<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="City"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="PlaceType"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="PlaceName"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="State"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="place"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p.MsoEnvelopeAddress, li.MsoEnvelopeAddress, div.MsoEnvelopeAddress
{margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:2.0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-element:frame;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:blue;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;
text-decoration:none none;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in .8in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue>
<div class=Section1>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'> </span></font>Red Bluff Daily News - May 2, 2005<br>
<br>
Too much water under the bridge for <st1:place w:st="on">Northern Californians</st1:place><br>
<br>
By DOUG LaMALFA-Special to the DN<br>
<br>
What a thirsty <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:State w:st="on">California</st1:State></st1:place>
needs now is storage, more storage<br>
<br>
It's spring. Our hillsides are green. After a year of record rains in <st1:place
w:st="on">Southern California</st1:place>, the desert has bloomed. And, once
again, in the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName w:st="on">North</st1:PlaceName>
<st1:PlaceType w:st="on">State</st1:PlaceType></st1:place>, precious water is
rushing under our bridges and out to the sea, lost forever. Why?<br>
<br>
We all try to put away some money for a "rainy day." Then why don't
we store more of this year's precipitation for the dry days that are sure to come?
The answer is as simple as it is outrageous: Self-appointed "protectors of
the environment," aided and abetted by liberal allies in the bureaucracy
and Legislature, have managed to put their own peculiar obsessions ahead of the
needs of the people of <st1:State w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:State>.<br>
<br>
The simple facts of water life in <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:State w:st="on">California</st1:State></st1:place>
are these. We have dry years and wet years, but over the long haul, a plentiful
supply of rain and snow falls on our state. The problem isn't a natural
shortage of precipitation it's a manmade shortage of water storage.<br>
<br>
Earlier generations of Californians understood those facts well. For over a
century, they built dams and reservoirs not only to store water but to control
floods and create clean, renewable hydroelectric energy. Their foresight turned
<st1:State w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:State>
into the nation's number one agricultural state and helped it become the most
populous state in our nation. Without our remarkable manmade water system, <st1:State
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:State> would never
have grown and prospered so.<br>
<br>
In the last four decades, however, as environmental radicals have waged a relentless
propaganda campaign, many in <st1:State w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:State>
have lost sight of those realities. Since the Oroville Dam was completed in
1967,<br>
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:State w:st="on">California</st1:State></st1:place>'s
population has doubled. In the same period, these extremists fought every
effort to increase water storage in the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName
w:st="on">North</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">State</st1:PlaceType></st1:place>,
even though we are the source of most of the state's water supply.<br>
<br>
If that isn't bad enough, the people who for decades have stopped us from building
new dams are now lobbying to blow them up. First they went after a few small
ones, here and there. Now they are targeting O'Shaughnessy Dam at Hetch Hetchy,
a 360,000-acre foot reservoir that has provided water to<br>
<st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">San Francisco</st1:place></st1:City>
for nearly a century. Without its water supply, the Bay Area would never have
grown and prospered.<br>
<br>
Now environmental extremists are telling us <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">San Francisco</st1:place></st1:City> doesn't really need Hetch
Hetchy. Ironically, the groups who so vigorously oppose all other water plans
are proposing an elaborate engineering project to<br>
replace Hetch Hetchy. It's an interesting but hard-to-believe role reversal.<br>
<br>
The plan seems more like a shell game. Here's how it works. One group of environmentalists,
calling themselves "Restore Hetch Hetchy," wants to restore the
valley that was flooded to create the reservoir. In exchange, it proposes,
among other things, a new pipe from the Sierra to supply water to the Bay Area.
At the same time, however, another environmental organization, American Rivers,
opposes the pipe, saying it would harm the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName
w:st="on">Tuolumne</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">River</st1:PlaceType></st1:place>.<br>
<br>
Which group do you believe? Neither one, as far as I'm concerned.<br>
<br>
In <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Yolo</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType
w:st="on">County</st1:PlaceType></st1:place>, Friends of the River is also
pushing a bill in the legislature that would slap a "wild and scenic"
label on 31 miles of Cache Creek. In the name of protecting natural resources,
this bill could very<br>
well threaten human lives and property by making it difficult to provide flood
protection for the growing <st1:place w:st="on">Woodland</st1:place> area. Of
course, that makes no difference to extremists more concerned with the fate of
delta smelt, kangaroo rats and their next fund-raising letter, than people.<br>
<br>
It's a gloomy picture but a ray of sunshine is breaking through. It comes from,
of all places, <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">San Francisco</st1:place></st1:City>.
The leaders of that ultra-liberal city are beginning to feel pinch. They don't
like it. Environmentalists be<br>
damned, they say, as they launch an all-out battle to keep Hetch Hetchy.<br>
<br>
We in the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName w:st="on">North</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType
w:st="on">State</st1:PlaceType></st1:place> have known this truth for a long
time. For once, <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">San Francisco</st1:place></st1:City>
has gotten it right. Now, all Californians must recognize the need for more
water storage that will serve our state for generations to come.<br>
<br>
Assemblyman Doug LaMalfa, R-Richvale, represents <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName
w:st="on">Tehama</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">County</st1:PlaceType></st1:place>.<font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><br>
</span></font>Dear Editor,<font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>I could not disagree more with the op-ed piece about the value of dams<font
color=blue><span style='color:blue'> </span></font>that you printed recently from
Assemblyman Doug LaMalfa. Underlying the<font color=blue><span
style='color:blue'> </span></font>gratuitous partisan attacks on
environmentalists in the Assemblyman's piece<font color=blue><span
style='color:blue'> </span></font>was a very important substantive
misconception-that <st1:State w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:State>
needs more<br>
surface water storage. Nothing could be further from the truth.<font
color=blue><span style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=blue face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:blue'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>The old,<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'> </span></font>out-dated,
destructive paradigm that all water shortages are solved with<font color=blue><span
style='color:blue'> </span></font>ever more expensive dams has been debunked
thoroughly by science and<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'> </span></font>practical
money management. Contrary to what Assemblyman LaMalfa would have<font
color=blue><span style='color:blue'> </span></font>you believe, dinosaur dams
have been eliminated by cost more often recently<font color=blue><span
style='color:blue'> </span></font>than by environmental opposition. <font
color=blue><span style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=blue face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:blue'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>No one, particularly farmers, can afford<font color=blue><span
style='color:blue'> </span></font>to pay the huge costs of building dams in the
marginal places where new dams<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'> </span></font>are
proposed to be located. No one, other than Uncle Sucker, or badly led<font
color=blue><span style='color:blue'> </span></font>state taxpayers, would be
willing to pay $300 per acre foot (Sites<font color=blue><span
style='color:blue'> </span></font>Reservoir) or $1000 an acre foot (expanded
Los Vaqueros) for water that<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'> </span></font>would
only be available on occasion.<br>
<br>
<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=blue face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:blue'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>As for the proposed Shasta raise, how will pouring additional concrete<font
color=blue><span style='color:blue'> </span></font>make it rain more?
Shasta's problem is that it is not full often enough,<font color=blue><span
style='color:blue'> </span></font>something like one year in 8 over the last 30
years. Assemblyman LaMalfa<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'> </span></font>should
know that there is plenty of water available for <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Sacramento</st1:PlaceName>
<st1:PlaceType w:st="on">Valley</st1:PlaceType><font color=blue><span
style='color:blue'> </span></font>farming today and far into the future if more
cheap <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">North</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">State</st1:PlaceType>
water is not<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'> </span></font>"re-sold"
to continue the present outrageous waste of water in Southern<font color=blue><span
style='color:blue'> </span></font>California and in industrial agriculture on
the westside of the <st1:place w:st="on">San Joaquin</st1:place><br>
valley. <font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=blue face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:blue'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>What is the motivation for a Northern California politician to be<font
color=blue><span style='color:blue'> </span></font>blaming environmentalists
for opposing additional financial and<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'>
</span></font>environmental waste on new dams when there are financially sound
water<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'> </span></font>solutions readily
available for Southern California-recycling, reuse of the<font color=blue><span
style='color:blue'> </span></font>approximately 2 million ac/ft pumped into the
sea in Southern California<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'> </span></font>each
year, capture of more of the 1.2 million ac/ft of stormwater run-off<br>
that rushes uninterrupted into the sea in Southern California in an average<font
color=blue><span style='color:blue'> </span></font>year, de-salination of
polluted groundwater, and retirement of contaminated<font color=blue><span
style='color:blue'> </span></font>farmland on the westside of the <st1:place
w:st="on">San Joaquin</st1:place> valley? These cost effective<font
color=blue><span style='color:blue'> </span></font>measures should be <font
color=black><span style='color:black'>fully utilized before the politicians
fleece the taxpayers to pay for marginal dams that no water user in <st1:place
w:st="on">Northern California</st1:place> would or could afford on their own
for local use.<br>
<br>
</span></font><font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=blue face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:blue'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>If Southern California water users need
water they</span></font> should look to their<font color=blue><span
style='color:blue'> </span></font>own resources first, not <st1:place w:st="on">Northern
California</st1:place> rivers and groundwater basins.<font color=blue><span
style='color:blue'> </span></font>They presently use 60% of their water on
outside water uses while living in<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'> </span></font>a
desert. They only drink one per cent of their water. They live
within a<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'> </span></font>few miles of
the largest water <font color=black><span style='color:black'>source on the
planet, the <st1:place w:st="on">Pacific Ocean</st1:place>. They don't need
more North state water, except that it's very cheap and some of</span></font>
our politicians aren't very good at protecting it.<br>
<br>
Michael Jackson,<br>
<br>
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Quincy</st1:City>, <st1:State w:st="on">California</st1:State></st1:place><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><br>
<br>
</span></font><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
Arial'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>