Water Education Foundation
This is just one post in the Peripheral Canal Category
Click here to view all posts

Saturday’s top of the scroll: Divisive Delta canal now on the fast track; Fears loom that moving water south could devastate, contaminate supply

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 4, 2009 at 8:25 am

Happy Fourth of July!  May you have a safe and enjoyable holiday!  Today’s top of the scroll comes from Mike Taugher at the Contra Costa Times:

Chuck Baker grows pears on land his family has worked since 1851 and has a farmer’s sensitivity to the plagues of modern agriculture — pesticide regulations, the intrusive hand of federal regulators, the threat to private property posed by wetlands restoration — and, most of all, the need for water. So, he sympathizes with San Joaquin Valley farmers who are short of water this year, but he also has little patience for the argument being trumpeted by valley politicians: that the problems confronted by valley farmers can be reduced to the simple equation of “fish versus farmers.”

“I don’t think we’d be in this situation if they paid any attention to their own rules,” Baker said. “They’re the ones that ruined the fish. Not me, not me who’s been irrigating the same piece of land for 150 years.” The “they” Baker was referring to was not so much his kindred farmers, but the state and federal agencies that ship them Delta water. Those agencies, he said, created the ecological crisis by taking more water out of the Delta than they should have.

As Delta pumping increased in recent years, fish populations collapsed and triggered new rules to prevent fish from going extinct. Those rules will affect water deliveries for years, but so far have had a minor impact because shortages this year are mostly due to dry conditions and drawn-down reservoirs.

Now, the solution proposed to keep Delta water flowing south — a peripheral canal — poses a threat to water rights his family has held since statehood, Baker said. It is not something north Delta framers like Baker should have to worry about. They have the law, contracts and water-quality standards on their side.

But given a long record of broken promises and aborted plans, Baker and others say there is no reason to trust the government will protect their rights from the thirst of others, especially the farmers in the San Joaquin Valley. “They’re going to build this canal whether we want it or not,” he said. “The best we can do is fight them until we run out of money.”

Baker’s son, Brett, a 25-year-old UC Davis graduate who represents the sixth generation of his family to live on the same 30-acre orchard, put it this way: “This is being framed as a fish-versus-people issue, when in actuality it’s a people-versus-people issue.”

Read more from Mike Taugher at the Contra Costa Times by clicking here.

July 4, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Comments

4 Responses to “Saturday’s top of the scroll: Divisive Delta canal now on the fast track; Fears loom that moving water south could devastate, contaminate supply”

  1. ieatfood on July 4th, 2009 2:20 pm

    The bottom line is we need safe, affordable food to exist. Federal regulators paid for by Environmentalists are dehydrating the richest, most fertile soil in California which grows half of the nation’s food. They are also sacrificing millions of dollars in tax revenues at a time when California needs money the most. Where’s the common sense? Why would anyone want to bite the hand that feeds them?

    This issue is about ALL of the people of California. It is not about farmers and farm workers. Environmentalists want to slow humankind. They want wildlife in California. NOT PEOPLE. They are trying to achieve this by controlling our water, starving our economy by collapsing our biggest industry, agriculture, and forcing people not to populate. They are doing it under the guise of trying to protect fish. This issue is REAL! And they have the money to pay scientists and politicians for control of our precious resources through the federal government and the courts.

    Smelt are not the issue. We know they are only threatened NOT endangered, and only in this one tiny geographical area. Smelt exist by the millions from Michigan to Maine. Smelt are just a distraction; a way to tie up our water resources in the courts and damage ag and the economy of California further. This tactic advances the Env’s cause to slow human population in our state by putting people out of work, decreasing revenue for programs and infrastructure, and ultimately making it too expensive for you to have children or to live in your home state.

    Now that we are wise to their Smelt lies, they are really grabbing at straws. They are pulling years-old biologogical opinions out of their back pocket. They are hastily attempting to make a food-chain argument from the Smelt to the whales. Could there not also be a food-chain argument made for people?

    California farmers are not against the environment. On the contrary. They are the only people in this issue who actually work hand in hand with it. They are up to their boots in sun, wind, rain, air, earth, every single day as part of their job to feed our nation. They know more about land and waterways than anyone else because they depend on it to grow our food. It is a necessary part of their business to be friendly to the environment and to conserve water as well as all other resources. Their livelihood depends on their knowledge of being environmentally conscious. Proof of this is the fact that farmers consistently pass on their farms to their children and are themselves fourth and fifth generation farmers. They have grown up learning how to efficiently and safely use our valley’s resources. And their knowledge benefits our nation by providing us with half of our country’s food. We are the bread basket of the world and the env’s want to parch our farmland. Will you stand by and let this happen?

    This issue is not just about the farmer or the farm worker. This is about all of the people of California. This is about Environmentalists with power and money controlling our great golden state through the very government that should be protecting us. Do not let the env’s, who have never visited the San Joaquin Valley and who have never seen our farmland in production, who never step outside their high rise flats or leave their city, do not let them force us to eat foreign food that is possibly unsafe. Do not let them destroy the farms. Do not let them take California from us.

    Wake up California. Turn on your brains. Read about this. Learn about this. You will soon see where the real trouble with water lies and why we are living a man-made drought. You will discover the housing crisis will look like nothing compared to the inescapable devastation there will be after the ripple effect of letting them get away with further collapsing agriculture and California’s economy. You will see how easy there can be food shortages. And when you learn the truth, I hope you will become a loud voice against the anti-humans who are trying to fool you into believing they are merely trying to save the Smelt.

  2. dfb on July 4th, 2009 10:23 pm

    ieatfood: I think you paint environmentalists with too broad a brush and fail to consider the complex issues our water system presents and variety of opinions within the different groups. There are many reasons why someone might challenge delta exports. There are some who want to save the Delta because they live there, others want to stop irrigation of areas with high groundwater and saline soil, and yet others want to fully restore salmon runs. Likewise, you fail to consider the variety of opinions in the farming community, as well as who owns much of the farmland. This article featured farmers who want delta exporst to be limited — you didn’t even address that in your rant. Many farms are family owned and operated but much of the land is owned and operated by huge corporate conglomerates. In the past, Chevron, Prudential, Del Monte, etc. have operated some of the largest farms in California. Boswell operated the biggest of them all.
    I am neither environmentalist or farmer but I can tell there is more to the story than us versus them versus those over there. versus the fish. We do not truly address the root issues or create long term solutions when we delude ourselves into thinking that way.

  3. ieatfood on July 5th, 2009 1:36 am

    There is enough water for everybody’s needs, yet a single group is getting away with stealing all of the water rights.
    A rant? Yes. Glad you noticed. We live in California and we’re mad. Mad that 480,000 acre feet of water was allowed to go straight to the ocean so far this year. Mad that one group is not playing fair and getting away with it. Mad that more Californians don’t know what is happening and may not find out until they are sick from E. Coli they contracted from eating foreign fruit. Mad that we are seeing public services like police, fire, and schools disappear because unemployment is so high and there are not enough tax revenues to pay the bills. Mad that millions of tax dollars from farming has been sacrificed when our state needs that money the most. The list goes on…

    I believe you’re wrong about the ownership of land by huge conglomerates in the San Joaquin Valley. That simply is untrue. But even if it were correct, it doesn’t matter WHO grows the food that feeds our nation. Food is food as long as it doesn’t come from foreign sources. They pay taxes too. They create jobs. Not to mention these so called conglomerates would be suffering from the same water restrictions.

    Yes, there are many reasons to challenge the delta exports, but one group is underhandedly creating a new addition to the endangered species list: humans. It is simply outrageous that federal authorities would seek to force these restrictions on California without conducting a single public hearing, without any public review or comment, and without any consideration of the harm they are doing. Corruption is rampant in our government.

    Brett Baker, in this article, says, “This is being framed as a fish-versus-people issue, when in actuality it’s a people-versus-people issue.” I agree.

    I realize our water issues are complex, but the need for food to eat is very simple.

  4. dfb on July 6th, 2009 11:29 pm

    ieatfood: I think you will accomplish little with your tact and your tone. There are more players than farmers and environmentalists. There are fisherman, residents of riparian areas such as the Delta and the S.F. Bay, recreationalists who use some part of the vast Sacramento and San Joaquin watershed. These all play a part in the debate. You will need to get them to come together. As has been noted, these groups are all fractionalized as well. In other words, generalizations are likely to anger some of your potential allies in this debate.

    “Water rights” are legal rights to water. Many of the San Joaquin Valley farmers being shut out (such as Westlands farmers) lack water rights altogether. That is why they are first to see cuts when there is not enough water to go around. They do possess contractual rights to a limited amount of water set by contract. The amount available is clearly variable according to the contract and essentially allows for drought and other reasons for decreased deliveries. Farmers who do possess water rights are getting their full allotment of water this year. You can see historical CVP allocations on the CVP web site showing the discrepancy between exchange contractors (have water rights) and water contractors (no water rights): http://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvo/vungvari/water_allocations_historical.pdf

    People, myself included, are sick of scare tactics. We already get a lot of our produce from other countries. I know because stores are required to label country of origin. The recent big e coli scares have originated in the US. Spinach in Salinas, beef from Swift in Greeley, CO, peppers (or was it tomatoes) from Florida.

    Who grows our food is very relevant to this conversation. You should research and provide stats to back up your claim. It isn’t hard for critics to cherry pick the big farm/corporations in the San Joaquin Valley and hold them up as poster children about what is wrong with agriculture (also referred to by many as agribusiness) in the US. In fact, many of the most prominent critques I’ve seen/heard about the valley farms strike at their size, wealth, and corporate owners. Many of the articles about farm bankruptcies talk about this glut or that glut caused by a huge corporate farm planting too much of one item, sinking prices and the competition. Almonds last year, grapes a few years before that. There are also the stories about the farmers who skirted size restrictions to get CVP water for decades, until the 1980’s when size limits were lifted. You have your work cut out for you.

    One thing I’ve seen/heard that may hurt your cause is the modern victory garden. A lot of people I know across the country are trying to garden again using the WWII victory garden concept. They are doing it for various reasons. Folks in Michigan and Ohio are saving a few bucks. Friends in LA and the Bay Area are ripping up lawns to save water or have greater control over taste, use of chemicals, and selection. A small space is all that it takes to grow enough food for the family.

Leave a Reply