[env-trinity] Its A Deal, Maybe...

[Patrick Truman]

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER:   thanks Mike...

Some see a deal to get river rolling; A long-sought pact for dry San Joaquin could become reality after Monday hearing

Sacramento Bee - 6/17/06

By Michael Doyle -- and Mark Grossi -- Fresno Bee

WASHINGTON -- The dried San Joaquin River might flow again, along with lots and lots of money, under a historic deal coming closer by the hour. 


Long-warring parties who beat the odds to become negotiating partners will march once again before a federal judge in Sacramento on Monday. In their hands could be an accord that reshapes California's water future.  

"The agreement is there," said Rep. George Radanovich, R-Mariposa. 


Attorneys for farmers and environmentalists quietly concur, though the final haggling could well last all weekend. Negotiators are motivated.  

They know that if they fail, U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton will impose his own unpredictable solution -- which might hit farmers hard. 


"The negotiators believe that it is possible to reach agreement in principle on the few remaining issues before June 19, and will continue to work between now and the status conference," attorneys advised Karlton on Thursday.  

Details are cloaked and negotiators tight-lipped. Still, any deal will be heard loud and clear throughout the West. 


It will be ambitious, as officials revive the San Joaquin for the first time since Friant Dam began constraining the river in the 1940s.  

It will be far-reaching, with water users as far north as the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta waiting nervously to see the plans. 


It will be expensive, with San Joaquin River restoration costs estimated at a minimum of $100 million and possibly much more, depending on how the river is restored.  

It will also quickly become congressional business. Federal authorization will be required for the levees, streambed improvements and other work required to enliven the seasonally dry river with about 200,000 acre-feet of water annually. 


An acre-foot is the amount of water needed to cover an acre to the depth of 1 foot, or about 326,000 gallons.  

"If there's an agreement, we will come together to write the enabling legislation," said Rep. Jim Costa, D-Fresno. 


Last September, urged on by Radanovich and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., the Friant Water Users Authority and the Natural Resources Defense Council began quietly conferring on how to settle a San Joaquin River lawsuit first brought in 1988.  

The lawsuit challenges contract renewals for Friant, which represents 15,000 east San Joaquin Valley farmers. Arguments quickly turned to the loss of the river's two salmon runs in the late 1940s when two large stretches of the river dried up. 


State law requires dam operators to provide enough downstream flow to keep fisheries going. Nonetheless, state officials squelched complaints from their own Department of Fish and Game and allowed the federal government to dry up the river.  

Then-Gov. Edmund "Pat" Brown agreed with federal officials who wanted to irrigate highly productive land. Friant's lawyers have always maintained this is what Congress intended. 


But in 1997, Karlton invalidated 14 contracts, ruling environmental reviews were not properly conducted. After the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case, the two sides spent more than three years trying to settle. They wound up back in federal court by 2003.  

In August 2004, Karlton decided the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation broke state law by drying up the river and wiping out the salmon runs. 


He has been poised since February to craft a solution unless a settlement is reached.  

The politics are as complex as the litigation. 


The congressman who represents most of the Friant district on the Valley's east side, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Tulare, bluntly distrusts environmentalists. Nor does he want to release water from Friant for the purpose of saving the long-dry San Joaquin; at most, he indicated, he "may not oppose" the final deal.  

Downstream water users in Merced, Stanislaus and San Joaquin counties worry they might be hurt. For instance, some fear they will shoulder new Endangered Species Act burdens in order to protect the spring run of the chinook salmon enraptured by the San Joaquin River's new flow. 


"I'm hopeful that we'll come up with a solution that works for everyone," said Rep. Dennis Cardoza, D-Merced.  

On the other hand, a revived river would help water quality downstream, where environmentalists derisively talk of the "lower colon of the San Joaquin River." 


A healthy San Joaquin would mean higher water quality in the Delta, the source of drinking water for about 23 million Californians.  

But, back on the Valley's west side, another third party worries about what will happen if the river is restored. The westside farmers who once used the San Joaquin for irrigation have instead taken water from the Delta for years. They farm more than 200,000 valuable acres along the dried and withered sections of the river. A live river will inevitably spill out onto surrounding land, Central California Irrigation District officials fear. 


"Most of the big expense of restoring the river will take place right in this stretch," said district manager Chris White.  

Friant and the Natural Resources Defense Council neared an agreement several months ago. The struggle ever since has been to brief groups like Central California, Modesto and Turlock irrigation districts and to tinker as necessary with the final language


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20060621/c44b72f9/attachment.html>