[env-trinity] Editorial: Fisheries have equal claim to water

[Tom Stokely]

Editorial: Fisheries have equal claim to water
THE HERALD'S VIEW
The Monterey County Herald
Posted: 06/09/2011 05:28:35 AM PDT
Updated: 06/09/2011 10:30:51 AM PDT

http://www.montereyherald.com/editorials/ci_18237441?nclick_check=1
You've seen the signs — "Farms, not fish!" — when the TV cameras are about to roll. But it isn't likely you've seen any proclaiming "Fish, not subsidized water for corporate ag," which is because there haven't been many signs like that.
Fishermen can be just as appealing as farmers, but agriculture continues to win the political and public relations fight over the limited amount of California water that both of them need. Those who should be supporting the fishing interests—including the people and institutions of the Central Coast—should start doing that more loudly and more clearly.
A bill now in the House, H.R. 1837 by tea party favorite Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Visalia, would set the clock back to 1994 for environmental regulations imposed on giant water traffickers such as the Westlands Water District and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.
The Nunes bill attempts to kill a landmark 2006 agreement that transformed decades of disagreement into a model plan to restore and protect the San Joaquin Delta and the San Joaquin River, key components of California's water infrastructure.
It would take considerable power from the state and pass it to the federal government, and would effectively allow the state's irrigators to pump water even when it jeopardized huge populations of fish—fish that are needed to support the commercial and sport fisheries on California's coastline and other species that are needed to keep coastal ecosystems in balance.
Fish stocks, including smelt, shad and young striped bass, have declined to record lows in the past five years, largely because of wholesale export of water out of the Delta. In May alone, state and federal water project pumps on the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta killed nearly 15,000 spring-run Chinook salmon, which could be a record.
A coalition of salmon conservation groups wrote to Congress last month that the Nunes bill "is a radical attempt to place the water demands of some of California's most junior water rights holders ahead of all other California interests in a blatant water grab.
"It is intended to significantly enrich a small group of land owners (and water agencies) by allowing them to purchase the maximum amount of below-market, taxpayer-subsidized, government-developed water in order to irrigate some highly problematic or marginal lands, or to profit by reselling that water at market rates."
Nunes, who has become a master at misleading rhetoric, said his bill is merely meant to protect agriculture.
"We give up water and no one else gives up water, and that time has come to an end," he said, in all apparent seriousness.
Is irrigated agriculture important to California? Absolutely. Anyone who questions that doesn't understand the California economy. Should ag's access to reasonably priced water be protected? Again, absolutely.
But when the supply of anything is limited, competition ensues, and no industry, not even agriculture, is entitled to more than anyone else with legitimate claims.
It's time for ag to stop playing the victim, and for supporters of fishing and the environment to stop being so quiet.
Tom Stokely
Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact
California Water Impact Network
V/FAX 530-926-9727
Cell 530-524-0315
tstokely at att.net
http://www.c-win.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20110614/fc59ba80/attachment.html>