Department of Water Resources
A daily compilation for DWR personnel of significant news articles and comment
November 16, 2007
1. Top Items
Panel votes to return salmon to San Joaquin - Associated Press
House panel OKs river restoration - Sacramento Bee
Editorial: Letting the water flow; House members must fund full restoration of the
Panel votes to return salmon to San Joaquin
Associated Press – 11/16/07
By Erica Werner, staff writer
The 25-15 vote by the House Natural Resources Committee came over objections from minority Republicans that some farmers in the
Democrats and environmentalists welcomed the committee vote, which marked the first congressional advance for the
"Given that it has been a year, today's vote is incredibly important," said Hal Candee, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, which brought the original lawsuit against the Interior Department and others in 1988.
The bill still must pass the full House and the Senate, where Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., is aiming to shepherd it to a committee vote early next year.
The legislation would implement a settlement that would return water to a dry 60-mile stretch of the
The San Joaquin is
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 could range from $250 million to $800 million, according to Candee, of which about $200 million would come from state bond money and the bulk from irrigation districts.
Federal legislation is necessary because water fees that now go into the federal Treasury would be diverted to the settlement, something requiring congressional approval.
The Congressional Budget Office measured that fee diversion as a $170 million loss to the U.S. Treasury. Under congressional "pay as you go" rules, that loss must be offset by other income.
That led to new controversy over the bill recently after Democrats added language that would offset the money with a fee on oil and gas leases in the
Rep. Jim Costa, D-Fresno, insisted this was just a placeholder provision and the bill wouldn't be brought to the House floor until agreement could be found on the offsets, but Republicans were mad.
"You can't tax somebody after the fact," said Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska.
Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., proposed an amendment to tax the Hetch-Hetchy Reservoir in
House panel OKs river restoration
By David Whitney, staff writer
"We've waited a year for this, and now we have it," said Hamilton Candee, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council. "This sends an important signal back to the state that this river restoration is going to happen."
"It's good to see it's moving," added Ronald Jacobsma, general manager of the Friant Water Users Association.
The measure would send water down about 27 miles of the river, which often dries up downstream of Friant Dam because the water is diverted. But the deal is far from done.
Republicans balked in unison because it would meet tough House budget rules by balancing the $170 million federal cost with a new tax on non-producing oil and gas leases in the
The legislation writes into federal law a settlement reached last year in a lawsuit the NRDC filed in 1988 over degradation of the river. The goal is to restore the river and its once-thriving spring salmon run, but there are doubts about whether the long-lost run can be rebuilt.
Costa said the settlement envisions a future salmon run of 10,000 fish, but he tried to downplay that as the benchmark of success, saying there are many other benefits to
"Regardless of whether restoration of the run happens, there are important water quality and flow benefits," he said. "While the goal is a spring run, the water users' goal is certainty of supply."
Without the settlement, Costa said, decisions about how to restore the river would be thrust into the hands of federal judges.
To restore the river, however, water users in the congressional district of Republican Rep. Devin Nunes of
In an interview, Nunes said the water losses are so severe that "all of the cities and counties in my district are opposed" because of restricted water allocations.
"Some districts will lose 90 percent of their water," he said. "The city of
While Republican members raised some concern about the impact on Nunes's constituents, the budget issue dominated the debate. Even so, the bill won praise from many Republicans.
Some offered their own alternatives.
"We can solve this problem by drilling off
Another Republican, Rep. Doug Lamborn of
Until last week, the restoration bill was bipartisan, with Republican Rep. George Radanovich of Mariposa as a co-author.
Radanovich broke with Costa over the budget issue.
Radanovich said in an interview Thursday that other than the budget issue, he was pleased by the committee's action.
"This is a real positive step," he said. "There is still work to be done, but it keeps this moving."
It's unclear where the bill goes now, or how fast. Costa promised it would not go to the House floor without changes to the budget provision, but several Republicans said they were aware of an effort to bundle the measure with a must-pass spending bill and send it to the House floor for passage this year.
Costa said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., hopes to move a Senate bill in early February and is looking at alternatives to the oil and gas tax. #
http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/496380.html
Editorial: Letting the water flow; House members must fund full restoration of the
It's another potentially fateful day for the
Members of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Natural Resources today will consider legislation to authorize funding for restoration of the 330-mile river.
After 64 years of diversions, 18 years of litigation and three years of delays, the
In August 2004, a federal judge ruled U.S. Bureau of Reclamation officials had been violating
Since then, federal officials have failed to assume responsibility for restoring the river.
Legislation to finalize that settlement and provide $250 million in funding was introduced in January. It's needed so the court agreement can be implemented fully.
Committee members are concerned about the project's ultimate $500 million cost and a proposal to offset some of those costs with fees on oil and gas leases in the
Friant Water Users Authority members aren't pleased because Southern San Joaquin Valley agribusiness could lose 19 percent of the water now being diverted from the river for their use.
None of that should halt full restoration of
The
Skeptics maintain that U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton's 2004 decision never will be implemented fully.
It should be and must be.
Starting today, the 48 members of the Democratic-controlled House Resources Committee must find a way to keep the restoration effort flowing. #
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071115/A_OPINION01/711150313/-1/A_OPINION
####
No comments:
Post a Comment