WAR AND PR

Lupine next to Pa'san Ridge Trail:
San Joaquin River Gorge Special Recreation Management Area

NO MAN'S LAND

     The Dumna and Kechayi Native Americans once occupied the San Joaquin River Gorge and surrounding lands. The Pa'san Ridge Trail loops around on the west side of the river--the word pa'san is derived from their language and means “pine nuts,” a food source that exists in abundance on the hillsides.  In spring the ridge trail provides an opportunity to experience a breathtaking array of flowering trees and plants: redbuds, lupine, poppies, fiesta flowers, goldfields, owl’s clover, fiddleneck and popcorn. At one point the ridge trail forks south, dipping down to the edge of the inundation zone of Millerton Lake, where rotting flotation devices, driftwood and trash are strewn upon or near Native American pounding stones. In spring, baby blue eyes blanket the grass between the river and the trail near indentations, the size of house pits, in the ground. The small piece of level land at the bottom of the gorge is the only place where the Native Americans could have set up their huts and buried their dead. Across the river, rocks left over from the construction of a small hydro project rise on the slope like a barricade. 

Pounding Stone near Hydro Project:
San Joaquin River Gorge Special Recreation Management Area

     Sometimes under water, sometimes exposed, the ancient Native American site remains in a water-logged limbo where pristine public land transitions into wasteland. The conflicts related to water in California have often been described as a war--other than a dam, only a war could have created a no-man’s land of similar proportions. The denuded slopes of the gorge reveal the high water mark of Millerton Lake, the reservoir created by Friant Dam. Only a crop of cockle-burrs flourishes there. Reservoir water has destroyed the root systems of the native plants and trees, leaving unstable rocks and soil. Unlike a war zone, however, this no man’s land will not renew itself as long as Friant Dam stands.

Pounding Stone in Millerton Lake near Hydro Project:
San Joaquin River Gorge Special Recreation Management Area

     The first time I found the Native American site, I felt betrayed. The ridge trail offered so many wonders that I expected to find myself eventually in some Edenic place far removed from the rat race. Instead I ended up at a Native American village site converted into a wasteland for an investor-owned utility and the ag industry. Every time I have returned since, the sense of betrayal has grown stronger: I feel that I have been duped for most of my life. 
     Now that the voters have passed a water bond that could lead to the approval of a dam at Temperance Flat, I see clearly how little Native American sites or the environment or our system of public lands actually means to those in power and how much the democratic process can be manipulated. Much more is at stake than just the loss of The San Joaquin River Gorge Special Recreation Management Area. Our whole system of public lands will remain in limbo as long as the people with power and money continue to buy the officials who represent our democracy and manipulate the masses through the media. I am convinced that this most recent assault on public lands serves as a test to see how much they can get away with.

Possible House Pits in Inundation Zone
of Millerton Lake near Pounding Stone

          Two dams already exist at both ends of the recreation area: Kerckhoff Dam above and Friant Dam below. The reservoir created by Temperance Flat Dam would fill up the space in between, drowning the canyon, and along with it, the recreation area and several hydroelectric projects. 
     The Bureau of Reclamation notes that construction of the dam and reservoir will have "unavoidable and/or disproportionately high and adverse" impacts on air quality, fisheries, aquatic ecosystems, botanical and wetland resources, wildlife, climate change and greenhouse gas emissions, cultural resources, agricultural resources, noise and vibration, and visual resources. Local Native American tribes have identified 30 sensitive sites within the Temperance Flat study area, one of which was defined by the Native American Heritage Commission as sacred. The proposed Temperance Flat power system would only be able to replace between 81% and 91% of the power lost by flooding the existing hydroelectric plants. Moreover, if three dams of that size fail together, the entire river bottom area, which includes the town of Friant below Millerton Lake, could be wiped out, as well as parts of northern Fresno and towns downstream such as Firebaugh. These are just a few of the most obvious problems, and the media has avoided mentioning them. 
     The current water war, like all wars in recent history, is accompanied by a public relations campaign in the media. In recent years, the Fresno Bee has often voiced support for a dam at Temperance Flat. From the beginning, the Bee has framed the issue in a way that favors agribusiness, avoiding discussion of negative impacts on the public or the environment. The Bee in its recent campaign, for instance, fails to mention that the dam will wipe public land off the map and that the public will end up footing a large part of the bill for the loss and destruction of its own resources while private interests benefit: The tragedy of the commons, in which the community as a whole loses out while one industry benefits, will be played out in epic proportions if the dam is approved. In eminent domain proceedings, at least, an offer to purchase the property is made to the owner in order to mitigate the property owner’s loss. In the case of Temperance Flat Dam, The Fresno Bee has avoided discussing the possibility of replacing the recreation area with one of the same quality and size somewhere else along the river. Numerous dams already exist on the San Joaquin River and one would be hard-pressed to find any land accessible to the public along an undammed stretch of the river north of Kerckhoff Reservoir all the way to Mono Hot Springs (a three-hour drive from Fresno).

Ridge Trail: San Joaquin River Gorge 
Special Recreation Management Area

     The media, for the most part, has avoided discussing a connection between the dam and the use of its water to irrigate one of the most wasteful crops in the world: almonds, the Valley’s biggest crop. The Bee recently mentioned that journalists from other parts of the country have “parachuted” into the Valley to get the scoop on almonds, and that one magazine (Mother Jones) even points out that it takes over a gallon of water to produce one almond. The Bee’s suggestion that journalists from other parts of the country have to parachute into the Valley as though into a war zone to find the truth would be funny if it didn’t ring so true. Instead of supporting a dam, why doesn’t the media complain about the water guzzling crops, such as almonds, cotton, and grapes that have no business being grown in a semi-arid region, especially in chronic drought conditions? Why isn’t the media protecting the public interest instead of advocating for a vested interest that needs to do some serious soul-searching about its practices instead of maintaining the status quo at the public's expense?
     The issue is framed as a public benefit for salmon: A dam at Temperance Flat might provide cold water downstream to revive a salmon run. However, The Fresno Bee has avoided mentioning that two dozen rare, threatened, and endangered species in the gorge will take a hit when the river ecosystem is wiped out.
     The media generally fails to mention the history behind the Central Valley Project. As Bettina Boxall of the LA Times points out, aquifer levels in the Valley nose-dived in the years before World War II. The federal government came to the rescue with the Central Valley Project, the nation's biggest irrigation operation, erecting Friant Dam in 1942. Two canals diverted over ninety-five percent of the water from Millerton Lake. The Madera Canal ran north and the Friant-Kern Canal meandered south, filling the east side's thirsty irrigation ditches. The river's salmon quickly vanished and about 50 miles of riverbed downstream from Friant remains a desert in all but the wettest years.

Goldfields and Bush Lupine: San Joaquin River 
Gorge Special Recreation Management Area

     I am still surprised to discover that many local people do not know that the San Joaquin River once flowed into the delta and eventually into the San Francisco Bay, suggesting another failure on the part of the media to inform the public. In wet years the river would overflow, replenishing wetlands (now down to four percent of historical levels) as well as groundwater supplies. Due to the diversion of so much water, environmental problems from Friant Dam to the delta continue to plague the Valley: Groundwater levels plummet, and fish populations in the delta teeter on the edge of extinction while farmers combine pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers with irrigation water that percolates down into the aquifers. 
      In discussing Temperance Flat Dam, the Bee fails to mention an important difference between the State Water Project and the Central Valley Project. In 1960, California voters approved a bond to build a network of dams and aqueducts, diverting water from the delta to cities in the south. The rate-payers of those primarily urban water agencies are repaying most of the bond for the State Water Project with interest while shouldering almost all of the system's annual operating costs. As Boxall points out, irrigators in the Central Valley Project have, in contrast, enjoyed the equivalent of a 60-year, interest-free loan. They have so far repaid about 19% of their $1.2-billion share of the federal project's capital costs. Under reclamation law, the government charges them no interest. Though the vast majority of Temperance Flat's releases could go to growers, they will no doubt have great difficulty paying for their share of the dam's costs. The NRDC points out that the water coming out of Temperance Flat would "cost more than $1,500 per acre foot. Even with massive taxpayer subsidies, the Bureau of Reclamation estimates that water would cost more than $200 per acre foot for agricultural contractors (far more than these districts pay today, especially since the project would eliminate much of the cheap $10 per acre foot water that is provided in wet years)." Because the dam would destroy public land without what would be considered appropriate compensation in any other case, more taxpayer subsidies would simply add insult to injury. 

Native American Village Site:
Pine Flat Reservoir in Drought Year

     Proposition One's allocation for new storage projects would increase the state's annual water supply by only a small fraction of California's total needs (as little as one percent) but could win a huge chunk of state taxpayer funding. The Proposition sets aside $2.7 billion for unspecified surface and groundwater storage, but does not pay for all of a project's total cost. So dam backers would still have to turn elsewhere for money, most likely to the federal government or urban areas. The Bee fails to mention that cities will need to play a major role even though agricultural users, not urban users, will receive the lion’s share of the water.
     As the argument against Proposition One in the Official Voter Information Guide points out, "In a major historic departure for water storage projects, the costs of these new dams and reservoirs will be paid from the state General Fund, and California taxpayers will share the burden of paying off bonds that will drain $500 million a year from the General Fund....It's an issue of fairness. The 1960 bond act that financed the State Water Project directed that beneficiaries pay those costs through their water rates. If private water users won't fund these projects on their own, taxpayers should not be required to underwrite their construction, and then purchase the water later at higher prices. Private water users who are the beneficiaries, not taxpayers, should pay for the cost of these projects."

Lupine and Red Clover
next to Ridge Trail

    The Bee claims that by approving Proposition One, voters supported building more dams, such as the dam at Temperance Flat. The language of the legislation, however, does not specify any water storage projects. Ground water storage projects are another, and far superior option, but again, the local ag-industry is less certain to benefit from this type of project.
    The San Joaquin River from the mountains to the San Francisco Bay was once the lifeblood of one vast ecosystem comparable to the Serengeti Plains in abundance of wildlife. The ag industry has drained the river dry for seventy years and the ecosystem has nearly vanished. But just when you think everything is gone, they find something else to take. The next to go will probably be the King's River Special Management Area, since the hydraulic brotherhood has also been clamoring to build a dam at Roger's Crossing for years. One lesson to be learned is that local, state and federal governments can change land use designations whenever expedient. That, combined with corporate influence on politics and the media, requires hyper-vigilance on the part of the public.
     The Bee's outspoken support of the dam at Temperance Flat resembles nothing less than an all-out public relations campaign. At best, the Bee and other media are simply misleading the public due to an inability to delve more deeply into an issue. At worst, they are being controlled by corporate interests. Funny, but I have always assumed that it is in the best interests of a newspaper to at least provide the impression that integrity is important. At this point, I have serious doubts that maintaining journalistic integrity is even a consideration for the McClatchy Company anymore.