[Water_news] 5. DWR'S CALIFORNIA WATER NEWS: AGENCIES... -10/2/08

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment

 

October 2, 2008

 

5. Agencies, Programs, People –

 

 

A flood of worries

Stockton Record

 

Opinion:

Time to tap into water-wise farmers' well of ideas

Modesto Bee

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

A flood of worries

Stockton Record – 10/2/08

By Alex Breitler

 

ROBERTS ISLAND - Rogene Reynolds hit the brakes of her sedan as a family of quail skittered across the farm road.

It's the same path Reynolds, 59, traveled as a little girl - on a pony.

 

Roberts Island is a place where traditions never die, even if they do grow up a little.

 

The flooding of thousands of acres of farmland, and the relocation of hundreds of homes, however, would wipe out generations of heritage, residents here say.

In recent weeks, they've become alarmed over a pair of maps issued more than a year ago - maps that suggest using Roberts Island and Stewart Tract, where a major housing development is planned, as a flood plain to protect Lathrop and Stockton from a raging San Joaquin River.

 

While such a scenario is difficult to imagine during a drought, officials who are searching for solutions to the Delta's many problems say that some kind of flood bypass on the San Joaquin is necessary.

 

The question is where.

 

At an August meeting in Stockton hosted by the state's Delta Vision officials, Reynolds saw for the first time two maps that made her so angry she told all of her neighbors and persuaded about 40 of them to complain in Sacramento at another meeting in September.

 

The maps suggest two possible scenarios: allowing Roberts and neighboring Stewart Tract to flood, thus alleviating pressure on levees protecting urban areas, or building a new levee that would basically widen the San Joaquin, taking out farmland in the process.

 

"I don't want to see one acre of this farmland used for flood control," Reynolds said. "We're hanging by our fingernails out here, and we know it."

 

The maps were not made by Delta Vision, but rather by contractors helping the state Department of Water Resources to judge risks to the Delta and its levees and find solutions. However, Delta Vision has relied on information from that state study to form some of its opinions, which is why Reynolds is worried.

 

It's early, said Ralph Svetich, a program manager with the Department of Water Resources. The maps were preliminary.

 

"They were some brainstorming ideas that we put out there," he said. "Before anything like that would be accomplished, it would have to go through the normal process to get approved.

 

"We certainly wanted to hear from folks," he added. "If they have concerns, we certainly want to know about those."

 

Delta Vision is relying on dozens of other sources in making its determinations, spokesman Keith Coolidge said. "Absolutely nothing is imminent," he said.

Roberts Island residents aren't waiting to respond. In a letter to state officials, one wrote that his health would be endangered if he had to move now, his family having been on the land since 1876.

 

Another farmer, Arnold Strecker, is restoring a house his grandfather built in the shadow of the San Joaquin levee. The white Colonial Revival-style home was erected between 1910 and 1912, and sits square in the way of any setback levee. Strecker still farms the land around it.

 

"What do you do with half a ranch and no house?" Strecker said.

 

Anywhere from 15 to nearly 200 homes would be relocated, according to the maps, land values could drop, and under one of the scenarios, more than 100 miles of roads and rail, and 180 oil or gas wells, would face greater risk of flooding.

 

To the south, developers with the proposed River Islands at Lathrop development on Stewart Tract wrote state officials Sept. 18, worried that Delta Vision "may be reconsidering" using the land as a flood bypass.

 

Tens of millions of dollars have been spent on infrastructure at River Islands, although no homes have been built, said Susan Dell'Osso, River Islands' project manager.

 

A far better solution is south of the island at Paradise Cut, where River Islands and several environmental groups - which had sued over the development - want to expand the channel to accommodate flood flows.

 

River Islands successfully lobbied against the state's bypass idea when it was proposed last year, Dell'Osso said.

"I hope it's ancient history," she said. "If not, we've got a fight on our hands."#

http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081002/A_NEWS/810020324

 

Opinion:

Time to tap into water-wise farmers' well of ideas

Modesto Bee – 10/2/08

By Peter Gleick, Heather Cooley

Gleick, Cooley and Christian-Smith are the authors of the Pacific Institute report "More with Less," which is available at www.pacinst.org or by clicking on the link with this column at www.modbee.com/opinion.

The High Five

1.Books

2.Wife among arrested in husband's slaying

3.CHP: Bicyclist struck, killed

4.Here, kitty: Cop expects house cat, gets cougar

5.Small, locally owned banks say customers are flowing in

1.4 women file lawsuit against Sheriff's Department

2.Police shoot, kill man who stomped baby to death

3.Man tries to cut off arm inside Modesto restaurant

4.CHP officers shoot, kill man near Farmington

5.Gang members apologize after stabbing wrong man in Modesto

Water supply constraints have reduced the amount of water available for California this year, causing economic losses and midseason fallowing for many farmers. Independent of what we might want, it is very likely that there will continue to be serious constraints on water available to all California users, including agriculture.

At a recent state Board of Food and Agriculture meeting in Sacramento, Secretary of Agriculture A.G. Kawamura stated that because of changes in the timing and reliability of water supply, "doing nothing is not an option."

 

We agree and think it is time for an open and honest discussion about the full range of ways to respond to the water crisis in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and throughout the state. Certainly, new infrastructure for water supply is one option that might be necessary. But it is also critical that farmers explore another promising option: agricultural water conservation and efficiency.

 

A new Pacific Institute report, "More with Less: Agricultural Water Conservation and Efficiency in California," does this by looking at what innovative California farmers are already doing and offering ideas to help overcome barriers to further improvements.

 

We may be facing another drought year. The Old Farmer's Almanac and the National Weather Service's Climate Prediction Center are forecasting a third dry winter in a row for California. While they both could be wrong, of course, even most optimists don't think it likely that there will be more water for agriculture in coming years as population and environmental pressures grow, uncontrolled development in the Central Valley continues, and climate changes get worse.

 

We thus face two choices: Ignore the possibility of ongoing water reductions and let them randomly destroy farms and communities; or plan to manage changes in agricultural water availability and reliability, and improve the productivity of the water that is available. We prefer the second approach, and our report examines how we can maintain a healthy and profitable agricultural sector into the future.

 

There is a basic question here: Is there any potential for the agricultural sector to use water more efficiently? Many farmers have responded with a resounding "yes." Even James O'Banion of the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority in a Sept. 15 letter to the Pacific Institute conceded that "there may be some additional gains in some of these areas." If even a small amount of water could be saved or used more efficiently, then it is worth having a discussion about how to provide the appropriate incentives to achieve these savings.

 

We offer concrete recommendations for ways to overcome the financial, legal, and institutional barriers that currently inhibit or discourage efficient water use. For instance, we suggest providing rebates to farmers on more efficient irrigation equipment, and property tax exemptions for on-farm improvements that reduce water use. We also suggest the state provide more funding for educational and technical outreach programs such as agricultural extension services, which are not funded to an appropriate level to help deal with water-efficiency challenges. It is time to invest in the many "water-wise" farmers whose efforts bring benefits far beyond the farm gate and to create incentives that encourage other farmers to become more water-wise.

 

In his commentary in The Bee ("Study subtly aimed at getting more water for environment," Sept. 25, Page B-5), O'Banion made some serious misrepresentations of our report. His comments reflect a knee-jerk response to any suggestions for how farmers might actively address growing concerns over water. There are those who prefer to bury their heads in the sand or attack research findings and recommendations, but this does little to help farmers or to deal with the crisis at hand. We encourage every member of the agricultural community to read the report.

 

http://www.modbee.com/opinion/community/story/449616.html

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

DWR's California Water News is distributed to California Department of Water Resources management and staff, for information purposes, by the DWR Public Affairs Office. For reader's services, including new subscriptions, temporary cancellations and address changes, please use the online page: http://listhost2.water.ca.gov/mailman/listinfo/water_news. DWR operates and maintains the State Water Project, provides dam safety and flood control and inspection services, assists local water districts in water management and water conservation planning, and plans for future statewide water needs. Inclusion of materials is not to be construed as an endorsement of any programs, projects, or viewpoints by the Department or the State of California.