Upload
scot-martin
View
221
Download
7
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
CVP FRIANT DIVISION
San Joaquin River SettlementCVP FRIANT DIVISION
San Joaquin River Settlement
FriantFriantDamDamFriantFriantDamDam
SacramentoSacramentoSan Joaquin DeltaSan Joaquin DeltaSacramentoSacramentoSan Joaquin DeltaSan Joaquin Delta
Merced RiverMerced RiverMerced RiverMerced River
San Joaquin RiverSettlement:
Status Report
Ronald D. JacobsmaConsulting General ManagerFriant Water Users Authority
March 11, 2008
Friant Division Service Area and Contractors Friant Division Service Area and Contractors
Alpaugh I.D.
Arvin-Edison W.S.D.
Atwell Island W.D.
Chowchilla W.D.
Delano-Earlimart I.D.
Exeter I.D.
Fresno I.D.
Garfield W.D.
Hills Valley I.D.
International W.D.
Ivanhoe I.D.
Kern-Tulare W.D.
Lewis Creek W.D.
Lindmore I.D.
Lindsay-Strathmore I.D.
Lower Tule River I.D.
Madera I.D.
Orange Cove I.D.
Pixley I.D.
Porterville I.D.
Rag Gulch W.D.
Saucelito I.D.
Shafter-Wasco I.D.
Southern San Joaquin M.U.D.
Stone Corral I.D.
Tea Pot Dome W.D.
Terra Bella I.D.
Tulare I.D.
City of Fresno
City of Orange Cove
City of Lindsay
Fresno Co. WWD #18
Madera County
M&I ContractorsM&I ContractorsM&I ContractorsM&I Contractors
Ag Water ContractorsAg Water ContractorsAg Water ContractorsAg Water Contractors
Service AreaService AreaService AreaService AreaMerced CoMadera CoFresno CoTulare CoKern Co
MercedMercedMercedMerced
BakersfieldBakersfieldBakersfieldBakersfield
VisaliaVisaliaVisaliaVisalia
Madera CanalMadera CanalMadera CanalMadera Canal
Millerton LakeMillerton LakeMillerton LakeMillerton Lake
Friant Kern CanalFriant Kern CanalFriant Kern CanalFriant Kern Canal
FresnoFresnoFresnoFresno
SJR Channel Improvements
• Litigation Background– Federal Judge determined that USBR was not operating
Friant Dam (CVP) consistent with State Law (F&G code 5937) during “liability” phase of court proceedings, meaning water needed to be released to support historical (Salmon) fishery
– “Remedy” phase of court proceedings was scheduled for February of 2006
– Senator Feinstein and Congressman Radanovich prompted parties to undertake another attempt at Settlement
– Settlement Agreement reached In Summer of 2006
• Settlement Provides:– End of protracted litigation - Resolution of all legal
claims– Funding and Plan for San Joaquin River Improvements– Water Supply Certainty for 20 years or more– Opportunity to recover water and/or develop water
supplies– No additional financial exposure– Cooperation from federal, state and local governments
and plaintiffs provides greatest chance of success for future
– No material third party impacts
San Joaquin RiverEqual Primary Goals of Settlement
Restoration Goal
Water Management Goal
Settlement Goals• Restoration Goal
Specified water deliveries for fishery releases based on hydrology (results in 15% average annual water supply impact for Long Term Contractors; overall water supply reduction of 19% in Friant Division (145kaf – 240kaf) )
River improvements to support naturally reproducing self-sustaining anadromous fishery
• Water Management Goal Water Recovery Account Plan-$10/a.f. in wet
conditions Plan to get back water (recirculation, recapture and
reuse) to reduce or avoid water supply impacts Utilize Transfers/Exchanges/groundwater programs
Why Water Management Goal Is
Critical• Approximately 15,000 mostly small family
farms on nearly one million acres of the most productive farmland in the world have relied on Friant Water supplies for the last half century
• Farmers, Farmworkers, Support Industries, and Communities are dependent upon Friant water Supplies for their livelihood
Friant LT Irrigation water contractor impacts
SETTLEMENTWithout buffer flows and
NO recovery of water supplies. THIS IS IMPACT TO BE
MITIGATED BY WATER MANAGEMENT GOAL.
ANTICIPATED JUDGMENT
Reduction in Water Deliveries
145,000 acre-feet 360,000 acre-feet
Current Riparian Releases 117,000 acre-feet 117,000 acre-feet
Additional Releases for Fisheries
320,000 acre-feet 632,000 acre-feet
Remaining Flood Releases 140,000 acre-feet 74,000 acre-feet
Farm land out of production 51,300 acres 116,000 acres
Lost Crop Production$159.3 million direct$264.9 million total
$372.5 million direct$621.0 million total
Income Impact$36.6 million direct$80.7 million total
$93.1 million direct$200.9 million total
Employment Impact(jobs lost)
1,360 direct3,070 total
3,490 direct7,660 total
Potential Consequences of Failure to Meet Water Management Goal
G.W. Basin G.W. Basin G.W. Basin
G.W. Basin
Water Management GoalWater Recovery
Opportunities
Purpose:
To reduce or avoid adverse water supply impacts to all of the Friant Division long-term contractors that may result from the Interim Flows and Restoration Flows provided for in the Settlement.
Where We Are Today
• SJR legislation, now embodied in HR 4074 as Title I (formerly HR 24) has passed House Natural Resources Committee
• Legislation on hold pending resolution of Congressional PAYGO budget rules for non-discretionary spending and further delineation and clarification of the implementation of the water management goal