http://www.bakersfield.com/News-sections/take-our-river-back/2010/01/22/lois-henry-could-we-get-a-real-river-back.html
Wooo HOOO! That’s me celebrating a very significant step in the long journey to get a piece of the Kern River back into that dry, ugly gully running through the heart of our city.
State Water Resources Control board staff are recommending that the board declare the Kern is not — repeat NOT — fully appropriated. That means there is “loose” water in the Kern for the first time since it was declared locked up in 1964.
This is huge!
The board will vote on the issue at its Feb. 16 meeting in Sacramento and we all have until noon Feb. 9 to get in our two cents.
The recommended order wasn’t exactly what I expected. Board staff focused more on flood water that in really wet years can’t be used by water rights holders and occasionally goes out to the California aqueduct unclaimed.
That, they said, shows without doubt there is unappropriated water on the river.
There wasn’t enough evidence to make a determination about whether water is available through a court ruling that found Kern Delta Water Storage District forfeited some of its rights to the river for lack of use.
That issue can still be argued before the State Water Resources Control Board, however, according to the recommended order. And it means the city can go full tilt with its application to get any unappropriated water and run it down the riverbed.
“This is 90 to 95 percent favorable, ” the city’s attorney, Colin Pearce, told me. “Now, we’re moving into a process where the public can comment on the use of the water and the order stated they would consider the environment and public trust issues.
“This order is a strong statement on their part.”
If you’ve been following my columns on this, you know I’m in full support of the city’s efforts. If there’s water available, and apparently there is, we should have some of it.
Five other entities, including some of Kern’s powerhouse ag districts, have fought against having the status of the river revised and they’ve also applied for the water themselves in case the board did find water was available. They would, according to their applications, use it for irrigation and housing.
I’m sure some of you will accuse me of favoring aesthetics over ag.
But remember, this is water that’s not being used. And running it down the river isn’t just about aesthetics anyway.
Doing so would:
1. Replenish the aquifer.
2. Restore the natural flora and fauna.
3. Create more recreation.
4. And yes, it would add beauty, which we could sorely use around here.
So if you want a river back here in good ol’ “river city, ” now’s the time to get involved.
These are Lois Henry’s opinions, not those of The Californian.