A river shall run through it
A San Joaquin River deal could become a model for compromise
By: Michael Doyle | Publication: Fresno Bee,
Sep 14, 2006 -
A marathon legal battle over the fate of the San
Joaquin River
inched closer to a settlement Wednesday, when the details of the deal were
presented to the federal judge who now presides over the 18-year-old case. If
the deal is finally done, over time it will change the face of the Valley --
and for the better, we believe.
Many of the details aren't yet clear, but the broad outlines
of the deal are.
Twice as much water -- nearly 250,000 acre-feet per year --
will flow downstream by 2009, with the possibility of salmon running in the
river by 2013.
Some 15,000 farmers in the Friant Water Users Authority,
served by river water from behind Friant Dam, would see their water deliveries
drop by about 15%.
Federal funds and state bond money would be tapped to pay for
the costs of the restoration, as part of a "San Joaquin River Restoration
Fund" created under the deal.
There are obstacles, to be sure, beginning with the millions
of dollars that will be needed to carry out the restoration. That's a
particular concern downstream, where the river is mostly dry throughout the
year. The old river channel has long since been converted to productive
agricultural land, and restoring the flow would take much of that land out of
production.
The settlement language apparently includes a guarantee that
land will be purchased only from "willing sellers," which may cause
problems down the road. What if the owner of a crucial stretch of the old
channel is not willing to sell? Would the entire restoration project come to a
halt?
Farmers and water agencies along the Valley's west side may
not be very happy with other aspects of the deal. Outside parties -- such as
downstream agencies and farmers -- would not be permitted to sue if they don't
like one aspect or another of the settlement.
Another touchy subject is language in the settlement that
appears to place a year-end deadline on Congress to pass the necessary enabling
legislation. Rep. Devin Nunes, who represents many of the east-side farmers
covered by the Friant Water Users Authority, has already expressed his
irritation with that, and he's likely not alone.
We'll know more in the days ahead, including just how likely
this deal is to be fully and finally implemented. But it's already a historic
measure. You can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times farmers
and environmentalists have come to a useful compromise in one of their ongoing
battles over water in California.
Here's hoping this deal turns out to be a model for future
compromises, rather than an ephemeral aberration.
Copyright 2006 McClatchy Newspapers, Inc.
All Rights Reserved
