"Water Deal...."

**Darian** · 08-01-2007, 09:12 PM

Water Grab

In an interesting development, it was reported in the SacBee, today, that the feds are negotiating a trade for ownership of all of the water in San Luis Reservoir with the Westlands Water District. So Far, these negotiations have been carried out in closed session.

The proposed deal is said to require Westlands to assume responsibility for "....cleaning up a multibillion-dollar irrigation drainage mess." (remember Selenium and Kesterson

) The water district hasn't specified how it would carry out this requirement and why should it, it's water customers/users were responsible for cleaning up the "....mess..." in the first place. They dumped it off on the feds for funding thru the EPA super fund.

In addition, the deal may relieve Westlands from their obligation to repay the feds for building the reservoir and canals. Oh, and the proposed deal could make Westlands exempt from "....acreage limits meant to preserve small family farms,...."

One of the principals in these negotiations is our own Senior Senator, Dianne Feinstein.

Forunately, both parties agree that any compromise will be months away. That gives us time to review this proposal and express your opinion (pro/con) to the Senator's office.

This type of backroom negotiation (water grab) is precisely why I expressed my cynical outlook about the process under the peripheral canal.

**Bill Kiene semi-retired** · 08-01-2007, 10:30 PM

I heard the Federal Government is giving 15% of the water in California to some big connected corporate farms which they said was the largest water grant (grab) in the history of the state.

Wow...that's pretty blatant.

HC · 08-01-2007, 10:57 PM

Is there a link to this story! I would like to read it and try to understand it. This sound very suspicious. Di no longer answeres my letters, and they stopped sending me their news letter. I guess I was too critical. Harley

**Darian** · 08-02-2007, 06:13 AM

The link to the article is:

http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/302589.html

**Terry Thomas** · 08-02-2007, 07:32 AM

Some things never change out west when it comes to a water "deal." A water "deal" usually = a "water steal."

**Darian** · 08-02-2007, 07:54 PM

Well,.... It looks like this water proposal is coming closer to completion. The SacBee reported in today's Capitol & California section that the negotiation is complete and that "....negotiators will be drafting legislation in the coming weeks".

In the latest revision, Westlands will obtain a 50 year contract for water rights to be taken from San Luis Reservoir (the length of this contract is double the usual duration of these contracts). As reported earlier, Westlands will be freed of the obligation to repay the feds for construction of the reservoir and associated canals (worth approximately $490 million) and would be freed from acreage limits (also mentioned earlier).

Westlands and other water districts will be responsible to solve the earlier mentioned agricultural drainage mess that the feds want get rid of as a part of this deal. The feds were originally on the hook to construct a canal that would flow from/thru the lower San Joaquin Valley and empty into the delta. Construction was never completed. The feds estimated the cost of finishing the canal at approximately $2.6 billion. Just imagine all of that untreated polluted water emptying into the delta.

The water districts believe that they can solve the drainage problem for a cost of $700 million. They propose using "....a combination of biotreatment, evaporation, salt tolerant crops and hauling away of accumulated salts." On the surface, these proposals don't sound too bad.

Apparently, there is little oversight of water districts included in this agreement. Not good considering Westlands past performance on pollution issues. Also, many unanswered questions. Remember, the details are still a secret.... But our Senior Senator says, "The Devil is in the details". I don't know about you guys but that statement makes me nervous.

**Darian** · 08-15-2007, 06:57 AM

Anybody else see the post on Blanton's BB concerning this proposal

It's still out there and morphing into it's final form. Altho the "deal" has changed, it still includes onorous provisions for the delta and the state's taxpayers.

I'd like to be able to refer you to the document itself but it's not available (remember, it's secret).

If you want to obtain some detail, yourselves, contact Mindy McIntyre, Water Program Mgr, Planning & Conservation League/PCLF, (916) 313-4518 or at mcintyre@pcl.org. PCL website:

www.pcl.org

Apparently there is an on-line petition concerning this agreement at:

www.thepetitionsite.com/1/no-more-secret-deals

This vehicle enables you to tell your representattives how you feel about this (pro/con).

HC · 08-15-2007, 02:28 PM

Darian, Thanks for the info. I signed the petition and left my usual caustic comments. Harley

**OceanSunfish** · 08-15-2007, 08:23 PM

I signed the darn thing too.

It's tough to keep one eye on the fishing rod and the other on Westlands, et. al.

**Darian** · 08-18-2007, 10:28 PM

Hmmmm,.... It was reported on Blanton's BB that only 300 people have signed the petition available to oppose this water grab by south delta water distributors/users.

I guess I'm a little confused about this.... It would seem that guaranteeing a fixed amount of water, annually over 60 years, to these ditstributors/users would be incentive enough to sign the petition....

In addition to stopping the water grab, there are other incentives involved. For example, the guarantee offered will mean that in years when there isn't enough water for fisheries, any water appropriated/taken by federal/state agencies from the guaranteed allotment will have to be paid for by taxpayers.

I hope this reminder will motivate all of you to go to the website (listed above) and signe the petition for all our sakes (fish/us).