Linda Satchwell
Staff Writer
11/11/2009

    The California state Legislature passed its comprehensive water package in a night session that ended in the early morning hours Nov. 4.
    According to proponents, the package will allow for clean, reliable water for Californians. Plumas County’s representatives, Senator Dave Cox and Assemblyman Dan Logue, both voted against the package. Brian Morris, manager of the Plumas County Water Conservation District, said the legislation would pose significant problems for Plumas County.
    “Folks here are completely outnumbered by the Bay Area and Los Angeles,” he said. It’s a “one size fits all” package that, in certain ways, doesn’t fit Plumas County.
    One particular aspect of the package of four water policy bills that concerned Morris is a requirement for groundwater monitoring, which charts whether groundwater is being used in a sustainable manner.
    The problem of overdraft, taking more from the water table than is replaced through rainfall, just doesn’t occur in Plumas County, he said. Some of the large eastern valleys, such the Sierra and American valleys, have less precipitation and more agriculture. They already have groundwater monitoring wells and report the results to the state.
    But in the western part of the county, where there’s more rain and less water use, no monitoring has been necessary.
Now, however, if the county doesn’t begin monitoring in all areas, it won’t be able to access the $75 million in bond money that has been allocated to the Sierra Nevada Conservancy for habitat restoration. It also won’t be eligible for water grants and loans.
    The bills also direct the State Water Resources Control Board, responsible for water rights and diversion data, to establish an effective system of delta watershed diversion data collection and public reporting by Dec. 31, 2010.
    “If it’s a typical state program,” said Morris, “there’ll be fees and costs associated with it.” In the past, area-of-origin water users didn’t have to report this type of water use to the state. Again, Morris said, local users resent the state’s intrusion, and this “might be something we need to pursue in the future if that goes through an administrative process to be implemented.”
    Morris was glad to see a change in the scope of responsibilities for the new Delta watermaster, which initially was set to have control over all water diversion in the Sacramento River watershed, including Plumas County.
    Its jurisdiction has now been restricted to the Delta, leaving authority for any water rights in the Plumas region with the State Water Resources Control Board, a better thing for the county according to Morris.
    Several positive things occurred in the latest changes to the bond and bills, however. The mountain counties were registered as a region in the bonds. The region takes in the western slope of the Sierra Nevada—including everything in the mountain areas that drains towards the delta. This is the first time the mountain counties region has been recognized as a separate entity in a bond said Morris.
He believes recognition as a discreet region will help in getting this county’s unique requirements noticed.