COLORADO RIVER AGREEMENT
Agricultural Angst: North Nervous Over Course of South-state Water Battle
Chico Enterprise Record - 6/19/03
By Heather Hacking, staff writer

Tough negotiations over water in Southern California have alarmed Northern California farm groups that don't like the idea of urban areas muscling water away from agriculture.

They're worried someday the state will say farmers are using too much water in the north and more should be shipped to the south.

This week Gov. Gray Davis' administration and Imperial Irrigation District of Southern California accused Metropolitan Water District of trying to make a water grab by not agreeing to an offer on the table over Southern California's use of Colorado River water.

Monday the Bureau of Reclamation will issue the results of a study to determine if Imperial Irrigation District uses water wastefully. If waste is determined, the district could be forced to use less.

Metropolitan argues the Imperial district, which receives the majority of Colorado River water, is using antiquated farming methods and could make improvements to use a lot less.

Groups with water rights in Northern California don't like the idea of the federal government coming in and challenging ag's right to use water.

Similar shock waves went through farmers' minds in January when senators Mike Machado and Sheila Kuehl proposed the Legislature should step in and pass a law to make Imperial give up water the district says it has a legal right to use.

Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District sold about 40,000 acre-feet of water to Metropolitan this year, and is extremely concerned about the possibility of an ag-to-urban water trend.

Don Bransford, president of the board of Glenn-Colusa, said his board is nervous the federal government could rule on what is and isn't "beneficial use" for agriculture.

"It has the potential of moving to the north and using similar arguments," Bransford said.

Metropolitan says you can't compare the two ag areas.

"Our position is that these matters should be viewed from a Southern California context," said Adan Ortega, president of external affairs for Metropolitan.

"There is no other ag entity we're aware of that does so much to protect antiquated farming methods."

For example, Imperial canals are not lined, which means water seeps into the ground and ends up in Mexico.

Another big difference, Ortega said, is that Northern California has the CalFed process, which works to manage water supply issues with environmental concerns for the San Francisco Bay Delta.

Southern California doesn't have a similar program to deal with environmental concerns for the Salton Sea, which gets water from Imperial Irrigation District farm runoff.

Bransford agreed it wouldn't make sense to do things like lining canals in Northern California. Water saved would come at a huge expense. And water that soaks into the ground from the ditches recharges the groundwater here.

That's different than water on Southern California farms running into the Salton Sea or sinking into the desert, he said.

Yet, the idea of the federal government overriding water rights strikes a nerve locally.

"They're choosing to ignore water rights that Imperial has," Bransford said. "If they ignore those rights, they could do that here."

"It strikes right at the heart of the water rights most of the districts in our area have."

David Guy, head of the Northern California Water Association, said Northern California is different. Water users are working on an integrated water management system for the state to take into consideration needs of city, farms and the environment.

Yet, he said many agencies are still very concerned. "The bottom line is it's an effort to limit water rights and sends a horrible message to rural California" - if water isn't transferred, another agency will just come up and take it.

Worrying about a water grab from the south is nothing new, said Mark Atlas, an attorney for the Tehama-Colusa Canal.

"Part of it is a healthy paranoia based on the history of water development in California starting with the Owens River Valley," he said.

Landowners with water rights have fought long and hard to keep the legal right to their water.

In the past several years there has been a change in Metropolitan, Atlas said. "I think they recognize the baggage they bring generally and have made a lot of effort to demonstrate that while some of that baggage may be deserved, some is not."

He mentioned the Princeton-Codora-Glenn fish screen project, which was partially funded by Metropolitan, and support by Metropolitan for a new offstream storage facility north of the Delta.

"I think they recognize that habitat improvement will pay dividends" even if they are indirect benefits to the southern part of the state, Atlas said.

"We can't do it on our own and they can't do it on their own."

Ortega, of Metropolitan, said the dealings in Southern California are also different because Imperial Irrigation District is entrenched in its position.

During the standoff over Southern California water, Imperial filed a lawsuit against the federal government challenging its authority over Colorado River water.

"Nobody in the Sacramento Valley has been as brazen" in challenging federal authority, Ortega said.

He said he's confident of the "constructive relationship" that is being built between the north and south water managers.

It took Metropolitan three months to negotiate a deal to buy some water from Northern California this year. It took seven years for Southern California to get into the mess it is in right now, Ortega said.

He said he thinks expression of distrust from Northern California may just be a negotiation tactic to strengthen its case for future water deals. He said Northern California water suppliers will see the track record that Metropolitan has set in negotiations and "reflect upon it positively."

"We recognize there's whole communities that must be dealt with proactively. You can't just slide a deal through," Ortega said. "Those days are gone." #

Chico Enterprise Record - Copyright Policy