WILDFIRE SEASON: USDA GEARS UP FOR SIGNIFICANT, ACTIVE SUMMER Page 4
FRIDAY, MAY 20, 2016
VOLUME 89, NUMBER 21
WWW.CAPITALPRESS.COM
CALIFORNIA WATER RIGHTS
THE LABYRINTH
SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN RIVER DELTA
A CHALLENGE FOR ALL WHO DEPEND ON IT
$2.00
Judge strikes
down GMO
ban in rural
Oregon
county
Josephine County GMO
ordinance is pre-empted by
state law, judge rules
By MATEUSZ PERKOWSKI
Capital Press
Tim Hearden/Capital Press
Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta watermaster Michael George points out a more than 100-year-old tidal fl ap gate for captur-
ing incoming tides. Antiquated equipment and facilities is one problem in the Delta.
By TIM HEARDEN
Capital Press
S
Area in
detail
(Percentages as of 2006.)
74% Sacramento
River Valley
5
CALIF.
Sacra m en
10% eastern
tributaries and
precipitation
.
8% in-delta use
Sacramento
65% outflow
to Suisun and
San Francisco
San
bays
Input source
of water
Outflow/
withdraw
of water
Jo
a
5
q
R.
uin
Sacramento-
San Joaquin
River Delta
San
Jose
n
Sa
Francisco
Turn to GMO, Page 12
NEV.
80
to R
TOCKTON, Calif. — Michael George often
fi nds himself in the middle of political fi restorms.
It’s part of his job.
As the state-appointed watermaster for the
Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, George
serves as a water rights referee for between
1,500 and 2,000 water diversions each year. Operating
in an area about the size of Rhode Island, many of the
landowners have the state’s oldest water rights, and they
can move their diversion points, further complicating
George’s job.
With the many demands on its water blamed for the
Delta’s crippling environmental degradation, the area is
rife with political infi ghting and disputes, the most nota-
ble of which is a pitched debate over the project called the
California WaterFix, Gov. Jerry Brown’s proposed tunnel
bypass for the Delta that is estimated to cost as much as
$18 billion.
“The Delta is always changing,” said George, a 20-
year water rights attorney who was named to the position
in late 2014 by the State Water Resources Control Board
and Delta Stewardship Council.
George makes it a point to understand all sides, but
sometimes he must make unpopular decisions, as when
he recommended last summer that the Byron-Bethany
Irrigation District near Tracy be sanctioned for taking
too much water and drew criticism from some that the
powerful water board was picking on smaller districts.
The proposed $1.5 million fi ne is still pending before the
water board.
Turn to DELTA, Page 12
Water exchange
through the
Sacramento and
San Joaquin Delta
The prohibition against genetically engi-
neered crops in Oregon’s Josephine County
has been struck down by a judge who ruled
the ordinance is pre-empted by state law.
Voters in the county approved the ban on
genetically modifi ed organisms, or GMOs,
in 2014 even though state lawmakers disal-
lowed local governments from regulating the
crops the prior year.
Proponents of the GMO ban claimed that
the state pre-emption was unconstitutional,
but Josephine County Circuit Court Judge
Pat Wolke has rejected that argument and
held the county ordinance to be invalid.
“The state law says that the localities may
not legislate in this area; and the voters of
Josephine County have attempted to legis-
late in the exact same area. It is impossible to
read the two enactments in harmony; so that
the local ordinance must give way,” Wolke
said in the May 16 ruling.
Farmers Robert and Shelley Ann White
challenged the legality of the GMO ordi-
nance last year, arguing it had prevented
them from planting biotech sugar beets on
100 acres of leased property.
During oral arguments in April, much of
the debate focused on whether the Whites
had legal standing to fi le the case.
Supporters of the GMO ban called them
“hobby farmers” who fi led a “manufactured
lawsuit” on behalf of agribusiness lobbyists
and didn’t have a valid lease to the 100 acres
or a contract to grow biotech sugar beets.
Oregonians for Safe Farms and Families,
a nonprofi t, and Siskiyou Seeds, an organic
seed producer, had intervened to defend the
ordinance after the county government took
a neutral position in the litigation.
16% San
Joaquin
River
12% Central
15% State
Valley Project
Water Project
N
20 miles
Source: California Legislative Analyst’s Office
Alan Kenaga/Capital Press
Mateusz Perkowski/For the Capital Press
Josephine County’s ban on genetically
engineered crops was struck down by Circuit
Court Judge Pat Wolke on May 16. Oral
arguments in the case were held in April at
the Josephine County courthouse.
EPA water quantity report worries farm groups
Agency lays out legal justifi cation for regulating water quantity
By MATEUSZ PERKOWSKI
Capital Bureau
Agriculture groups are ner-
vous that a “technical report”
released by the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency will
be used to justify new federal
controls over water usage.
The EPA claims its report
— “Protecting Aquatic Life
from Effects of Hydrologic Al-
teration” — is meant to provide
state regulators with “technical
support” about the impact of
water management on the health
of rivers and streams.
However, farm groups wor-
ry it’s intended to make the case
for expanding the Clean Water
Act’s scope beyond regulating
water quality, to include water
quantity as well.
“It’s a back door way of
achieving something Congress
didn’t give the EPA the authority
to do,” said Don Parrish, senior
director of regulatory relations
for the American Farm Bureau
Federation.
The Farm Bureau and sev-
eral other agricultural organiza-
tions have sent the agency a let-
ter stating the report isn’t limited
to technical discussions but also
“advances legal justifi cations”
for regulating fl ows under the
Clean Water Act.
The EPA’s decision to sub-
ject the “technical report” to
public notice-and-comment pro-
cedures, with submissions due
June 17, reinforces the notion
that it will have regulatory im-
pacts, said Karen Budd-Falen,
Turn to EPA, Page 12
21-4/#5