Farmland and Water Shortage

Much of your editorial “Power of the Market” (April 29) is right on the mark in pointing out the failure of the state’s leadership to expand water facilities to meet the needs of a rapidly growing state in periods of inevitable drought. We are dismayed, however, that you support the bill sponsored by Sens. Bill Bradley (D-N.J.) and Alan Cranston (D-Calif.), which would directly impact Westlands Water District and hundreds of other urban and agricultural districts.

The main problem with this bill is that it would require an open-ended commitment of water from the federal Central Valley Project (CVP) to restore river and delta fisheries to unrealistic levels.

We and our counterparts in the CVP fully support restoration of fisheries and other environmental values in the project area. But we firmly believe such a program should take the approach proposed last year at the federal level by former Rep. Doug Bosco and then-Sen. Pete Wilson for the Sacramento River, and at the state level by Assemblymen Jim Costa and Bill Jones for the San Joaquin River.

The net result of the Bradley-Cranston bill would be less water, rather than more, for both urban and agricultural needs throughout Central and Southern California. The bill would bar the sale of additional CVP water until fish and wildlife restoration goals are met.

In addition to the tremendous losses in the industrial sector, there would be staggering losses in agriculture, which provides one of every six jobs in the state.

In regard to water banking, we must point out that the water committed to the state’s emergency water bank came from private water rights, not the State Water Project as you erroneously stated. We support the concepts of water banking and water marketing, but we do not believe they alone will solve the problem even in the short term.

JERALD R. BUTCHERT

General Manager

Westlands Water District, Fresno