It's much easier to reduce a complicated issue like California water policy to a slogan that fits on a bumper sticker. But calling the struggle over limited water allocations in the state "fish vs. people" or a "man-made drought" oversimplifies an issue that impacts every part of California life.
Like most political issues these days, the debate over water is most often carried out on the extremes, with the various sides defaulting to talking points put out by groups they belong to. The idea of reaching a compromise isn't even on the radar. That brings gridlock to the issue and is the main reason that a water solution remains out of reach.
The Fresno Bee's editorial board has long pushed for a balanced solution to the water problem that acknowledges the need to protect the environment and provides water for agriculture and urban uses. After three years of drought conditions, dividing up the limited supply of water is where the issue gets complicated. In addition, the federal Endangered Species Act has limited water pumping from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta because the pumping kills threatened species. So far, agriculture has been the sector that has given up the most water. There needs to be fairness in water allocations.
Unfortunately, much of this issue is being fought out in Federal Court in Fresno where Judge Oliver Wanger has been trying to sort through the many legal issues that the ESA and the pumping have created. It would be much better if the lawyers were kept out of the mess and it was settled amicably through reasonable negotiations. But that isn't the way water disputes are resolved in California. At least they aren't settling them with guns anymore.
Now Sen. Dianne Feinstein has stirred the controversy by proposing an amendment that could increase water deliveries to farmers on the San Joaquin Valley's west side to 40% of their allocation. They received 10% last year. Feinstein would attach her amendment to the federal jobs bill. Environmentalists are condemning the Feinstein plan, while farmers are praising it. Let's look at the details before rejecting this latest plan.
Feinstein's controversial solution would be a temporary one if it gets the support it needs in Congress. In the end, California must have a comprehensive water solution that fixes the fragile Delta, which is crucial to the state's water system.
Most of California's drinking water and irrigation water goes through the Delta. It's levees and sloughs have been weakened and they could fall, causing a major catastrophe for the state. The water is pumped to the San Joaquin Valley and Southern California by huge pumps, which also suck in endangered fish. The Delta must be repaired and soon.
One solution is pumping water around the Delta in the so-called "peripheral canal." But Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's water experts are pushing another possi8bility -- tunneling under the Delta. Last fall, Lester Snow, the governor's water expert, told The Bee's editorial board that the underground canal would be 110 to 150 feet below the surface and 33 feet in diameter. There would actually be two tunnels that would transport the water under the Delta, according to Snow.
But that idea is years and millions of dollars into the future. Right now, the many sides of this issue must find common ground. Feinstein has offered a controversial plan. Does anyone out there have another solution beyond the current gridlock?
We don't need to solve this problem if we don't mind importing our food or we decide that Los Angeles and San Diego don't need to grow any larger. Water that flows through the Delta not only helps feed the nation, but it also quenches the thirst of millions of Southern Californians.
In a state of 38 million people, we have a water system that was built for half that many people. We could have enough water for environmental, agricultural and urban uses. But too many of the players in California's water wars would rather argue on the extremes than compromise.
Secret water diversion. I was employed by the self-proclaimed "mastermind." City rebuilt on top of this mess. The joke is that "the public will never figure it out." www.myspace.com/marlalk4
I prefer to frame the issue as "flushing toilets". No matter who you are; farmer, environmentalist, big city resident or small town resident we all depend on our state's infrastructure to flush our toilets. This allows us to live a clean, dysentery free environment. For anyone who doesn't appreciate infrastructure such as a dam or a peripheral canal, I urge to visit a third workd country and ddrink the water.
So are the pumps are not operational? Is that why they are being turned off? It's time to get some stimulus money directed toward erecting a nice smelt memorial and use the pumps to provide water from the delta, the purpose for which they were designed, and for which taxpayers spend a considerable amount of money on maintenance. It would be one thing if every time we are told it is not a non-native endangered species which is assisting in our economic suicide that is the issue, but in la belle indifference smelt earn only repeated denial as a title while wholly ignored in often vertically communicated and artfully deceptive pedantry. The Bee propagandists who exploit repetition as a primary strategem of establishing this lie, while the lords of state rally years later, don't need to worry though because the only credibility lost will be among the worlds most sensible classes, farmers and those who understand the security that comes from growing plants that are nutritional.
I've asked Congressman Devin Nunes questions on this issue but he does not answer, he is instead focused on petty partisanship.
Thanks Jim
Interesting take. The Chronicle covered this as "Fishermen v. Farmers."
If the FBee is looking for a way to balance the debate, it missed the point. The salmon fishery is collapsing, as is the trout. Not allowing enough fresh water to flow through the system will result in saltwater intrusion into groundwater wherever saltwater advances--which will affect the groundwater farmers draw on.
Try again, FBee.
Foolish slogans don't begin to encompass the magnitude of the issues.
Assemblyman Berryhill is also involved in partisan positioning. He either isn't bright enough to get it--or doesn't want to. I'm not sure which is worse.
There is nobody to blame but ourselves. We have outgrown, and over-allocated our available water from this source.We must do the difficult work to fairly allocate what we have to the identified users, and in times of drought and low flows, when there is not enough, everyone gets their allocation of not enough. This needs to combined with pragmatic, austere conservation measures. Our world will not be as it was. Southern California, Central Valley farmers, environmentalists, everyone will need to realize that we've reached the limits of our resources we all have been warned about since the 60's. We have new technologies to assist in managing what water we have more efficiently, however irresponsible unbridled growth is out. All user needs must be balanced one against the other. The only reason we haven't been more conservative with our water is that we haven't had to be. Now we have to. Any other path is only very temporary.We must become experts at conserving water.
Bill
Do we think the south cares about water rights? Look at the shameful deals made last fall. Deals gave them SUPERIOR water rights, the Delta commission and the bond proposal so that Metropolitan Water Dist. can take water to their district at our expense. The ruse claims it is for farms and farm workers in the San Joaquin. However, many of those farms, and their water rights, are owned by So Cal developers! The rest can be purchased. Pretty easy for that water to go over the Tehachapi’s. The reason to move the proposed massive intakes upstream, which are big enough pass 12 million gallons per minute, to take over 83 per cent of the ENTIRE AVERAGE Sac River flow, is not for Delta protection. You can't have a fresh water Delta without fresh water! It is so they don't suck non-potable water! Earthquake and sea level rise protection is another ruse. Delta soils are alluvial deposits and are unstable and the proposed intakes are barely above the current intakes. The sustainable solution is for Metropolitan to recover their rain water, use water efficiently, reuse water and install desalination plants. The LA River is now a year round river due to their waste! Their accounting states that these solutions are more expensive, $1000 per acre foot vs. $600 per acre foot. What they have not included are the costs that will be transferred to CA and US. Things like flood control costs, mitigation, fallowing 100,000 acres of Delta ag land and 100,000's more in CA, the raising of dams, electricity to pump the water through the Delta and Federal subsidies. That's right, they have to PUMP this water around or under the Delta. They already use 3 per cent of ALL electricity in CA to get it over the Tehachapi’s! And it still doesn't address the sinking land under the CA Aqueduct or potential of terrorist acts. It’s a water grab plain and simple.
Last week I attended the California Water Crisis Forum sponsored by the Pacific Legal Foundation at the World Ag Expo in Tulare. The only news crew I saw was from Channel 47.
Johnny Amaral, Chief of Staff from Congressman Nunes office was present at that forum, he spoke and answered all questions directed to him.
http://tinyurl.com/ydl7ydd
Must be a very recent drastic change in Nunes's Office policy because he has not got back to me with direct answers to questions.
It's not really "fish vs people." It is Libs / Obama administration vs people!
I'm not sure that government offices prefer responding to folks who live life calling themselves Bee Sting, Osage Orange, The Fly, or Bear in the Big Blue House anymore. Security imperatives in the last decade or so have modified constiuent contacts to reality based communication. If nothing else try making up an alias like "Ken Salazar," they have been waiting for one of them awhile now.
Assuming I went under alias is just an ussumption. I do communicate properly to our representatives.
Bee Sting...What,now we're not good enough for you?...man up and you'll get some respect...maybe,but then I wonder...could "Bee Sting" be just one of your multiple personalities and all these no-name wonders may just be one person or maybe this is like the "Truman Show" and none of you are real... just "Fresno Bee" operatives while Jim Boren plays the "Ed Harris" part of the director...meanwhile,I've got 4 feet of snow on a half acre I'll sell to the highest bidder or $100 a pickup load(you shovel)...I'm also building a non-taxpayer funded,smelt free reservoir on my property and encouraging others to do so.
Brian you asked; "What,now we're not good enough for you?" No it's not a question of "good enough", it's a question respecting aninimity.
Trust me if I wanted to "get respect" from bloggers I would not search for it here.
Good luck shoveling, been there done that.
So until the federal government relaxes the environmental law maybe California should follow some of the other states getting noisey about states rights. I don't see how the state water bond is relevant if as Judge Wanger has pointed out that the problem rests in the language of federal law which gives the "environment" and edangered species equal standing as humans in water distribution. There is no assurances that the lawsuits are going to end.
What happened to the "Two Gates" Project? Its my understanding that Two Gates was based on science and real field work. Two Gates would enable the delta smelt to migrate upstream to other areas of the delta and not get entrapped by the big pumps. I recommend Two Gates; but you gotta read the details of the project to understand how it works. I read all the documents about three times...and Two Gates sounds like a reasonable alternative. Thanks for your time.
Bee Sting...what does "Respecting Anonymity" mean?..."Respect my Cute Name,Respect my Non-accountability,Respect my Fear,Respect my What"?You say you're not looking for respect here but your asking for it...confusing at best.Meanwhile...GoCalifornia,what I know about the two gates seems reasonable but nothing short of "No Water" seems acceptable to the enviros and their puppets...it's not about fish,it never has been.
It looks more like self survival mode of the Westside farmers more than anything else! The politics is much about who gets the water and the salmon, and smelt seem a nuisance to these people. Overpopulation and the sewage problem through the Sacramento area add to the problem of the survival of these species of fish. It seems another form of Orwellian nightmare. One created by people, not animals or nature. As complex as the water situation is, survival of these interests seem to override the right of nature to survive. Preservation of wildlife, the flow of rivers and a system of nature will, by the forces of civilization take hold and make things right for a segment of population that farm an arid part of the San Joaquin Valley. It seems only people with the most influence and pocketbook have more rights.
The 850,000+ acres of Westside Water District is a part of the valley that was formed last. As a consequence, they were the last to receive the water and became victim to three years of drought. The direction of farming, is to maintain the status quo of the valley and it's ability to continue farming! The point is, is California willing to allow the loss of fish species and the degradation of a natural water system? Is California really sure in the climatic changes and shifts of nature continue it's course as populations explode and farming become more impossible? Yes,the issues are complex. The politics has become a battle of survival. It is that of convincing the values that are placed before us. If we are unable to do that, we all may be losers.
In any case, I don't think nature will prevail. As humans, we have our own personal selfish interests and anything else is considered "socialistic" and against the wishes of a few. We must take,seize and hold by capitalistic standards and this is the American way. But as California is in debt to it's neck and the economic devastation is apparent, California is supposed to build and support these unsustainable and questionable infrastrutures and place us further into debt. Nature, neither, may not provide for us even as we decide our decisions on this issue!
Ron I'll buy you dinner if you stand in the middle of Mendota, on stage with a translator, and read your post once every five minutes for one hour. Don't forget your helmet.
If we had had environmentalists millions of years ago, dinosaurs would still be walking the earth. The world evolves. We can't stop this evolution, the smelts' time has come. This world has gone crazy.