CA: Farmers win $26 million landmark water
suit
Bakersfield Californian | 1/13/04 | Vic Pollard
Posted on 01/13/2004 11:20:05 AM PST by
NormsRevenge
For more than a decade, Kern County farmers and water officials have
been complaining bitterly about irrigation water they lost when federal
agencies began diverting it to protect endangered fish.
Now, a court has ruled that federal agencies must pay for water they
took for environmental protection in the early 1990s, an estimated $26 million.
In a case that could leave the government liable in other programs
around the country, a federal claims court judge in Washington, D.C., has given
agricultural and urban water agencies a major victory.
The ruling is a blow to environmentalists and federal
environmental officials who argued that taxpayers should not have to
pay water users for environmental damage caused by their water diversions.
Officials of the National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, the targets of the legal action, could not be reached
Monday for comment on the case or on whether they will appeal the decision.
The issue arose when the federal agencies took steps that forced the
State Water Project and the federal Central Valley Project to sharply reduce
the amount of water they pumped out of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta in
1992, 1993 and 1994.
Alarmed at the rising number of tiny Chinook salmon and delta smelt
that were being sucked into the pumps and killed, the agencies ordered the
pumping slowed under the Endangered Species Act.
In a lawsuit filed by the Kern County Water Agency and other users,
claims court Judge John Wiese ruled in 2001 that the government was required to
compensate the farmers for the water they lost.
In a final decision issued Dec. 31, he said they lost more than
300,000 acre-feet of water that was worth nearly $14 million at the time.
With interest, that has swollen to $25 million to $26 million today,
said John Stovall, the Kern water agency's chief attorney.
"The federal government is certainly free to preserve the fish; it
must simply pay for the water it takes to do so," Judge Wiese wrote.
If the ruling is not overturned on appeal, the money will eventually
be divided among hundreds of farmers in Kern, Tulare and Kings counties who
purchase water from the state project's California Aqueduct. A water district
that serves the urban Bakersfield area also lost water in the case and should
also share in the award, officials said.
The claims were filed only for the three-year period in the early
1990s because a subsequent series of heavy rainfall years required fewer
pumping restrictions. And by the time restrictions were reimposed, federal
agencies had begun buying water, much of it from Kern County, to replace the
lost irrigation water.
However, the attorney who represented the valley water agencies,
Roger Marzulla of Washington D.C., said the ruling has implications in other
areas. He pointed to the Klamath River basin, where the federal government has
imposed severe restrictions on water supplies to farmers in order to protect
fish.
Valley water officials were elated with the ruling.
"It's a victory for farmers and urban water users," said Gary
Bucher, water supply manager for the Kern County Water Agency. "Anyone who uses
water from the Delta -- in California that's most of us -- should welcome this
decision."
Non-text portions of this message have been
removed.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE:
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any
copyrighted
material herein is distributed without profit or payment
to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this
information for non-profit
research and educational purposes only. For
more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml