Public.Law		Sales$0mQSA term
Statutory minimum price for up to 1.6 million acre-feet that Metropolitan may buy from the Department of Water Resources (per acre-foot, not less than, inflation-adjusted; proceeds go to the Salton Sea Restoration Fund after costs)
Metropolitan Water District (buyer)
California Public.Law		Sales$0mQSA term
Price paid by the San Diego County Water Authority to IID (per acre-foot)
San Diego County Water Authority
Voice of San Diego		Sales$0m2018
Price paid by San Diego to IID under the QSA (per acre-foot (US$730.10); starting price was US$258)
San Diego (water users)
Voice of San Diego		Sales$0m2023
Payments by San Diegans to IID for just over 40% of San Diego's water supply (press report says 'almost $148 million', for the previous year)
San Diego water users
Voice of San Diego		Sales$148m2022
Payments to farmers to leave fields unplanted (2003 to 2017, the period of the fallowing programme)
Imperial Valley farmers (recipients)
Voice of San Diego		Compensation$161m2003–2017
Mitigation fund for areas indirectly affected by fallowing (US$30 million from San Diego and US$20 million from Imperial 'on paper')
San Diego County Water Authority and IID
Voice of San Diego		Compensation$50mfrom 2003

Benefit to nature: what was measured

Not measured

The 2002 State Water Board order required 15 years of mitigation inflow to keep salinity at the level expected without the transfer. The sources reviewed contain no independent measurement of whether that standard was met. The LAO records that inflow fell less than projected (about 1 million acre-feet in 2022 against 700,000 to 800,000 projected), that the requirement expired at the end of 2017, and that the state implemented no major management projects over those 15 years. The agencies' own spending figures are not a measurement of benefit to the Sea.

Annual inflow to the Sea
about 1.2 million acre-feet (2003) to about 1 million (2022)
Less than the reduction projected; evaporation outpaces inflow California Legislative Analyst's Office
Mitigation inflow requirement
ended at the end of 2017
15 years under the 2002 SWRCB order California Legislative Analyst's Office
Surface elevation
-243.8 feet, 25 July 2026
-236.0 feet in January 2018 (Wikipedia) Pacific Institute

Operation Ongoing · The transfers continue under the QSA; the mitigation inflow requirement ended at the end of 2017. California Legislative Analyst's Office

Findings on record

  • Court or regulator ruling California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District (2011-12-07) · Quantification Settlement Agreement Cases, C064293: “does unconditionally obligate the state to pay the excess mitigation costs” California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District
  • Official audit California Legislative Analyst's Office (2024-02-26) · The 2024-25 Budget: Salton Sea Management Program: “the state did not implement any major management projects at the Salton Sea during that time” California Legislative Analyst's Office

Who gained

Money that reached nature, beside money that stayed elsewhere.

Reached nature or the ground

Not published
No figure published.

Gained elsewhere

Not totalled
Currency: USD · Window: 2003–2026. All figures cover the same period. * Estimate built from cited figures.

Responses on record

  • San Diego County Water Authority (2 October 2023): Its general manager said the QSA price is market value for Colorado River water but below market value for all new water development, and that the premise of the agreement was to create a market for water transfers in California. · Voice of San Diego
  • Imperial Irrigation District (2013; 2014): Its trial counsel described the QSA as the largest set of consensual water transfers in the history of the United States; the district petitioned the State Water Board in 2014 over the pace of state action at the Sea. · Allen Matkins
  • Metropolitan Water District of Southern California: No statement of its own is recorded in the sources reviewed.
  • Coachella Valley Water District: No statement of its own is recorded in the sources reviewed.
  • State of California (2003; 2011): Through the Court of Appeal record and Chapter 613 of 2003, the State accepted sole responsibility for future Salton Sea restoration and for mitigation costs above the US$133 million cap. · California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District

In court and with insurers

Every proceeding and every insurer decision on record.

Lawsuits and rulings

  1. 2003–2011Claimant won
    Quantification Settlement Agreement Cases (C064293; JCCP No. 4353)
    California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District (appeal from Sacramento County Superior Court) · Civil · Imperial Irrigation District, with the State, SDCWA, CVWD, Metropolitan and others as appellants → Protect our Water and Environmental Rights (POWER), County of Imperial and landowner respondents

    IID filed a validation action on 5 November 2003 in Imperial County Superior Court; POWER and the County filed CEQA suits. The Sacramento trial court held the Joint Powers Agreement violated article XVI, section 7 of the California Constitution and dismissed the CEQA actions as moot. On 7 December 2011 the Court of Appeal reversed, held the State's obligation to pay excess mitigation costs unconditional and not unconstitutional, found the CEQA actions not moot and remanded them for adjudication. California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District

  2. 2003–2013Claimant won
    QSA Coordinated Civil Cases, validation and CEQA challenges (on remand)
    Sacramento County Superior Court · Civil · Imperial Irrigation District and other agencies (validation) → QSA opponents

    On 4 June 2013 the court upheld the QSA on all points, including that the contracts do not relieve the State of its commitment to restore the Salton Sea, according to IID's trial counsel. Whether an appeal was filed is not stated in that source. Allen Matkins

  3. 2014Defendant won
    People of the State of California ex rel. Imperial County Air Pollution Control District v. U.S. Department of the Interior (Nos. 12-55856, 12-55956)
    US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Civil · Imperial County and the Imperial County Air Pollution Control District → US Department of the Interior, Secretary of the Interior and Bureau of Reclamation (IID, SDCWA, CVWD and Metropolitan intervened)

    On 19 May 2014 the court held the plaintiffs had standing but affirmed judgment for the defendants: the Secretary did not violate NEPA and the record showed no Clean Air Act violation in approving the Implementation Agreement and delivery schedule. US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Insurers

No insurer decision on record.

What nature saw

Outcomes measured on the ground, and nature's note.

Nature's report opens this page. Below: further outcomes measured on the ground.

Annual inflow to the Sea
about 1.2 million acre-feet (2003) to about 1 million (2022)
LAO, 2024; projections had expected 700,000 to 800,000 acre-feet by 2022
Mitigation inflow requirement
expired at the end of 2017
SWRCB 2002 order, 15 years; LAO, 2024
Surface elevation
-243.8 feet (NGVD 1929), 25 July 2026
Pacific Institute page citing USGS gage 10254005
Surface area lost over 30 years
more than 60 square miles (19%)
Pacific Institute, August 2025
Children with asthma near the Sea
24% of 722 surveyed
USC study, Environmental Research, 2024

What we don't know

Undisclosed, unproven, untried: recorded as data.
Court ruling existsOfficial audit findingBenefit not measuredKey earnings undisclosed

Nature

  • Disputed Whether the QSA contracts relieve the State of its commitment to restore the Salton Sea
  • Disputed Share of regional dust that comes from the exposed lakebed and the health weight given to it

Accounts

  • Disputed Effect of the IID-San Diego transfer on Imperial County's economy

Record

  • None on record None on record: a cumulative total of payments to IID under the transfers since 2003. The sources reviewed give per-acre-foot prices for 2018 and 2023 and a 2022 payment, not a running total.
  • Not measured Not measured: whether the 2003 to 2017 mitigation inflows kept the Sea's salinity at the level that would have existed without the transfer, as the 2002 State Water Board order required. No source reviewed reports an independent measurement against that standard.
  • Disputed Disputed: the effect of the transfer on Imperial County's economy. Imperial's own models projected harm to county businesses and an independent panel of economists concluded Imperial could still come out ahead.
  • Unclear Unclear: the end date of the mitigation deal. The LAO says the inflow requirement expired at the end of 2017; the Water Education Foundation says the fresh-water deal "expired in 2018"; Wikipedia says the 15-year period ended on 1 January 2018.
  • Unclear Unclear: the QSA price after 2023. Voice of San Diego reported an inflation-tied price running until 2035, 12 years before the agreement officially expires, and, in the 2 November 2023 article, a contract up for renewal in 2047; the sources reviewed give no price schedule.
  • Insufficient Unconfirmed: a reader comment under the Voice of San Diego article of 2 October 2023 said IID's budget rose from US$40 million to US$240 million after the QSA; the article does not state this.

Did the harm stop?

The sources reviewed show no halt. The LAO wrote in 2024 that reductions in inflow are expected to progress and that the Sea will continue to contract; the 15-year mitigation inflow requirement expired at the end of 2017, and the Pacific Institute recorded a lower surface elevation on 25 July 2026 than in January 2018.

Who paid?

San Diego County water users pay IID for the transferred water (almost US$148 million in 2022 according to Voice of San Diego). The three water agencies' mitigation liability was capped at US$133 million (present value) and the State is liable for the excess; the agencies, via the Salton Sea Restoration Fund, provide US$30 million in 2003 dollars (US$68.5 million adjusted by 2047) for state-led restoration.

Sources

Voices on record: ✓ Company or project✓ Government and regulators✓ Courts✓ Press and investigations✓ Communities and civil society✓ Researchers

Company or project

Government and regulators

  1. The 2024-25 Budget: Salton Sea Management Program
    California Legislative Analyst's Office · 2024-02-26

Courts

Press and investigations

Communities and civil society

Researchers

Connected cases

Related matters, and cases linked to this one through the same organisations, with the role each played in both.
Similar cases
Chemical pollution · Water use · United States · 1981–2026
DuPont PFOA (C8) at Washington Works, Parkersburg, and the Tennant farm
Same type: Water useSame countryCourt: won by claimant
Insurance declined or withdrawn · Chemical pollution · Water use · United States · 2020–2026
PFAS insurance disputes (3M, Chemours, DuPont)
Same type: Water useSame countryCourt: won by claimant, lost by claimant
Liability shifting (spin-offs, bankruptcy, closure bonds) · Water use · Chemical pollution · United States · 1961–2026
US Magnesium: Utah's lease termination, the company's bankruptcy and the state's US$30 million purchase of the Great Salt Lake plant
Same type: Water useSame countryCourt: won by claimant
Space debris and re-entry · Water use · United States · 2022–2025
Starbase launch site, Boca Chica, Texas: environmental review, penalties and Starship debris
Same type: Water useSame countryCourt: won by claimant
Water use · United States · 1985–2026
Gulf of Mexico dead zone (Mississippi nutrient runoff)
Same type: Water useSame countryHarm to nature disputed
Liability shifting (spin-offs, bankruptcy, closure bonds) · Chemical pollution · Water use · United States · 2017–2021
Duke Energy coal ash cleanup cost recovery (North Carolina)
Same type: Water useSame countryCourt: won by claimant