|
County objects to inclusion in fight to fill Walker Lake |
|
|
Friday, 18 September 2009 |
By Wendilyn Grasseschi
Mammoth Times Staff
 Northern Mono County ranchers and farmers got a bit of a shock recently, when they found out that their water and/or water rights might be made available to help fill ailing Walker Lake in Nevada.
The news was very unexpected, according to Mono County District Four Supervisor Bill Reid, who has been a member of a group of California and Nevada stakeholders that have provided comment on Nevada’s efforts to put more water into the lake.
It was unexpected because the idea of leasing or buying water from the northern part of the county, that naturally flows to the Walker River eventually, wasn’t even a part of the several-year-long conversation about restoring Walker Lake, which is home to an at-risk species of fish that Nevada is trying to keep off the endangered species list.
Until a few weeks ago, only Nevada water rights and water were part of the discussion and, as such, only the impacts to Nevada’s water has been analyzed in a federal environmental impact statement. Reid had been sitting in on many stakeholder meetings on the issue, but the county’s role had always been more to monitor the issue, since California waters were excluded from the conversation.
“I really don’t know how we got left out of this loop,” Reid said. “We were blind sided by this one.”
He found out about issue when he saw that a bill stemming from U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s office was on its way through Congress with language in it that made northern Mono County’s water subject to the same options that Nevada had, including potentially being up for lease or sale.
“Possible impacts to our area, including financial and resource impacts, aren’t even in the EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) and here we are included in this bill,” Reid said.
It’s not that these options are necessarily bad, county attorney Stacey Simon said, more that there has been no analysis of them whatsoever.
Some ranchers or farmers might well be interested in selling or leasing their water rights, so it’s not like the whole issue is negative by definition, he said. But without analysis of how losing the water could affect the area, there’s no way to know how to take right action.
On top of that, the bill is scheduled to go through Congress within days, giving the county little time to make its case for possible impacts to be considered.
Reid wasn’t the only one upset about the issue.
Being excluded entirely from the discussion did not go over well with the state or the rest of the county board of supervisors either. This week, the board and the state upped the pressure on U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer.
Their efforts may be bearing fruit, and just in time, Reid said.
When this story went to press on Sept. 17, language protecting Mono County’s water, including the Bridgeport and Topaz reservoirs, was included in the final bill. A Congressional committee was slated to review the bill on that day.
“Now all we can do is wait and see what the final language is,” said District 5 Supervisor Byng Hunt.
|
|
Last Updated ( Friday, 25 September 2009 )
|
