Monday’s top of the scroll: San Joaquin soon will begin flowing year-round; Filling, restoration of river due to begin in October
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 15, 2009 at 8:01 am
From the Fresno Bee:
The San Joaquin River will finally flow year-round as a long-awaited restoration begins in October. And officials finally have figured out what to do with a 20-mile stretch of the river that has been choked with brush and unused for decades.
A new environmental document answers years of questions about the bottleneck, northeast of Los Banos. It will simply be bypassed for now using a flood-control channel, but the stretch later may be restored as a functioning part of the river at a multimillion-dollar cost yet to be determined.
That challenge is on hold for further study. But after decades of rancorous debate and legal action, the biggest river restoration in the West will wait no more.
An agreement among government officials, environmentalists and farmers compels officials to fill the river with water starting Oct. 1. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation this month set forth an environmental document with plans for the first flows.
Read more from the Fresno Bee by clicking here. You can read environmental documents and find out much more about the San Joaquin River Restoration project by clicking here.
Picture credit: Photo of the headwaters of the San Joaquin River by flickr photographer jcookfisher.
Daniel Weintraub: River restoration project offers a sprinkling of hope
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on April 26, 2009 at 7:41 amFrom the Sacramento Bee:
When the chinook salmon come back to the San Joaquin River, it will be a miracle. But the wonder of the river’s restoration won’t be in the biology involved, which is well established. Or the engineering needed to bring the river back to life. Most of what is required has been done before.
It’s the politics that make this project so remarkable.
Few issues in California, or anywhere in the West, cause as much bitter division as water. Yet in the foothills east of Fresno and the flatlands stretching toward the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the warring parties have finally put down their arms and are working together on a project that should benefit the environment, the fishing industry and the local economy. Even the farmers at the heart of it all have signed on to the deal, though many of them still wish they could remain set in their ways.
Thanks to recent changes in federal law and a commitment of federal money to the project, the San Joaquin River restoration, debated for nearly 20 years, is about to begin in earnest. The first water for the newly re-created river will flow through Friant Dam in October, if all goes according to plan, and it will then flow into parts of the river that have been dry for decades. Within a few years, thousands of salmon should be swimming upstream through what is now a parched valley landscape.
Read more from Daniel Weintraub’s column in the Sacramento Bee by clicking here.
Don’t wait until it’s too late for the San Joaquin River, says commentary
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on April 24, 2009 at 8:04 amFrom the Modesto Bee, this commentary written by Eric Caine, a teacher at Merced College. The first half of the commentary is discussing how angry some people are over the San Joaquin River Restoration, which has been the subject of years and years of litigation. Some people are bitter and angry at the courts, and other people see a different target:
The courts aren’t the only target for people’s wrath. Rep. Devin Nunes of Visalia, himself a politician, blames politicians. Of course it’s usually the politicians from that other party, in this case the Democrats, who are to blame.
Nunes claims “radical greenies” bent on “destroying our economy in the San Joaquin Valley” have taken over the Democratic Party and have engineered a “man-made drought.” The Republican congressman isn’t too clear about how the “greenies” managed to bring about three consecutive years of less than average rainfall, but perhaps the explanation is forthcoming.
It’s easy to forget that water shortages have been a looming threat for decades, and easier still to forget the San Joaquin River and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta are near a state of collapse because we have ignored their health.
Deferred maintenance always comes with a steep price, especially in the case of rivers and waterways.
Those calling for delays in beginning the task of restoring our waterways have good reasons for their positions, but they have forgotten that these are the same reasons we’ve always used to postpone the inevitable.
As painful as the fix is now, the consequences of a total collapse would be even worse, and unless we act soon, we’re looking at a total collapse. We should have learned by now that the longer we wait, the worse it gets. Action now is painful; action later may be too late — not just for salmon, but for all who depend on healthy rivers and waterways.
Read the full text of this commentary from the Modesto Bee by clicking here.
Nunes condemns lands bill; says passage eliminates “all hope for construction of Temperance Flat, a new reservoir urgently needed to address the ongoing ground water shortage throughout the San Joaquin Valley”
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on March 26, 2009 at 10:05 amFrom Congressman Devin Nunes’ website:
Today, Congressman Devin Nunes reacted to passage of the San Joaquin River Settlement legislation.
“Today’s action by Congress represents a major setback for our region. The officials responsible will be remembered as architects of the economic and environmental catastrophe that follows,” said Rep. Nunes.
The San Joaquin River Settlement legislation will force the diversion of 250,000 acre feet of surface water in order to accommodate the creation of a new salmon fishery – a fishery experts believe will not succeed. These diversions come at a time when many communities across the valley are already faced with critically low ground water supplies, water quality issues, as well as ongoing legal challenges threatening further losses.
“The outlook is grim and there is no way to sugar coat the seriousness of the challenge before us. I expect 300,000 acres of farmland to be forced out of production thanks to this backwards approach to restoring the San Joaquin River. Additionally, this legislation will eliminate all hope for construction of Temperance Flat, a new reservoir urgently needed to address the ongoing ground water shortage throughout the San Joaquin Valley,” said Rep. Nunes.
Nunes, the author of legislation in 2003 that authorized a new feasibility study for the construction of Temperance Flat, has long warned Friant and others involved in the San Joaquin River Settlement talks about the unintended consequences of their actions. He provided alternative restoration proposals, as well as options to recover water lost during restoration. None of Nunes’ suggestions were accepted by Friant or the Natural Resources Defense Council.
“It is hard to imagine a more flawed approach than the one Congress has taken today. Greed, dishonesty and the vain hope of relief from lawsuits seemed to be the primary motivation for passage of this deal,” said Rep. Nunes.
For more information on the San Joaquin River Settlement and its impact on the San Joaquin Valley, visit www.nunes.house.gov.
Editorial: Pelosi must stand up for lands bill
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on March 14, 2009 at 7:20 amFrom the Sacramento Bee, this editorial:
Here’s an urgent task for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi: Remove Rep. Collin Peterson, D-Minn., as chairman of the House Agriculture Committee. The need became clear on Wednesday, when Peterson was instrumental in narrowly defeating a landmark public lands bill that was the result of years of bipartisan compromise.
The Senate passed this highly popular bill in January on a 73 to 21 vote. House members voted 244-182 in favor of the bill – two votes short of a needed two-thirds majority.
The problem: Peterson helped hold this noncontroversial bill hostage to amendments being pushed by the National Rifle Association. Specifically, the bipartisan Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (Senate Bill 22) was held up because the NRA wanted to attach an amendment that would create a law allowing concealed, loaded weapons in national parks.
For a committee chairman to allow the narrow agenda of a special interest group to take precedence over a broad-based bill in the national interest is unacceptable – particularly for someone who chairs a committee overseeing many of the nation’s public lands.
Pelosi can’t just let this pass. There have to be consequences.
Read more from the Sacramento Bee by clicking here.
House shoots down public lands bill with California projects, including San Joaquin River Restoration
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on March 11, 2009 at 8:32 pmFrom the Fresno Bee:
Democratic leaders suffered an embarrassing defeat Wednesday as the House failed to pass a public lands bill packed with California projects.
Loaded with provisions restoring the San Joaquin River, preserving Sierra Nevada wilderness and storing Madera County groundwater, the 1,248-page bill secured a solid House majority. The 282-144 vote, though, fell just short of the two-thirds margin needed under the special rules in play.
“They were trying to be too cute by half,” said bill opponent Rep Devin Nunes, R-Visalia. “This was a completely ridiculous process.”
The House vote does not permanently kill the public lands bill. Before it returns, though, the House leaders who miscalculated Wednesday will have to reconsider their tactics.
The leadership’s first tactical decision was to fold 172 different provisions into one giant package. This big-tent approach is typical for public lands legislation, because it diversifies political support.
The provisions range from new Pacific Northwest scenic trails and Everglades National Park additions to designating new Sierra Nevada wilderness in honor of former California congressman John Krebs. By Wednesday morning, though, the bill’s size worked against it.
Read more from the Fresno Bee by clicking here.
San Joaquin River wrangling continues
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on February 16, 2009 at 6:01 am
From the Fresno Bee:
The revival of the San Joaquin River will officially begin with a shot of fresh water in October — capping decades of courtroom battles and years of delicate negotiations over funding.
But the wrangling over the state’s second-longest river is far from over.
People are only now beginning to discuss other issues, such a proposal by developers in Madera County to pour treated sewage into the river not far from salmon-spawning areas.
San Joaquin River wrangling continuesSome people also are wondering how to keep downstream water users from siphoning the restoration water. And east-side farmers, who will give up irrigation water for the restoration, want authorities to recapture and return some water to farm fields.
Meanwhile, a lot of people are ready to argue about the exact course of the rebuilt river.
Congress soon is expected to give the green light to $88 million in restoration funding for a settlement in the river lawsuit, which was filed nearly 21 years ago to restore salmon to the river. The full restoration price tag could eventually be 10 times higher.
The restoration would make the river a continuous stream again, connecting a fractured, 153-mile stretch from Friant Dam to the mouth of the Merced River. Beyond the Merced the river has remained a flowing stream to the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.
With the first revival flows coming this fall, local activists say it’s time to consider the river differently.
“It will become a statewide drinking water source. It will become habitat for endangered species and migratory fish,” said Chris Acree, executive director of Fresno-based Revive the San Joaquin. “It will become a new recreational source.”
Read more from the Fresno Bee by clicking here.
Don Curlee commentary on San Joaquin River restoration: “What kind of convoluted reasoning supports spending hundreds of millions in federal tax money and stealing millions of acre feet of agricultural water to restore a river that has been dry for 60 years just so salmon can frolic in the stream?”
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on February 2, 2009 at 6:32 amFrom the Visalia Times Delta, this commentary:
The fishermen and hunters I know don’t always get their game, but they seem to know where to find it. Oregon and Alaska are popular destinations to find salmon. Makes me wonder why some folks propose spending millions to bring salmon to the fishermen of the San Joaquin Valley.
What kind of convoluted reasoning supports spending hundreds of millions in federal tax money and stealing millions of acre feet of agricultural water to restore a river that has been dry for 60 years just so salmon can frolic in the stream?
This is the scenario presently on the table in a bill before Congress. The version omits the $500 million in federal funding that was proposed originally, putting even more of a ridiculous burden on farmers and private enterprise. At one point the proposal included an even exchange of new water for the amount released down the San Joaquin River. That suggestion also has been withdrawn.
People who discuss the issue point to the decision by federal Judge Oliver Wanger ordering implementation of the plan. The judgment was based on environmental law and precedence. Water purveyors who disburse water for farm use saw the congressional proposal as the least intrusive of several proposals.
The predicament underscores the awesome power that environmentalists and fish worshipers have achieved. They seem to dictate the costliest, most unreasonable actions based on the flimsiest evidence. They’ve been doing it for 50 years or more, and they seem to gain momentum with each decision made by helpless judges and intimidated legislators.
Read more of this commentary from the Visalia Times Delta by clicking here.
Healing the waters: Federal legislation will help restore San Joaquin River, end lawsuit, says editorial
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on January 22, 2009 at 8:32 amFrom Stockton’s Record, this editorial about the recent passage of the Federal lands bill, and the San Joaquin River salmon restoration:
The idea is to bring water back into the river that in stretches is dry and, in the process, to bring back salmon runs. Those plentiful runs were a yearly occurrence before the opening of Friant Dam in 1949, which changed the San Joaquin River from the Valley’s main liquid artery into little more that an irrigation ditch. At certain times during the year, 63 miles of the once-teeming river dry into a sandy gravel bed, home mainly to lizards and jackrabbits rather than fish. The idea is to restore river flow and salmon runs by 2013.
The Senate measure that passed is a collection of about 160 separate bills conferring wilderness protection to 470,000 acres in California, with additional lands in other states.
Federal officials are completing a big environmental study of the river restoration plan. No water can start flowing until the study is done, perhaps later this year.
Restoration work includes a bypass around the Mendota Pool in western Fresno and Madera counties. That will keep migrating salmon from getting hung up on their way home. In addition, gravel pits along the river will be filled or isolated to protect juvenile salmon. And seasonal screens will keep fish from getting lost near Los Banos.
Read the full text of this editorial from the Record by clicking here.
Coverage wrap-up: U.S. Senate approves massive public lands bill; California reaps the benefits
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on January 16, 2009 at 8:00 amFrom the Fresno Bee:
The Senate on Thursday approved a grab-bag public lands bill that’s supposed to save the San Joaquin River, store Madera County groundwater and secure Sierra Nevada wilderness.
At 1,296 pages, the public lands bill was stuffed with more than enough goodies to ensure its passage over conservative opposition. The House is expected to take up the bill within the next few weeks. Once approved by the House, it’s bound to become one of the first bills signed by President-elect Barack Obama after he takes office.
“Restoring the once-mighty San Joaquin River - and putting an end to the years of legal battles over the river’s resources - has long been one of my top priorities,” Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein declared. “The good news is that the Senate today took us one step closer to this vital goal.”
QuantcastLawmakers call the bill the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009. Skeptics call it pork, but they could not block its 150-plus provisions through a filibuster. The bill passed easily, 73-21. “I believe we’re doing this because we’re thinking in the very short term,” said Republican Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, citing the “blatant, corrupting process of earmarks.”
Great coverage of the provisions for central California, including the San Joaquin River restoration, expansion of wilderness in the Sierra Nevada, and a Madera County groundwater project. Read more from the Fresno Bee by clicking here.
The Central Valley Business Times article focuses on the San Joaquin River Restoration:
Supporters of the measure say that once enacted, it is expected to bring to a close 19 years of lawsuits between the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Friant Water Users Authority and the U.S. Department of the Interior. It would restore and maintain the San Joaquin River’s critical fish populations, while minimizing adverse water supply impacts to long-term Friant water users and other third party contractors, bill supporters say.
It does so within a framework that the affected interests have all agreed to, Ms. Feinstein’s office says.
Not everyone is happy about it. U.S. Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Visalia, could probably be counted on the negative side when it comes up for a vote in the House. “Today’s action by the Senate is fiscally irresponsible,” says Mr. Nunes. “It represents an attack on our local economy during a period of national economic crisis and will deprive our region of precious surface water at a time of critical shortage.”
More details on the San Joaquin River restoration portion from the Central Valley Business Times by clicking here.
Good news for our rivers, too, says Friends of the River in this article posted on IndyBay.org:
“This is the largest addition of federally protected rivers in California since 1987,” said Steve Evans, Conservation Director of the statewide conservation organization Friends of the River.
The bill protects as Wild, Scenic, and Recreational Rivers segments of the upper Owens River in Mono County, Cottonwood Creek and the Amargosa River in Inyo County, Piru Creek in Los Angeles County, and the North Fork San Jacinto River, Fuller Mill Creek, Palm Canyon Creek, and Bautista Creek in Riverside County. The bill also protects more than 700,000 acres of wilderness.
The rivers and streams protected in the bill provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation, including hiking, fishing, and wildlife observation. In addition, the waterways provide important habitat for a host of threatened and endangered species and are rich in cultural and historical values.
“This bill protects our fast-dwindling heritage of free flowing rivers in a state where 1,400 dams have harnessed our rivers,” Evans said. “It also significantly increases the ecological diversity of the rivers in the National Wild & Scenic Rivers System.”
The legislation for the first time protects rivers and streams in eastern and southern California, in such spectacularly scenic and ecologically sensitive regions as the eastern Sierra, White Mountains, Mojave Desert, San Gabriel Mountains, and San Jacinto Mountains.
Read more from IndyBay.org by clicking here.
Even Oxnard got a boost, says the Ventura County Star:
It’s the first time the Senate has given its approval to the Oxnard water expansion. The House has twice passed legislation authorizing the project — in 2006 and 2007 — but both times the bill died in the Senate. The bill still must go back to the House for final approval. But the Senate’s approval means the measure is almost certain to become law.
“This is meaningful,” Ken Ortega, the city’s public works director, said of the Senate vote. “All of the other votes have been important, but this is where we got stuck. To have cleared this hurdle, there’s just a step and a half here (to go). I think we can rest assured we’re finally past this milestone.”
Rep. Lois Capps, who first introduced the legislation in the House back in 2004, said she doesn’t expect any problem winning final approval in that chamber. “Now that the Senate has approved it, I fully expect the House to follow suit quickly so we can get this legislation to the president for his signature,” said Capps, D-Santa Barbara.
The Oxnard water expansion was one of 13 water recycling projects in California that were approved as part of the overall public lands bill.
Read more from the Ventura County Star by clicking here.
U.S. Senate breaks blockade of public lands bills by Dr. No
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on January 13, 2009 at 6:23 amFrom the Environment News Service:
Sunday was a working day for the brand new 111th Congress, now in the control of Democrats. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada lost no time in using his authority to make a massive omnibus public lands package the first order of business.
Casting their first vote, the senators agreed to consider and vote later this week on the package of 160 public lands bills that would protect 200 million acres of wilderness in nine states - California, Colorado, Idaho, New Mexico, Michigan, Oregon, Utah, Virginia, and West Virginia.
The bill would safeguard over 270,000 acres along over 1,000 miles of rivers in Oregon, California, Idaho, Arizona, Wyoming, and Massachusetts and add 2,800 miles of new trails to the federal system.
The package includes legislation Reid calls “crucial” for his home state of Nevada, where nearly 90 percent of the land is managed by the federal government.
Entitled the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009, S.22, the bill is known informally as the “Tomnibus” Bill because it combines many measures blocked in the past by Republican Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, a physician nicknamed “Dr. No.”
Coburn again objected to the legislation and has filed 13 amendments to the package that he says target both Republican and Democrat projects. Among other things, he objects to a provision that protects lands in Wyoming that might produce about 8.8 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and 300 million barrels of oil. “The energy resources walled off by this bill would nearly match the annual production levels of our two largest natural gas production states - Alaska and Texas,” Coburn said.
But Coburn’s greatest ire is directed at what he calls, “a $1 billion California water project to restore 500 salmon.”
Read more from the Environment News Service by clicking here.
Federal wilderness protection for California land moves forward; $461 million expected to be set aside for S.an Joaquin River
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on January 12, 2009 at 7:57 amFrom the Los Angeles Times:
Large swaths of California wild lands would gain federal wilderness protection under legislation that took a step toward approval in the U.S. Senate during a rare Sunday session.
The measure, which would expand the protection to more than 2 million acres of public land nationwide, may be the most significant conservation legislation in a decade, said Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee and the bill’s manager.
It would designate as wilderness — the government’s highest protection — about 190,000 acres in Riverside County, including parts of Joshua Tree National Park; about 450,000 acres in the Eastern Sierra and San Gabriel Mountains north of Los Angeles; and about 90,000 acres in Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Parks, including John Krebs Wilderness.
The measure also would authorize $88 million in funding to launch an ambitious effort to restore the San Joaquin River, which has been drained for decades to supply Central Valley farms. More water would be left in the river, and populations of spring-run chinook salmon would be returned under terms of a legal settlement in a long-running environmental battle over the river.
The proposal is expected to win final Senate approval by the end of the week and then go to the House, where it is also expected to be approved.
“We’re very excited that these slices of wild California are so close to being permanently protected,” said Ryan Henson, policy director of the California Wilderness Coalition.
Read more from the Los Angeles Times by clicking here.
From Stockton’s Record, more on the San Joaquin River Restoration:
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-San Francisco, requested the funds to settle the San Joaquin River dispute with the environmentalist group Natural Resources Defense Council.
“We’ve got our hands full,” said Ron Jacobsma, general manager of the Friant Water Users Authority near Fresno. “This is one of the largest, most complex river restorations in the West. But we think it is moving ahead appropriately.”
The restoration has split Valley political interests along north-south and east-west lines.
The Natural Resources Defense Council first sued in December 1988, hoping to return water flows and a viable salmon population to dry stretches from Fresno to Stockton. In September 2006, facing courtroom defeat, the Friant farmers agreed to join their longtime environmental adversaries in settling the suit.
Besides new wilderness designations, the bill would designate the childhood home of former President Bill Clinton in Hope, Ark., as a national historic site and expand protections for dozens of national parks, rivers and water resources.
Read more from Stockton’s Record by clicking here.
20 years of water war may end with passage of omnibus public lands bill
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on January 11, 2009 at 7:15 amFrom the Fresno Bee:
The turbulent life and times of the San Joaquin River will enter a daunting new stretch soon when the Senate passes a huge public lands bill. This afternoon, 20 years after a lawsuit got the ball rolling, the San Joaquin River restoration bill will almost certainly clear its last big Senate hurdle. Final approval could come by the end of the week, following today’s key procedural vote.
“We’ve had our hands full,” said Ron Jacobsma, general manager of the Friant Water Users Authority. “This is one of the largest, most complex river restorations in the West. But we think it is moving ahead appropriately.”
Attorney Hal Candee, who represents environmentalists, said that the effort has come far despite all the odds, having won support from state and federal officials as well as urban and rural communities. “It couldn’t come at a better time,” Candee said.
But not everyone thinks so. “We’re talking about a slow death for some farming,” predicted former Friant Water Users Authority board President Kole Upton, a Madera and Merced county farmer.
Read more from the Fresno Bee by clicking here.
California salmon deal fishy; San Joaquin restoration is ‘radical environmentalism’ run amok, says commentary
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on January 9, 2009 at 6:43 amFrom the Capital Press, this commentary by columnist Don Curlee:
The fishermen and hunters I know don’t always get their game, but they seem to know where to find it. Oregon and Alaska are popular destinations to find salmon.
Makes me wonder why some folks propose spending millions to bring salmon to the fishermen of the San Joaquin Valley.
What kind of convoluted reasoning supports spending hundreds of millions in federal tax money and stealing millions of acre feet of agricultural water to restore a river that has been dry for 60 years just so salmon can frolic in it?
This is the scenario on the table in a bill before Congress. The version omits the $500 million in federal funding proposed originally, putting even more of a burden on farmers and private enterprise. At one point the proposal included an even exchange of new water for the amount released down the San Joaquin River. That suggestion also has been withdrawn.
People who discuss the issue point to the decision by Fresno Judge Oliver Wanger ordering implementation of the plan. The judgment was based on environmental law and precedents. Water purveyors who disburse water for farm use saw the congressional proposal as the least intrusive of several proposals.
The predicament underscores the awesome power that environmentalists and fish worshipers have achieved. They seem to dictate the costliest, most unreasonable actions based on the flimsiest evidence. They’ve been doing it for 50 years, and they seem to gain momentum with each decision made by helpless judges and intimidated legislators.
Read the rest of this commentary in the Capital Press by clicking here.
Feinstein, Boxer want to add money to San Joaquin River Restoration
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on January 7, 2009 at 6:20 amFrom the Modesto Bee:
Some familiar San Joaquin Valley priorities are being resurrected in the 111th Congress, which began Tuesday. Potentially, the new Congress could restore the San Joaquin River; provide money for a Yosemite-area school; design an irrigation drainage cleanup for the valley’s West Side; and help distressed homeowners.
“Unless you solve the mortgage meltdown, you won’t be able to stabilize the economy,” Rep. Dennis Cardoza, D-Merced, said Tuesday.
Cardoza, like his valley colleagues, is carrying over to the new Congress some old ideas left unfinished in the 110th Congress.
And Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer reintroduced legislation restoring water flows and salmon to the San Joaquin River below Friant Dam. The bill, shrunk from previous versions, provides $88 million over 10 years to the project that will receive funding from other sources.
Read more from the Modesto Bee by clicking here.
The Central Valley Business Times has more information:
The San Joaquin River restoration settlement would get the money needed to be implemented under a bill introduced Tuesday by California’s two U.S. Senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer.
“This legislation will authorize and help fund a settlement that restores California’s second longest river, while maintaining a stable water supply for the farmers who have made the San Joaquin Valley the richest agricultural area in the world,” says Ms. Feinstein.
She says the settlement must be funded quickly lest the now-agreeable parties to it resume their decades of water wars. “It is the only way to prevent a return to years of contentious court battles,” she says.
Much more information in the Central Valley Business Times - click here.
Finally, progress on the San Joaquin, says editorial
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 20, 2008 at 3:33 pmFrom the Capital Ag Press, this editorial which praises the recent progress made on the San Joaquin River restoration:
As Marvin Hughes, chairman of the Friant Water Users Authority, put it last week in a Fresno Bee opinion piece, “It should be plain to everyone in the Valley by now that the courts are the worst place to make decisions about San Joaquin Valley water supplies. Without the settlement the litigation would resume and we would have to return to court and put control of our water into the hands of a federal judge whose previous rulings strongly indicate that he will send water down the river to re-establish a salmon fishery regardless of the cost to the Valley.”
The deal Feinstein announced means CVP “exchange contractors” won’t see any decrease in their CVP contract deliveries, and they retain rights to divert from the San Joaquin if the canals dried up.
Some farmers, and rightly so, don’t like that. Judge Wanger, acting on behalf of threatened Delta smelt, has limited CVP and SWP pumping from the Delta for six months out of each year. Add to that the CVP practice of shorting Westside water deliveries during drought years, and you can understand the unease.
It took courage for Feinstein to take the lead on this settlement. She’s come a long way from being mayor of San Francisco. Central Valley farmers can thank her for caring. Also due thanks as the settlement bill moves forward are a bipartisan trio of congressmen: George Radanovich, a Republican, and Democrats Jim Costa and Dennis Cardoza.
Read more from the Capital Ag Press by clicking here.
San Joaquin River restoration bill clogged; Fish and Game Commission votes to cut water deliveries
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 20, 2008 at 3:27 pmFrom the Capital Ag Press:
Delay in the action on the San Joaquin River restoration bill until early 2009 is cutting it close. Interim flows down the river are scheduled to begin next year.
The legislation, authored by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., funds the massive restoration project aimed at returning a salmon run on the river. On Monday, Nov. 17, lawmakers in Washington, D.C., decided to postpone action on the large public lands bill that included Feinstein’s bill.
The Senate will take up the bill when the new Congress convenes. Stalled since 2006, the bill provides $88 million in funding, far short of the $250 million in the original legislation. The funding will implement the settlement reached between east side water users and environmental groups in 2006.
Water users who receive San Joaquin River water stored behind Friant Dam agreed to send part of their water down the river channel to restore a salmon fishery. In the settlement, they are promised that the amount of water they lose will be capped, and there will be improvements in the water delivery system to route water back to them.
Recent news of further restrictions for the longfin smelt could have implications for Friant water users:
New restrictions in delta pumping to protect longfin smelt would not directly affect the water deliveries to exchange contractors, Chedester said, but it could impact the Bureau of Reclamation and how it operates the water delivery system. If the bureau can’t deliver water from the delta, they will have to take it from Friant, he said, because the districts hold senior water rights.
Get the full story from the Capital Ag Press by clicking here.
Irrigation contractors agree to support San Joaquin River Restoration Act
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 19, 2008 at 7:52 amFrom the Western Farm Press:
The major water districts in the San Joaquin Valley have thrown their support behind the controversial San Joaquin River Restoration Settlement Act after an agreement was reached to protect their water rights.
The San Luis and Delta Mendota Water Authority, Merced Irrigation District, the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Authority, the Merced, Turlock, Modesto, Oakdale and South San Joaquin Irrigation Districts, and Westlands Water District announced the River Restoration Act.
An agreement regarding amendments to the act that calls for water contract security for these “third party” water agencies has eliminated their concerns that other amendments of the act that would enable the legislation to move forward under congressional “pay-go” rules could result in water supply reductions for the third party water agencies.
“It was important that the third parties not be impacted by the latest amendments that were proposed by Sen. Feinstein on Sept. 26,” says Dan Nelson, executive director of the San Luis and Delta Mendota Water Authority. “After receiving the proposed amendments, the third parties identified four areas of impact, including protection of water rights, prevention of seepage impacts to lands adjacent to the river, additional fish barriers and no introduction of anadromous fish until mitigation measures are completed.
“The protection of existing water rights and contracts has always been a fundamental issue for the third parties — and one particular group, the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority, had to receive the legislative guarantee of no modification of their senior rights as set forth in their Exchange Contract before the legislation moved forward. This legislative guarantee is consistent with the settlement itself which provided the settlement would not have adverse effects on third parties.”
Read more from the Western Farm Press by clicking here.
San Joaquin River plan aims to appease districts; Waterway dispute finally settled after two decades
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 18, 2008 at 6:42 amFrom the Merced Sun-Star:
A federal bill that would restore water flows and return salmon to the San Joaquin River had some local water districts worried. But amendments to the bill were agreed upon Monday, and those amendments should drown the worries of the districts.
The bill will go before the Senate early next year as part of a big land-use package and would make sweeping changes to the San Joaquin River.
Negotiation for some of the districts was done by the Merced law firm of Mason, Robbins, Browning and Godwin. Art Godwin, a lawyer with the firm, said growers downstream of the river were worried about seepage issues. If the river gets more water flow, water would seep into the growers’ land. That could kill whatever is being grown on the acreage.
“We were worried about seepage and also about the cost,” Godwin said. The cost has been estimated to be anywhere from $500 million to more than $1 billion. Godwin said the districts were worried that the money would run out before the restoration was finished.
Read more from the Merced Sun-Star by clicking here.
San Joaquin River restoration bill postponed until 2009
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 17, 2008 at 2:15 pmFrom the McClatchy News Service:
The Senate will postpone until early next year action on a big public lands bill that includes efforts to restore the San Joaquin River, lawmakers decided Monday. While not entirely unexpected, the delay disappoints those who had hoped to resolve the long-simmering river restoration issue sooner rather than later. It also gives supporters and opponents more time to maneuver.
“It’s unfortunate that the Senate could not move on this bill,” said Rep. Jim Costa, D-Fresno, adding that “it is my hope that the House will move quickly” in January.
The ambitious San Joaquin River plan is one of about 150 bills folded into an omnibus public lands package that’s designed to attract widespread political support. Other California elements include a Madera County groundwater bank project and a John Krebs Wilderness designation in the Sierra Nevada.
Lawmakers once spoke of moving the massive legislation during the lame-duck congressional session this week, but that schedule proved too ambitious amid ongoing negotiations over an economic stimulus deal and an auto industry bailout.
“Rather than move forward on the lands package, which is … so important to a lot of senators and certainly a lot of people around the country, we’re better off waiting until we come back,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced early Monday afternoon.
Read more from McClatchy News Service by clicking here.
San Joaquin River restoration bill nears passage
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 12, 2008 at 6:24 amFrom the Fresno Bee:
The San Joaquin River restoration effort, which has had many near-death experiences amid federal budget concerns and farmer worries, now appears poised for congressional approval as early as next week. Seemingly endless rounds of negotiations were capped this week when negotiators resolved the lingering concerns of Los Banos area farmers on the San Joaquin Valley’s west side.
This isn’t the first time negotiators have congratulated themselves, but the latest Capitol Hill progress sounds final. “I think it should satisfy all concerned,” Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein said Tuesday. “As far as I’m concerned, this is it.”
The negotiations answered the lingering concerns of the “exchange contractors,” who are Los Banos-area farmers irrigating about 200,000 acres on the San Joaquin Valley’s west side. Exchange contractors agreed to give up their historic share of San Joaquin River water in exchange for delta water via the Delta-Mendota Canal, but they reserved the right to reclaim their river allocation.
With these farmers mollified about future water supplies, the stage is set for the river restoration bill to be passed as part of an omnibus public lands package.
The public lands bill contains upward of 140 separate parks, wilderness and environmental provisions. Feinstein said “the odds are even” the Senate will take up the package during a brief lame-duck session next week; if it doesn’t, Congress will consider the legislation next year.
“I think this thing is ready to go,” Rep. George Radanovich, R-Mariposa, said Tuesday.
Read more from the Fresno Bee by clicking here.
An editorial by the Fresno Bee says the deal is the best agricultural interests could get, and is better than any alternatives:
The settlement requires federal approval and funding. The money was the hang-up over the past two years, as many in Congress balked over the $250 million price tag.
Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who sponsored the Senate version of the legislation and worked to sort out the knotty details, rewrote the bill to provide $88 million in guaranteed river restoration funding. That helped break the logjam, but it means the balance of restoration funds must be sought in future years.
This has been a difficult two-decade passage. It might have saved everyone a great deal of costly litigation if Friant Dam hadn’t been built and water diverted from the river. But then a multibillion-dollar agricultural economy wouldn’t have grown up and down the east side of the Valley. Dozens of small communities rely on the farms that are supplied by water from behind Friant Dam, and there are plenty of anxieties about what will happen if that water is restored to the river.
In this case the law was clearly on the side of the environmentalists, and there was every indication that the courts would have ordered even more water restored to the river if the case had proceeded. It is galling to many in agriculture, but the settlement is almost certainly the best deal they could get.
Read the rest of this editorial from the Fresno Bee by clicking here.
San Joaquin County farmers and others have generally supported the settlement, hoping additional flows in the San Joaquin River would boost water quality in the Delta:
However, it’s not clear how much extra water will actually reach the area, Manteca farmer Alex Hildebrand said. The portion of the river covered by the settlement extends north only as far as the mouth of the Merced River; any extra water may be pumped back upstream to be used again by farmers, he said.
More from Stockton’s Record by clicking here.
Breaking News: Deal reached on San Joaquin River legislation
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 11, 2008 at 3:58 pmFrom the San Diego Union Tribune:
Congress is on track to sign off on a deal to restore California’s San Joaquin River, bringing water and salmon back to a now-dry stretch of the waterway that once nourished the state’s farm fields, Sen. Dianne Feinstein said Tuesday.
Federal legislation needed to implement a legal settlement for the restoration has been hung up for two years by concerns from various parties.
Feinstein told The Associated Press on Tuesday that she had brokered a final agreement with all the parties – including environmental and fishing groups, farmers, irrigation districts and federal agencies – that could get lawmakers’ approval during a lame-duck session of Congress expected to begin next week.
“I think everybody realizes that this has been an 18-year fight,” Feinstein said. “Now that everybody’s on the same page, my view is that we should pass this bill, as it is, as early as we can.”
Read more from the San Diego Union-Tribune by clicking here.
Marvin Hughes commentary: Congress must resolve river settlement plan
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 8, 2008 at 6:51 amFrom the Fresno Bee, this commentary by Marvin Hughes, chairman of the Friant Water Users Authority:
In the weeks ahead, legislation to enact the San Joaquin River Restoration may come to a final vote in Congress. It is my opinion, and the opinion of my fellow farmers on the board of directors of the Friant Water Users Authority, that passage of the settlement legislation is necessary to ensure certainty for our water supply.
As most people know, the settlement ends 18 years of litigation over whether there should be enough water in the river to support the salmon fishery that existed before Friant Dam was built. The courts have ruled that water must be made available for the salmon.
Without the settlement, the court ruling would leave us with no ability to control how much water is released for a fishery and or control the resulting impacts to our families, our communities, our businesses and our land.
The settlement, on the other hand, caps how much Friant water can be used for the salmon, and it makes avoiding or minimizing Friant’s water loss a co-equal goal with restoration of the fishery.
It also limits Friant’s financial obligation to what Friant farmers are currently paying in terms of environmental charges and construction cost repayments associated with the Central Valley Project. Friant is not on the hook for unlimited costs.
Read more of this commentary from the Fresno Bee by clicking here.
Commentary: San Joaquin settlement not worth the risk
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 6, 2008 at 6:03 amFrom the Fresno Bee:
If the San Joaquin settlement becomes law, it could force more than 300,000 eastside acres out of production and may cost more than a billion dollars to implement. It would bring the cost of water to well above $100 per acre foot. In short water years, it would even require farmers to pay for water with a risk of no water delivery.
Irrigation district managers may tell you that it is better to settle this lawsuit now rather than risk going back to court. This might be true if we were still dealing with the “original” settlement that was signed in September of 2006, which included the water management goal (recirculation of water from the Delta to our counties), and equal priority given to the restoration goal. The original bill required the federal government to pay for the improvements required to move more water down river channels.
The original settlement between Natural Resources Defense Council and Friant turned out to be a ruse, which allowed NRDC to gain a legal position to extract more water for fish.
With three lawsuits filed against Central Valley water rights since the original settlement was adopted in 2006, we have no certainty that more suits will not be filed to increase water flows for salmon. In one such lawsuit, Judge Oliver Wanger reduced pumping in the Delta and ended any possibility that recirculation could be part of the settlement.
This means water will run down the San Joaquin River to the ocean, lost forever. This is different from the 2006 agreement, which allowed for the water to be recirculated back to Friant for use on farms and in cities, achieving the second component of the settlement: the water management goal.
Read more of this commentary from the Fresno Bee by clicking here.
Editorial: Time for a deal on San Joaquin?
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 3, 2008 at 7:19 amFrom the Sacramento Bee, this editorial:
The water wars of yesteryear continue to plague California as it struggles to address its water challenges, including the crisis in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
Two years ago, a fragile peace broke out between environmentalists and farmers near Fresno over an 18-year-old lawsuit involving flows in the San Joaquin River.
The 2006 court settlement, negotiated by the Natural Resources Defense Council and irrigators who receive water from Friant Reservoir, was aimed at restoring some flows to the San Joaquin by 2009. They also had an ambitious goal of restoring salmon by 2013 to a river that hasn’t seen them for decades.
Yet like the situation in Afghanistan or other tribal territories, peace does not come easily to the San Joaquin River. U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the main peacemaker in the region, has struggled for two years to pass legislation to implement the river-restoration package, partly because tribal elders continue to feud.
In the next few weeks, Feinstein may have a narrow window of opportunity in which to get this deal done. Congressional leaders are mulling whether to call a lame-duck session, mainly to pass an economic-stimulus package. If such a session were to be called after Tuesday’s election, Feinstein could – and should – seize the moment for her river- restoration legislation.
Read more of this editorial from the Sacramento Bee by clicking here.
Restore the Delta wants you to support San Joaquin River restoration
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 28, 2008 at 5:53 amFrom IndyBay.org:
Restore the Delta is asking you right now to take special action on behalf of protecting the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, the West Coast’s largest and most significant estuary. The federal San Joaquin River Restoration Bill is now under attack by the Central Valley exchange water contractors and needs your support, according to this action alert from Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla.
“Restoring fresh water flows to the San Joaquin River will not only help re-establish an important salmon run to California, but it will also help improve water quality for urban and agricultural communities in the South Delta,” said Barrigan Parrilla.
Salmon fishing this year is closed in the ocean waters of California and Oregon and in the Central Valley Rivers, with the exception of a short recreational season on the Sacramento River from Knights Landing to Red Bluff from November 1 through December 31. The closure was imposed by the state and federal governments, due to the collapse of Sacramento River salmon. We must do everything we can to restore the salmon populations of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers!
Read Restore the Delta’s action alert posted at IndyBay.org by clicking here.
Water fight swirls: Settlement debate muddies San Joaquin River restoration
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 24, 2008 at 6:01 amFrom the Capital Ag Press:
Differing - and passionate - views about the historic San Joaquin River settlement have bubbled to the surface.
Friant water leaders viewed the settlement, signed by 22 irrigation districts, as a way to put a stop to the district being on the short end of judicial decisions over water. Now, some Friant leaders and farmers are looking at the upcoming debate over legislation to implement the settlement as the end of their chance to fight for their water. The settlement signed in September 2006 was to have ended an 18-year fight over San Joaquin River water.
Some of the water stored in Millerton Lake northeast of Fresno and diverted to more than 1 million acres of farmland was sought by environmental groups to restore a salmon run downstream. Between 247,000 and 500,000 acre feet, depending on water supplies, are expected to be sent downstream, annually. Interim flows are scheduled to start in 2009.
As legislation awaits action in Washington, D.C., next month, conversations among water leaders, farmers and congressmen on both sides of the issue have reached a boiling point.
A majority of Friant Water Authority leaders are adamant that the settlement is still the best choice for farmers, but other Friant district boards question that position. Three districts have exercised an option that could allow them to opt out of the settlement. Another district, Chowchilla Water District, left Friant last year.
Funding in the bill being pushed by U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein was reduced to $88 million, not enough to cover the cost of the project, Chowchilla argued.
Meanwhile, farmers and business owners who depend on surface water delivered by the Friant Canal are caught in the middle. At meetings throughout the Friant district, the debate rages. Irrigation district leaders, farmers and their congressional representatives tangled over the issue Oct. 20 at a Tulare County Farm Bureau water committee meeting.
Read more from the Capital Ag Press by clicking here.
Work continues on wobbly San Joaquin River plan
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 11, 2008 at 8:07 amFrom the McClatchy News Service:
Lawmakers are revisiting a San Joaquin River restoration plan even as it comes under sustained pressure.
With two Valley water districts raising pointed questions recently, negotiators continue to tinker with the ambitious river plan. Some options could delay the time when water starts flowing downstream from Friant Dam. “There’s a lot that has to be hashed out here,” said Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Visalia. “A lot of chess moves have to be made.”
Nunes represents many farmers served by Friant irrigation water. He is also a vehement critic of the plan to steer more water toward restoring the San Joaquin River and its long-depleted salmon population. He’s watching closely, though, as Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein and other river restoration supporters refine a plan with many delicate moving parts: legal, political and personal.
On Monday in Chowchilla, and again in Sacramento on Thursday, California water officials met privately to see where they stood. Participants called the meetings amicable. Still, they reflected some of the unraveling that’s occurred since unified Friant farmers and environmentalists in September 2006 announced settlement of an 18-year-old lawsuit.
Read more from McClatchy News Service by clicking here.
San Joaquin River maneuvering continues as Congress nears end
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 1, 2008 at 7:29 amFrom the McClatchy Newspapers:
Political maneuvering over the San Joaquin River’s future continues even as Congress grinds to a halt. In a last-minute bid, Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein has rewritten a river restoration bill so that it might avoid budgetary obstacles. Feinstein says stripping out money could ease passage of the environmentally ambitious bill.
“The only viable option is to make the bill (budget) neutral, then pursue legislation in the next Congress to fully restore the original funding provisions,” Feinstein advised the Friant Water Users Authority late Friday. Feinstein added that “this will give us momentum going forward,” as environmentalists and Friant-area farmers try to complete a lawsuit settlement. Water would be flowing and salmon swimming again below Friant Dam by 2013 under the settlement.
But Feinstein’s move caught even some of her Capitol Hill allies by surprise, and the odds still appear heavily stacked against success. “I don’t think that will fly,” said Rep. Jim Costa, D-Fresno.
Read more from McClatchy Newspapers by clicking here.
Inclusion in public lands bill good for San Joaquin River restoration
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 18, 2008 at 6:22 amFrom the Modesto Bee, this news article/editorial:
The restoration of the San Joaquin River moved a step closer last week when a Senate committee approved a version of a public-lands bill that includes the ambitious plan. We hope this means we’re at least a little closer to seeing a resolution of the decades-old fight over restoration of 60 miles of riverbed that has been dry since the completion of Friant Dam.
The river bill is part of a larger Omnibus Federal Land Management Act that has some 90 separate components. Restoring flows north from near Fresno won’t be cheap. The most conservative estimates put the price tag at around $500 million; most people feel it will take at least $1 billion. But the alternatives to spending so much money are even less attractive.
The bill — and the money that comes with it — are needed to implement the settlement reached in a lawsuit that was filed in 1988 and resolved in 2006. Part of that agreement would take some Sierra snowmelt now diverted to farms south of Fresno and let it run north down the river channel.
Environmentalists who filed the suit and farmers who want to keep using the water agreed to the settlement for different reasons. Environmentalists want to see historic salmon runs restored; farmers want to see their very livelihoods protected.
Read more from the Modesto Bee by clicking here.
San Joaquin proposal part of big public lands bill
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 7, 2008 at 7:28 amFrom the Sacramento Bee:
Ambitious San Joaquin River restoration plans are part of a huge public lands bill whose national scope brings both risk and reward.
Senators returning to work next week will confront a 760-page package that wraps together more than 90 separate bills. One would restore water flows and salmon runs in the San Joaquin River below Friant Dam.
The river bill is big just by itself, with an estimated price tag of several hundred million dollars. The rest of the legislation is even bigger, covering everything from a new West Virginia wilderness to a proposed William Jefferson Clinton Birthplace Home National Historic Site in Hope, Ark.
“A large package like this will draw more bipartisan support,” noted Democratic Rep. Jim Costa of Fresno. “You have more collective interest, and it’s bipartisan.” But the same size that attracts multiple sponsors can also make measures like the Omnibus Federal Land Management Acts Bill a big, fat target.
With only a few weeks remaining in the congressional session, lawmakers will have to balance the bill’s benefits against its potential political costs.
Read more from the Sacramento Bee by clicking here.
Action in Washington could restore water to San Joaquin River
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on May 11, 2008 at 7:20 amFrom Stockton’s Record, this editorial:
There was good news out of Washington last week. If you’re a salmon.
The Senate Energy Committee approved a bill, similar to legislation a House panel approved last fall, that will restore water flows to the San Joaquin River. The proposal for the river, the state’s second longest, would bring water to a 60-mile dry stretch by next year. With luck, that would mean chinook salmon would return to the river three years later.
Being a salmon has grown increasingly tough in recent years, what with streams and rivers blocked by developments and dams, low water, bad water quality and who knows what else. In fact, we know so little about what has caused the salmon population to collapse that commercial fishing for the species off the California and Oregon coasts as well as sport fishing on the inland waterways has been halted this season.
Putting water back in the San Joaquin River, flowing north from Friant Dam and eventually into the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, will not restore the West Coast salmon runs of the past. But it won’t hurt, either.
Read the rest of this editorial from Stockton’s Record by clicking here.
U.S. Senate panel OKs San Joaquin settlement
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on May 8, 2008 at 12:09 pmFrom the Sacramento Bee:
A key Senate committee on Wednesday handily approved a revised but still ambitious bill to restore the San Joaquin River.
Following months of tinkering and political maneuvering, lawmakers quickly embraced the river restoration effort. The Senate Energy and Natural Resource Committee’s approval by a bipartisan 15-7 margin builds momentum, while not eliminating all resistance. “Bottom line: This legislation can help resolve one of the oldest water disputes in the West,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said after the committee’s approval.
The bill authorizes work to improve the parched river channel below Friant Dam so more water can be released and salmon reintroduced. The bill has a federal price tag of roughly $190 million, although calculating the full cost of river restoration is very complicated.
“I see this as a huge federal commitment and expense that has a lot of implications and consequences,” cautioned Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., also warning of a “pretty heavy cost to taxpayers.”
Read the full text of this article from the Sacramento Bee by clicking here.
Central Valley Business Times adds this:
“This brings us one step closer to passing this landmark legislation,” says Ms. Feinstein. “The legislation would bring an end to 19 years of litigation between the National Resources Defense Council, Friant Water Users Authority, and the federal government. It would transform the San Joaquin into a living river and maintain a stable water supply for the farmers of the region.”
If the legislation fails, the fate of the San Joaquin River would be determined by a federal district judge who, the parties agree, would likely rule in favor of releasing much larger amounts of water at higher cost, and without any effort to mitigate farmers’ potential water losses, Ms. Feinstein says.
She says it is this threat that compelled the parties to the table, and brought them to agreement.
Read the full text of this article from the Central Valley Business Times (which includes a list of the specific terms of the settlement) by clicking here.
From the San Francisco Chronicle:
The original lawsuit stems from the opening of Friant Dam in 1949, which dried up portions of California’s second-longest river below the dam where salmon once ran thick. The Natural Resources Defense Council and other groups sued the Interior Department and others in 1988 over operations of the dam.
Bottom line: This legislation can help resolve one of the oldest water disputes in the West,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. “If Congress doesn’t resolve it, a federal judge will — with consequences that would be more costly and impose a greater burden on farmers.”
Under the settlement, the Friant Water Users Authority would relinquish some of its traditional water use. Friant officials viewed that as preferable to having a judge establish the water flows. The total cost has been estimated around $500 million to $600 million, according to Hal Candee, lead negotiator for the NRDC. Some $200 million would come from state bond money and the bulk from irrigation districts.
The Senate bill sweetens the deal for water users by directing about $100 million for water projects, including strengthening of canals, meant to help Friant capture additional water during wet years.
“This was a very important step, particularly given the amendments to the bill,” said Ron Jacobsma, consulting general manager of the Friant Water Users Authority, which represents 22 water districts. “Everybody’s behind this thing.”
Read the full text of the story from the San Francisco Chronicle by clicking here.
Navajo Water Settlement & San Joaquin River Settlement advance to full Senate
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on May 7, 2008 at 12:30 pmBusy day for the Senate Energy & Natural Resources committee in Washington today, apparently. From John Fleck at Inkstain:
The bill, S.1171, would guarantee 600,000 acre feet per year of water rights to the Navajo Nation, and also fund a water pipeline that would run across the Navajo Nation from the San Juan River in northwestern New Mexico down to Gallup. The trick has always been figuring out a way to pay for it.
Yeah, isn’t that always the case …. find out more by taking the link from John Fleck’s blog - click here.
And from Stockton’s Record:
The [San Joaquin River restoration] legislation, which still must pass the full House and Senate, would implement a legal settlement that would return water to a dry 60-mile stretch of the San Joaquin River by 2009 and bring back Chinook salmon three years later.
Read the full text of this article from Stockton’s Record by clicking here.
Climate change adds twist to San Joaquin River restoration project
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on April 27, 2008 at 6:29 amWater is such big news in California, as regular readers know. I can easily post ten to twelve stories per day. Aquafornia focuses on Southern California water issues, but I cast a wide net because Southern California is hydrologically connected to many areas. This is one story which, up until now, I have not been following. However, with the collapse of the salmon run, Aquafornia will now follow San Joaquin River restoration stories.
The San Joaquin River is one of the rivers in Central California which feed into the Delta. The San Joaquin River is part of the federal Central Valley Project. The river in some areas is dry most months of the year, and during the summer, some stretches consists solely of irrigation drainage flows. The players in this story are the farmers, who have been mandated to give up irrigation water to the river, and the environmentalists who want the once-prodigious salmon runs restored.
From the Fresno Bee:
The best hope for cold-water chinook salmon to survive global warming may be near sweltering Fresno — in the San Joaquin River, where salmon have been extinct for 60 years. That’s the latest twist in the long-running debate over restoring the San Joaquin, a project that will begin in less than 18 months.
Farmers, forced by legal settlement to give up irrigation water for the project, are skeptical about the claim. They see global warming as a reason to reconsider the half-billion-dollar restoration. Warmer conditions will kill the restored fish runs, they say.
But fishery experts say San Joaquin salmon would tolerate climate warming better than salmon in cooler places, such as Northern California. The reason: The highest of the High Sierra would continue to provide the cold water that salmon must have to survive in the San Joaquin. Northern California has the lower end of the Sierra and, scientists predict, eventually won’t have much of a snowpack, eliminating a lot of cold water. “The restored San Joaquin may be an important place for the survival of salmon in the next century,” said fishery biologist Peter Moyle of the University of California at Davis.
The back-and-forth over restoring the river has been unfolding for decades, with debate focused mostly on a troubled, 149-mile section of the San Joaquin between Fresno and its confluence with the Merced River. Global warming came into the picture last year when a report from a worldwide panel of experts said about 40% of the salmon habitat in the Pacific Northwest could be lost during climate change.
If the San Joaquin is revived, as is planned over the next decade, it would have the southernmost salmon fishery in North America. And the San Joaquin Valley is expected to warm up faster than the Pacific Northwest or Northern California. This prompts some farmers to question the wisdom of trying to return salmon to the San Joaquin.
“Does it really make sense to spend this money and restore salmon down here?” asked Chowchilla-area farmer Kole Upton.
But Moyle, an authority on California’s native fish, said it is a very good idea for spring-run salmon. The fish will move up the river from the ocean in spring and spend summer in deep, cool ponds near Friant Dam before spawning during fall. The release of cold snowmelt from Millerton Lake in summer should keep the ponds cool enough for salmon even as the climate warms up, Moyle said.
The undercurrent of this discussion is political, as it has been all along.
Read more on this story from the Fresno Bee by clicking here. For more information on San Joaquin River Restoration, click here.
Aquafornia's Information Desk
Aquafornia's Discussion Forum
Aquafornia's Photos on Flickr
Upcoming Events
Check out the upcoming events from the Water Education Foundation.
Recent 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
- How it works: The Bay Delta Conservation Plan
- Delta groups and legislators plan rally for Tuesday, July 7
- Dan Bacher on the Seaweed Rebellion: North Coast enviros battle Schwarzenegger and Big Green over MLPA
- Environment groups find less support from Supreme Court justices
- Can the Mississippi Delta survive rising seas?
- City of Ukiah is serious about water conservation
- Latest state water cuts looming for Ukiah residents
- Mussel plague on Lake Tahoe?
- Tuolumne sewer row brewing
- A turf war your water bill can win
- Governor signs disaster assistance order
- Dry conditions continue
- New rate plan slated for Lakeside Water District customers
- Friday’s top of the scroll: State budget crisis scuttles Delta levee hazard detection, repairs
Aquafornia's Mission
Aquafornia's mission is to educate readers about the complex and often controversial issues surrounding water in California.
Aquafornia is affiliated with the Water Education Foundation, an impartial non-profit organization, whose mission is to create a better understanding of water issues and help resolve water resource problems through educational programs.
Find It
Save / E-mail / Share Aquafornia
E-mail Newsletter
To receive email announcements from the Water Education Foundation, sign up here.
News Article Archives
- Agriculture
- Aquafornia Exclusives
- Biofuels
- Bottled water
- Climate change & water supply
- Commentary
- Conservation
- Delta Issues
- Desalination
- Drinking Water
- Drought Tolerant Landscaping
- Drought, Weather & Snowpack
- Events
- Flood Control
- General Water Issues
- Geothermal Energy
- Grandiose water plans
- Great Green Ideas
- Groundwater
- Indian Water Rights
- Infrastructure
- International Water Issues
- Invasive Species
- Levees
- Monterey Agreements
- National water news
- Oceans and Beaches (all)
- Odds and Ends
- People in the News
- Recycled Water
- Regional Water Issues
- All-American Canal
- Antelope Valley
- Bakersfield
- Bay Area
- Coachella Valley
- Colorado River Basin
- Imperial Irrigation District & Imperial Valley
- Lake Tahoe & the Sierra's
- Las Vegas
- Los Angeles River
- Northern California
- Orange County
- Owens Valley & Mono Lake
- Riverside - San Bernardino
- Sacramento
- Salton Sea
- San Diego
- San Joaquin Valley
- Southern California
- Southwest Water Issues
- Westlands Water District
- Stormwater & Urban Runoff
- Uncategorized
- Water & Development
- Water & Energy
- Water & Investing
- Water & Population
- Water & the Environment
- Water & Wildlife
- Water Agency News (all)
- Water Banking
- Water History
- Water Legislation
- Water Quality
- Water Rights
- Water Storage
- Water Supply
- Water Technologies
- Water Transfers
- Weather Modification
- Weird & Wacky Water News
Web Resources
Agriculture
Conservation
Delta Resources
Environmental Organizations
Fishing Blogs
Landscaping
Los Angeles River
News
Salton Sea
Southern California Blogs
Water Agencies
Water Blogs
- Aguanomics
- American Water Resources Assn. Blog
- Aqua Channel
- Chronicles of the Hydraulic Brotherhood
- EDF’s On The Waterfront
- Great Lakes Law Blog
- H2ONCoast Blog
- Inkstain - jfleck
- Misu Blog
- Spouting Off - Mark Gold of Heal the Bay
- Water Cooler Blog
- Water SISWEB
- Water Words That Work
- Waterblogged
- WaterCrunch
- WaterWired
- Western Water Blog
Water Information