Best use of Kern River water? A river!

BY LOIS HENRY, Californian columnist lhenry@bakersfield.com

Kern River in 2006, a big water year and the year the Army Corps of Engineers deemed Isabella Dam the "most dangerous dam in America" and ordered the lake be drawn down from its max capacity of 578,000 acre feet to 360,000 acre feet. Photo by PIO Bureau.
Kern River in 2006, a big water year and the year the Army Corps of Engineers deemed Isabella Dam the “most dangerous dam in America” and ordered the lake be drawn down from its max capacity of 578,000 acre feet to 360,000 acre feet. Photo by PIO Bureau.

http://www.bakersfield.com/News-sections/take-our-river-back/2008/01/27/lois-henry-best-use-of-kern-river-water-a-river.html

I want a river. I want a river so bad I can taste it.

You can tell me all day long how much more beneficial it is to carve the Kern River into a Hydra of canals and ditches that help sustain our ag economy.

And you’d be right — to a point. But isn’t there just a little water from the mighty Kern that can be set free down its ancient path?

Turns out there might be. Here’s why:

A 12-year-long lawsuit between two local water districts culminated last year in a judge finding one of the districts had forfeited its rights to some Kern River water.

Once that happened, a flurry of petitions and applications were filed with the board, including one from the City of Bakersfield asking that the board a) declare the Kern not fully appropriated and b) give the forfeited water to the city.

In its application, the city states it would run that water down the natural channel of the Kern River. Gasp!

It seriously made my heart beat faster when I read that.

You may remember we had a river for a short time back in the spring and summer of 2006. The Corps of Engineers was concerned about Isabella Dam busting, so they lowered the lake, dumping water on us. So, it wasn’t exactly “natural” and there was some serious worry involved, but who cares!

We had a big, full, fat, lazy, beautiful river. And I swear it made Bakersfield a different city. I saw people on the bike path marveling at the water, the plant life, the wildlife. People canoed and kayaked and swam and picnicked on and around the river.

It was amazing how this ribbon of water through the city changed things, lightened them, made a hot sticky day bearable, made the air seem clearer, made the blind see (OK, I’m exaggerating, but only slightly). Personally, I was spellbound.

I want it back.

And here’s our opportunity.

I’m not advocating taking a chisel to the dam. But if you want that river even half as much as I want it, you can write to the State Water Resources Control Board in support of the city.

I’ll give you all the deets in a minute. The first step is to get a hearing and then the process will grind on from there.

It’s imperative that we get behind this effort now because the board is only taking comments through Thursday, and the city already has competition.

Four other districts have petitioned the board and asked for the water.

North Kern Water Storage District in conjunction with the city of Shafter wants to use the water for irrigation, groundwater storage and for homes and businesses.

Buena Vista Water Storage DIstrict wants it for irrigation and storage.

The Kern Water Bank Authority wants it for irrigation, storage and industrial uses.

The Kern County Water Agency would wholesale it to its member ag districts and municipal clients.

No, no, no!

Bakersfield should get that water. And for reasons beyond the aesthetics I mentioned earlier. Running water down the now bone-dry river channel would increase our overall groundwater storage.

The riverbed is the center of Kern’s vast aquifer, I’m told by Florn Core, the city’s water resources director.

“So water absorbed there eventually makes it out to the whole basin and everyone benefits, ” he said.

We also get our drinking water from that aquifer, so recharging it with good clean Kern water, rather than salty water from the California Aqueduct, means higher quality water out of the tap.

Oh, and Bakersfield would never sell or swap that good Kern water outside the county’s boundaries, Core promised. That’s what I call a win-win-win proposition.

Though no one knows the exact number of acre-feet that may be up for grabs, the city has calculated it could be as much as 110,000 to 120,000 acre-feet a year.

Core said in average water years the city typically has a river through town for about two months — May and June — as there’s more water than is needed by other river users. If the city succeeds in its pitch to the state board, we could be assured a river — except in dry years, of course — nine to 10 months a year.

I’m down with all the other benefits Core lists, but I really want that river. Even more so because I believe we were cheated out of our river several years ago.

Back in 2000, the city and the Kern County Water Agency got about $23 million from Proposition 13 funds, about $3 million of which was spent to build the “Kern River Flow Restoration Project.”

Sounds impressive, huh?

The water agency took control of the project, which involved building a series of pumps and wells along the river that would pull up groundwater and run it down the river channel between May and September.

In dry years, though, it would have cost up to $1 million to have that “recirculating river” through summer. So the pumps have never been used for that purpose, Core said.

Soooooo, we spent all those millions for what? Classic! Well, here’s another chance, a better chance and it won’t cost anything except a few minutes of your time. Everyone has taken their cut of the once untamed Kern River. The people of Bakersfield deserve a share.

Update on Wednesday’s column

In case no one noticed, expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP, lost again on Wednesday when the House could not override Bush’s veto for a third time.

This is a program to provide insurance to the children of the working poor. I think it’s a great program and the expansion was reasonable. But my view did not win out, so the program, known in California as Healthy Families, will continue to limp along under an 18-month extension.

Lois Henry’s column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. Comment at people.bakersfield.com /home/Blog/noholdsbarred, e-mail her at lhenry@bakersfield.com or call her at 395-7373.

Leave a Reply