Letters-Detecting and confronting error ...Middle East

News by : (Ukiah Daily Journal) -

To the Editor:

Our community – in a larger sense than perhaps many of us first imagine – is facing  an existential question regarding our future water security. This question is being posed,  not at our own initiative or design, but by circumstance. As many of us may know, even  though we may not all fully apprehend its consequences, PG&E is surrendering the Potter  Valley Project. How we will answer the only question that really matters will require the best  from each of us.

Years ago, my grandmother, a remarkable woman of deep faith, encouraged me to  pursue an education and to “never stop learning, Philip.” In a note that is now tucked into  her old Bible on my bookshelf, she observed six virtues of knowledge. The first counseled  that the honest pursuit of knowledge would allow me to “detect and confront error.” What  follows is just that.

For over 120 years, the entire Russian River watershed, from Potter Valley to Jenner,  has directly benefitted from PG&E’s storage, release, and diversion of Eel River water into  the Russian River watershed. Once those waters met PG&E’s uses, partly for hydropower,  and landed in the Russian River watershed, it was considered abandoned flow under  California water law. Many of us – almost all of us – perfected appropriative water rights  predicated on these foreign waters. Those of us relying on those waters have no right to  insist on PG&E continuing to provide them. When they are gone, our appropriative water  rights to that water are inchoate.

In anticipation of PG&E’s surrender of the Potter Valley Project, with tremendous  foresight, decades ago certain leaders took steps to ensure our community would be well positioned to meet this moment and created the Mendocino County Inland Water and  Power Commission. We are all better for their efforts. Recently, those of us who find  ourselves having inherited their vision have been laboring – and labor is the proper term  here – to secure the most favorable terms the reality of our circumstances permit. One  result of those labors is a memorandum of understanding between IWPC, Sonoma Water,  the Round Valley Indian Tribes, California Fish and Wildlife, Humbolt County, and  environmental groups on the Eel River. This MOU secures our ability to divert Eel River  water for up to fifty years, and, more importantly, establishes a regime – constructs a  framework – creates an ecosystem – that allows us to build on that success and that  partnership for our longer-term collective water security. Given the circumstances, this is, I  earnestly counsel, our only true imperative when it comes to the Potter Valley Project.

On April 4, 2025, the Mendocino, Sonoma, Lake, and Marin County Farm Bureaus  published an open letter to President Donald J. Trump and his kakistocracy. The letter  denigrates the elegant, durable solution the MOU frames out, complaining that the group that negotiated the MOU did not invite the signatories to bless it with their extensive  knowledge and expertise in these matters. The letter goes so far to invite President Trump  to sabotage PG&E’s decommissioning plan – a plan which includes the continued diversion  of water into the Russian, and, instead, urges the Bureau of Reclamation to assume  ownership and responsibility for the Potter Valley Project.

I detect three primary errors in the letter and offer them for our due consideration,  believing that by confronting them head-on we may avoid the communal immolation the  letter tempts us toward.

The first is the energy behind the letter – what is an injudicious and imprudent  yielding to fear. This energy is expressed in two distinct ways. First, my good reader, if one  has to publish an open letter to the President of the United States and a significant portion  of his Cabinet, then one simply does not have the juice – the experience – the wherewithal  – required to be heard otherwise. Now, in our history there have been populations that have  had to resort to this tactic – women, African-Americans, homosexuals, immigrants – because they have been institutionally disenfranchised. These are hardly those  circumstances. Second, this is simply not how one develops or even affects a major water  project. One should know to pick up the phone or send an email to the correct person  requesting the kind of discrete, focused, and informed meeting where these types of issues  are thoughtfully addressed. The letter betrays a fundamental misconception of how to get  important things – like our future water security – done in the real world.

I believe fear explains the tactic. Unfortunately, however, it does not excuse it. We  are all afraid – some of us are simply refusing to yield to it. In these times it will be a quiet courage and an unyielding (though not naïve) faith that count.

Second, while the letter rightly acknowledges the fundamental importance of  continued Eel River diversions, it simultaneously “urges” the President to prevent FERC  (how to do so within the bounds of our Constitution is not clear) from approving PG&E’s  decommissioning plan – the very plan that provides for those continued diversions.

Compounding the incoherence of its stated policy preference, the letter is uninformed by facts and circumstances. The facts include that PG&E owns the assets of  the Potter Valley Project, including Scott Dam, Cape Horn Dam, the associated  infrastructure, and the water rights. It’s PG&E’s stuff, folks, and we simply do not get to  dictate to them what to do with it. That’s how things like the 5th and 14th Amendments work.

The circumstances include elements in Humboldt County, including environmental  groups, which insist on Scott Dam coming down and do not seem to care whether there is  any continued diversion at all. These folks include extraordinarily-litigious and well financed elements like Pacific Coast Federation of Fisherman’s Association. The letter  insinuates we did not fight hard enough – that we somehow, for some reason – an absence  of courage or conviction, perhaps? – yielded to these elements. Here I am not being  defensive nor am I engaging in apologetics – I simply know what Herculean effort has gone  into this to get us this far. As an infantryman who fought in Iraq, I am far too used to those  who stayed out of the fight criticize those who fought. This blemish on human nature and  manly virtue is nothing new – it is, however, no less tiresome.

The prudent course required that we ask how best to deal with these energies. As  much as they may insult our own legitimate interests in water, these competing energies  are an important variable in any calculus that leads to any real and enduring solution. Rather than counsel the prudent path, the letter beckons us, Siren-like, to return the insult as if their interests were somehow necessarily subordinate to our own. This potential future  only guarantees conflict. This potential future only results in tragedy – tragic because the  resulting catastrophe will have been of our own making.

This regime of conflict is the governing regime in other areas of the state – I counsel  my neighbors in the strongest possible terms to avoid that future. It is a future where  executive directors, engineers, consultants, and, yes, lawyers, make boatloads of money and guarantee perpetual employment in the Sisyphean task of endlessly fighting over every  drop of water while the end user – the family trying to buy a home, the irrigator, the  harvester, the business owner, the kid at the park – suffers.

The current path is a path toward a future where competing interests to Eel River  water are recognized and provided for and which is the best guarantor of our collective  water security. Thus the letter is as ill-conceived as it is uninformed by reality.

Finally, in the crescendo of its folly, the letter “urges” Reclamation to assume  ownership and responsibility of the Potter Valley Project, citing Reclamation’s expertise in  federal water management and dam operations as “the best path forward.” Perhaps. One  wonders whether the authors are familiar with Reclamation’s cost allocation policies, and  with the fact that, yes, Reclamation does do large water projects – and does them rather  well – but it does not do so for free. In fact, the cost of providing what would be federal  project water, both in capital obligations and any attending water service or repayment  contract terms, would exceed by several factors the likely cost of the present course the  MOU provides. It would certainly be entire orders of magnitude more costly than the rates  currently paid by our friends and neighbors in Potter Valley. Once again, one need only cast

one’s eyes and mind beyond the borders of Mendocino County or read something other  than social media to understand the significant cost implications of Reclamation operating  a future water project. This the letter does not even begin to address.

To beat the horse dead, the letter also fails to grasp the structural realities  Reclamation and its water contractors and end users regularly deal with. Reclamation  does not operate in an administrative vacuum. As a bureau in the Department of Interior, its  sister agencies, notably U.S. Fish and Wildlife, are able to influence decisions made at the  policy level that manifest themselves in decreased water reliability – those of us who work  in this arena describe it as a one-way knob. Furthermore – and under the critical, well financed eye of those who are currently our allies but who would now be our outright  opponents – Reclamation’s every action would be subject to indefatigable challenge under  the Endangered Species Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the Clean Water  Act, not to mention the tome that is Federal Reclamation Law, which is itself, as the Central  Valley Project experienced in1992, subject to “improvement” based on national politics.  These constraints would very likely lead our home to operate under the same constant  water insecurity as our neighbors, for example, south of the Delta, where, for the third year  in a row, and after the third year of record or near-record precipitation, can count on only  receiving perhaps 40% of what their contracts with Reclamation provide. Bear in mind they  pay for 100%, regardless of the allocation.

The only thing the letter manages to get right is that we must raise and modernize  Coyote Valley Dam. And here when I say “we” I mean Mendocino County. The greater Ukiah  Valley’s water future is entirely dependent on accomplishing this. Anything – any effort, any  talking point, any other interest – that distracts from our ability to recover from the grave  mistake our forebears made 70 years ago must be unapologetically treated as a clear and  present danger to our collective water security. It’s just math, folks, plain and simple – it’s  addition and subtraction. Tens of thousands of acre-feet of water will come. We must have  somewhere to put it. Right now we do not.

An ill-conceived idea, born of fear and animated by a lack of information about the  relevant facts, circumstances, and law – essentially concocting an alternate reality – results in something that is as unwise as it is existentially dangerous. It may seem harsh to  offer these observations in public – much rather would I have had this discussion in private  with my friends and neighbors in Mendocino County Farm Bureau leadership. With all my  heart I hoped the letter would go quietly into the night. But the public repetition of the  letter’s existence, pleas, and substance, such as it is, unfortunately demands a public  rebuttal given the gravity of the sin. My sincere and earnest hope is that my offering will counsel more thoughtful, constructive, and informed participation from men and women of  the requisite moral fiber to meet the moment.

Error, undetected and unconfronted, can pervert the truth and – worse – undermine  our belief in and paralyze our pursuit of the truth. These times do indeed demand the best  from each of us – I suggest we now have a glimpse of what the worst looks like and that,  from this thalweg, we have nowhere to go but up.

-Philip A. Williams, Ukiah

Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Letters-Detecting and confronting error )

Also on site :

Most Viewed News
جديد الاخبار