Largest Water Grant in U.S. Bureau of Reclamations History Set for Today: Delta, Fish, and California to Pay the Cost

The Planning and Conservation League (PCL), we learn from Restore the Delta, has “released an action alert regarding a draft memorandum of understanding between the Westlands Water District and the Bureau of Reclamation. The “idea” behind this proposal, according to its negotiators, is to find a way to clean up lands that have been contaminated by improper drainage, resulting from the government’s failure to follow through on installing an agricultural drain as promised with the Central Valley Water Project. Because a significant portion of Delta fresh water is exported to the Westlands Water District and other San Luis Reservoir Contractors, Restore the Delta agrees with PCL’s alarm over a number of items covered in this memorandum of understanding.”

There is a lot of detailed information in this second article, that is also a must read for any Californians concerned about water and the environment.

There is, however, a third article, from The Hill, “Head of Interior Department conduct board joins lobbying firm”, from a couple of weeks ago that has some very interesting information. Remember those former Bush Administration officials from the first article? Consider this information from the third article:

“Limbaugh’s departure comes on the heels of his deputy Jason Peltier’s resignation. Peltier left the department in late June to join the Westlands Water District in California, which has interests before Interior, as its chief deputy general manager.

”Democrats have raised concerns about Peltier’s and others’ moves to Westlands from Interior. In a June 28 letter to Kempthorne, Reps. George Miller (D-Calif.) and Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.) asked for documentation behind Peltier’s move, as well as for Susan Ramos, a former Bureau of Reclamation official also working with Westlands, due to potential conflicts of interest.

”Limbaugh said that Peltier recused himself from “California issues” and added he has done the same.” [Emphasis added]

If you are concerned, you may wish to join in with the Planning and Conservation League and other organizations and contact California’s U.S. Senators—today. Their letter is below:

Letter of Opposition to proposed San Joaquin valley “drainage settlement” from Planning and Conservation League:

Dear Senator Feinstein and Senator Boxer:

Our organizations, collectively representing over many Californians, appreciate your leadership in seeking a resolution to the toxic drainage problems in the San Joaquin Valley. We are committed to working toward a permanent and cost-effective solution to this lingering environmental problem.

Due to the strong concerns outlined below, our organizations respectfully urge you to reject the proposed “Collaborative Drainage Resolution” that has been developed by Westlands Water District and circulated by the Bureau of Reclamation. After reviewing the draft MOU and attending public meetings hosted by the Bureau of Reclamation, we have determined that this proposal is not an acceptable or adequate solution. Instead, this agreement would prevent California from meeting state priorities and threatens to intensify the state’s water crisis.

We recognize that many parties are working in good faith to discuss and possibly revise parts of the proposal. However, we understand that the proponents of this draft MOU deem the transfer of a permanent water-right to Westlands Water District (Westlands) and title to San Luis Reservoir non-negotiable conditions of the proposed drainage settlement. For the reasons outlined below, we consider these conditions to be fatal flaws of this proposal. Inclusion of such elements and the inherent threat they pose to California compel us to oppose this proposal.

In addition to these concerns stated below, our organizations concur with the comments previously submitted to your offices and the Bureau of Reclamation (Bureau) by the Planning and Conservation League, The Bay Institute, Environmental Defense, Natural Resource Defense Council and the California Water Impact Network. We incorporate these letters by reference.

We urge you to work with the appropriate stakeholders and federal agencies to develop a more comprehensive drainage solution which also improves, rather than undermines, water supply reliability, water quality, and habitat conditions in the Bay-Delta ecosystem.

FATAL FLAWS OF THE PROPOSAL

Increased Threat to the Bay-Delta Estuary and Endangered Species

Just as scientists are confirming that high export levels from the California Bay-Delta are contributing to the crash of key species in that ecosystem, this proposal could potentially perpetuate those unsustainable diversion levels by exchanging Westlands’ existing water contract for a firm water right. Given the imperiled state of the Delta, it would be irresponsible to solidify these dangerously high levels of Bay-Delta exports by such provisions included in the draft MOU. Granting a firm water right to Westlands Water District would eliminate all opportunity for Congressional and public oversight of the most federally subsidized water and power in the country.[1] Without periodic review of these water allocations, increased degradation of Bay-Delta water quality and its watershed, resulting from such use, could develop and remain undisclosed to the public.

No Assurance of Drainage Cleanup

The MOU fails to provide adequate assurances that the drainage problem will actually be resolved. The proposal does not provide a timeline for completion, or commit contractors to a particular method of treatment. In fact, the technology identified in the proposal has not been tested at the scale of this project, and may not be effective for such large-scale toxic clean up. In addition, the proposal fails to identify regional facilities with the capacity to discard toxic contaminants. Without a firm commitment to implement a safe and proven drainage solution, the proposal provides no benefit to the public.

Reduction in Water Supply Reliability for California

The legal priority inherent in a direct water right and the operational control of San Luis Reservoir would give Westlands more secure access to Delta water, thereby potentially jeopardizing the water supply of millions of other Californians and the health of the Bay-Delta estuary. We recognize that proponents of this draft MOU have offered to minimize such risks. However, such suggestions have been conditioned with a mandatory provision for "replacement water. This condition implies that critical protections for fish and wildlife could not be imposed on the transferred water right, thereby severely burdening other water users, the Environmental Water Account or other indemnification devices.

The net effect would be to further threaten already endangered Delta species and the water supply reliability for other users.

Gift of Public’s Property to Organization of Special Interests

The proposed settlement would be an unjustified gift of public property to an entity made up of a small group of influential special interests. The settlement would not only transfer a 1 Million acre foot annual water right to that entity, it would also inappropriately grant them title to the San Luis Reservoir and forgive the massive debt they have previously incurred. At a time when the state is facing critical declines in the health of the Bay-Delta estuary and water supply reliability, this proposal would give away significant public resources necessary to address this crisis.

Moreover, contrary to statements made in the MOU, the settlement does not represent significant cost-savings for the taxpayer. It is now clear that the federal estimate of the cost for the Bureau to remedy the drainage problem on its own is greatly inflated. If the federal cost estimates were revised to accurately reflect the true costs of solving the drainage problem, it would become clear that the public assets being transferred are worth far more than the claimed savings to the government.

Scientists Excluded from Process

We are deeply concerned that, to this point, this process has excluded scientists and technical experts from the wildlife agencies, water quality agencies and other relevant regulatory authorities. This is particularly troubling given the recent history of federal political appointees overriding scientific findings and recommendations. Federal agencies charged with protecting public resources must be engaged in the development of a drainage solution.

A COMPREHENSIVE solution

The Westlands proposal fails to remedy the environmental problems of agricultural drainage that have plagued the San Joaquin Valley for over two decades and also threatens to aggravate environmental problems in the Delta. Given the proposal’s fatal flaws and the strong concerns expressed by private and public entities in California, we strongly urge you to call on the Interior Department to pursue an alternative approach that would eliminate the drainage problem in a more responsible and comprehensive manner.
Such a comprehensive alternative should include more extensive retirement of drainage impaired lands, enhanced water supply reliability for California, and dedicated water resources for Bay-Delta needs. We look forward to the opportunity to present your office with alternatives that include such components and maximize benefits for California.

We urge your office and the relevant federal agencies to provide equal consideration to alternative proposals these critical components.