A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment
September 17, 2008
2. Supply –
A drought en route? One more dry winter could cause problems
Water in the river still a possibility
The Bakersfield
++++++++++++++++++++++
A drought en route? One more dry winter could cause problems
By Ross Farrow, Staff Writer
"This is going to be a 'watch' winter for us," Deputy Public Works Director Steve Winkler told the board. "The sky hasn't fallen just yet, but we're one winter away."
The Board of Supervisors directed Public Works to develop a plan — which could include mandatory rationing — in case the county has a third consecutive dry year. Water officials are expected to present a plan within the next six months.
"We're looking, probably, at best, normal (rainfall)," Supervisor Larry Ruhstaller said, projecting the upcoming winter.
Ruhstaller and Supervisor Victor Mow urged county staff to work with
Mel Lytle, the county's water resource coordinator, said that droughts are nothing unusual, and they usually last for two to three years. The last drought to plague the
However, with Southern California and southern San Joaquin Valley interests pursuing a peripheral canal to transfer water south from the Delta, Lytle noted that several Southern California dams have significantly more water than those in Northern California, which include Camanche, New Hogan, New Melones, Folsom and Shasta dams.
Many
Precipitation facts
*The period between March and August of this year was the driest on record in the northern
* The statewide precipitation was 45 percent of average from February through July, the fourth driest in the 114 years that records were kept.
* The
*The western
Source: Mel Lytle,
http://www.lodinews.com/articles/2008/09/17/news/6_drought_080917.txt
Water in the river still a possibility
The Bakersfield
Don’t give up on the
We still have a shot at getting real river water back in that dry, brown gulch running through town.
But you — yes, you — have to pay attention and stay involved.
The State Water Resources Control Board is still deciding if it will hold a hearing on whether river water forfeited by a local irrigation district last year may be claimed by the city of
I know, I know — glaciers have formed and melted while this board ponders a hearing. Makes you wonder if we get a hearing, how long it will take to get an actual ruling. Don’t ask.
I’m being told there may be a decision soon, so this is where you come in. Notes, e-mails, postcards, smoke signals — send them.
Even if you’ve written before — if you really want that river — write again, call, stand on the Padre and holler until
Because despite what local ag water districts have said — that the Kern is all tied up and there’s not a drop to spare — there is something known as the public trust doctrine that figures heavily into the mix.
That doctrine holds that rivers belong to all the people and, coincidentally, the board has a duty to protect that right.
But the public has to demand its share.
Meanwhile, the city is still hammering away. Last month, it filed a 35-page brief with the board explaining its view of Kern River water rights, who owns ’em, who doesn’t and why Bakersfield should get any “loose” river water.
Basically, the city’s argument is that a court found that the Kern Delta Water District forfeited a portion of its river water for lack of use. Even if someone else was using that water, the city argued, that doesn’t mean they have a “right” to it.
Some have questioned whether
“The primary focus for that water is the environment,” Core said.
I’ve also been told the forfeited water is only available in the winter months so it wouldn’t provide for recreation. As with all things water, that’s true and not so true.
The city can, Core told me, pull that water out of
I am in absolute, total support of the city.
It’s important to recognize, though, that it has heavy opposition — four local ag water districts and the city of Shafter — which are arguing against the board holding a hearing at all, saying there’s no water to be had. Move along, nothing to see here!
That’s pretty interesting, considering each one of those entities initially filed petitions asking that the board give the unappropriated water to them.
Then the city and the public got involved and suddenly, whoops! No water here! Never!
If there isn’t any water because the river is oversubscribed, why not have the board make that ruling?
Makes me wonder if some district(s) have been using that forfeited Kern Delta water all along without rights or even paying for it, and now that the door has cracked open on that cozy little deal, they’re rushing to push it shut again.
As for needing
Some Kern water goes to ag, some to drinking water and some is being used like a cash machine by the very ag districts that would have us believe we’ll never grow another carrot if
Buena Vista Water Storage District, one of the entities that applied for the water and is now fighting to keep the state from hearing this issue, has rights to
Two years ago, the district began selling 11,000 acre-feet of water a year to Castaic Lake Water Agency for $500 an acre-foot.
Dan Bartel, general manager of Buena Vista, told me the district typically moves its state water to Castaic so the higher quality
He acknowledged that with the unreliability of the State Water Project and continuing drought, there could come a time when he would have to pump stored
I am.
I don’t like the idea of any
The city’s policy is that none of its river water will ever leave the county.
Hey! One more reason the state board should grant
Be sure and remind them when you write.#
http://www.bakersfield.com/hourly_news/story/547558.html
No comments:
Post a Comment