RCD votes to offer watershed wide program 

The controversial program offers a cheaper way for residents to obtain permits to divert water they otherwise have adjudicated rights to since the Department of Fish and Game is currently requiring land owners who divert water to obtain permits that require special studies to be done with respect to wildlife.

Local farmers are generally in agreement that the very notion of cooperation with the Department of Fish and Game's notion that they can require people with adjudicated water rights to obtain permits is only encouraging the government to overstep its bounds.

How it started

Since all of this originated with respect to supposed declining coho salmon numbers, many farmers brought up the subject, claiming that they understand that coho salmon numbers have not been declining at all and that there is no reason to infringe upon their adjudicated water rights.

"I don't like this.  I do not believe the coho should be listed.  I want to make that clear," said County Supervisor Marcia Armstrong.

Jim Morris, a Scott Valley rancher, had much to say on the issue.  He explained that the RCD used to be a friend to the landowner and he expressed concern that the relationship is about to change or end.

"Our actions may be of little or no value to coho recovery," said Morris.

Regardless of salmon numbers

However, Mark Stopher, DFG's Northern Regional Manager, claims that, regardless of salmon numbers, water diverters would still be in the same spot today because there is a required permit for any altering of a streambed.

Bill Krum, RCD board president, read a letter in the meeting from two residents who were in support of the watershed wide program and, before the voting took place, said that a workshop had already been arranged to assist people with signing up with the RCD's watershed wide program.

Krum said that if one workshop wasn't enough, there would be more workshops provided.

Veiled motives exposed?

A growing concern for some local farmers who divert water, is the loss of land value if they cannot use the water for farming.

In fact, some say the Department of Fish and Game may have an idea of turning some of the larger farm areas into what is known as "ranchettes" for wealthy individuals.

There are several PDF files about the watershed wide program on the Department of Fish and Game's website.  One of which discusses ranchettes.

"Currently, demand for rural ranchette properties in Siskiyou County and the Program Area is strongest for smaller agricultural properties typified by livestock farms within the lower hillside or upstream watershed areas rather than the larger alfalfa farming properties located within the more centrally located valley areas (Orloff, 2007)," states the PDF file on Land Use and Agriculture section.

Other risks to diverters

Another concern local water diverters have is the risk to having an RCD or DFG employee on their property to check on their water diversions.

If the employee were to be hurt on the landowner's property, it remains their financial burden, according to Stopher.

Also, the money lost as a result of adjudicated water rights being hampered by this new agreement leaves all costs to be borne by the landowner, as well as other liability risks.

"The law establishes that responsibility on you.  You may disagree, but this isn't new, though," said Stopher.

Absolutely no ground was given on the issue of money by the DFG.  However, Armstrong did disagree, saying that she believed that a takings claim could be filed by landowners for the loss of water rights.

RCD unclear

The question of whether or not the Department of Fish and Game would be able to simply go onto landowner's private property was debated politely between Krum and Stopher.  Krum did not seem to understand whether or not becoming involved in the watershed wide program would give this unbridled permission or not.

Also, according to Krum, if one is involved in the watershed wide program, they are bound to allow the DFG and/or RCD onto their property to see their participating neighbor's property.
For those under the belief that there could be "grandfathering" out of the DFG's demands, Stopher made it clear that there is no grandfathering in regards to this issue.

Although the passing of the watershed wide program with the RCD does not require everyone to participate, some farmers believe that it hampers those who will be standing firmly on their adjudicated water rights and not applying for any permits at all.