Water Contracts for Farmers

The Times’ editorial “Not Exactly a Watertight Deal” (Dec. 1) suggests that the federal government provide water to California farmers under “temporary contracts” while environmental impact studies are pending, studies which, by your own estimate, could take three to five years.

To understand the reality of such a suggestion, next time you apply for a mortgage to buy a home, try telling the lender that you are “temporarily employed.” Then, tell the lender that there is a study under way which may adversely impact your employment. Just for good measure, tell the lender that there is likely to be litigation over that study. That is the very situation farmers and local communities would find themselves with temporary water service contracts.

Department of the Interior officials renewed the water contracts of 28 irrigation districts because they are obligated to do so under law. The department is absolutely correct in stating that, if environmental impact studies indicate that policies should be altered, those alterations can be implemented when the studies are complete.

It should be noted that in an earlier editorial The Times reminded us that the President’s Council on Environmental Quality had recommended an EIS be done before contracts are renewed. It is interesting that the chairman of the council is now calling Interior Secretary Manuel Lujan’s decision “a sensible balancing between environmental concerns and the need to provide water.”

If The Times truly wants to see environmental restoration, it should recognize Lujan’s call for an initiative to restore the San Joaquin River as a move in the right direction, because it signals a willingness to enhance the valley’s environment without punishing farmers and valley communities.

STEPHEN K. HALL

Executive Director

California Farm Water Coalition

Fresno