Federal regs still rob Californians of water
“For those who think that our water crisis is over because of this wet year, let me set the record straight.”
That’s how Mario Santoyo of the California Latino Water Coalition
began his remarks at a recent PLF press conference in Fresno.
Even with all the rain and snow this year, farms and communities, and the businesses and workers who depend on them, are still being squeezed of water.
And when normal precipitation returns, as Mario pointed out, “at best people will be getting 30 percent of their water allocation. ... It’s going to put people back in the unemployment line.”The ongoing regulatory drought shows why PLF’s challenge to the feds’ Delta smelt regulations is as vital as ever!
Those regulations haven’t kept the fish from declining in numbers over the long term, but they have helped dry up the economy, causing deep cuts in water for the San Joaquin Valley and Southern California.One more thing: They also happen to be unconstitutional!
The Delta smelt exists only in California, and nobody buys or sells it, so PLF argues that the feds have no authority, under the Commerce Clause, to issue Delta smelt regulations.
Watch the video above: PLF's Brandon Middleton announces our petition to the Supreme Court in our Delta smelt case, along with statements by our clients and other concerned farmers and community leaders.Donate to help PLF fight for water rights and economic recovery!
As CEO of Harris Farms, Inc., John Harris, knows something about the need for a reliable water supply when you’re working the land and supplying jobs for thousands and food for millions.
John is also PLF’s Board Chair, and his recent op-ed, “Snow, Rain – and Regulatory Drought
,” makes it clear that the water crisis – and the need to support PLF’s “save our water” litigation – hasn’t ended!
As PLF attorneys seek to get the U.S. Supreme Court to take this important case, please donate
to our work! Your support is vital
for PLF to keep “rescuing liberty” from coast to coast!
2nd Win in Sterling Case; PLF 2, CCC 0
Regular readers of our newsletters may recall previous accounts of Dan and Denise Sterling, landowners in San Mateo County who have been trying to build a single-family home on their 143-acre parcel since 1999. The California Coastal Commission originally sought to require the Sterlings to employ their parcel for agricultural use, despite the fact that the Sterlings have no interest in becoming farmers or ranchers. Despite the Sterlings' court victory against the Commission holding that the condition was unlawful, the Commission would not let go, and imposed a condition just as onerous as the first on the Sterlings in a second-go-around at a development permit. We are pleased to announce that the court just handed the Commission another defeat .
As happy as we are to announce this victory, we still have to ask: isn't 12 years to get a permit long enough, California?