County plan offers best hope for balanced approach to water, endangered fish

It's worth re-emphasizing that the battle over using Russian River water for frost protection shouldn't be an all-or-nothing proposition. The North Coast economy and endangered fish can't afford it.

If nothing is done, the North Coast runs the risk of seeing water levels drop sharply during the next frost - possibly resulting in the stranding and killing of young endangered fish. This is what occurred in 2008 and 2009 along Felta Creek and part of the Russian River.

At the same time, if the state goes to the other extreme and places a ban on the use of water for frost protection, the potential loss for the grape industry and the economy could be devastating.

Sonoma County-based economist Bob Eyler completed a study for growers last month that found just a 10 percent loss of grape crops due to the inability to use water for frost protection would result in the loss of more than 8,000 jobs in Sonoma and Mendocino counties. Overall, it would be a $2.1 billion hit on the state economy.

Eyler projects that a 30 percent loss in crops would result in a loss of 27,000 jobs and a $6.7 billion drop in business revenues for the state. "Land values that are already in free-fall from the real estate bubble bursting will fall further .

.

. ," the study found. Enter the county. On Tuesday, the Board of Supervisors had its first look at a proposed ordinance that would have the county take a more central role in regulating water for fish and frost protection.Rather than resisting it, grape growers have urged the county to regulate them because they know the alternative from the state may be more heavy-handed and economically damaging.The draft county ordinance is complex and raises several unresolved issues, but it offers the best hope as yet of a water management resolution that will protect fish and growers. Meanwhile, it has already gotten off on the wrong foot.The draft ordinance wasn't released until Saturday, and yet the Board of Supervisors had its first reading of it on Tuesday, leaving interested parties little time to absorb it and offer feedback. An informational meeting is planned for today at 2 p.m. at the office of the Sonoma County agricultural commissioner, and supervisors have scheduled a public hearing of the ordinance on Dec. 7. But critics already are lining up against the ordinance for the lack of transparency in its drafting. Others argue that the ordinance doesn't go far enough in protecting fish.Maybe so. But this still represents the best effort to date by growers to address the problem head-on, to have themselves regulated and to collect data on stream flows and water diversions. The county needs to take its time and get this ordinance right.Meanwhile, environmentalists and growers should work with the county in developing a water management plan that makes sense and ensures resources for fish and frost protection. It can be done.

Enter the county. On Tuesday, the Board of Supervisors had its first look at a proposed ordinance that would have the county take a more central role in regulating water for fish and frost protection.

Rather than resisting it, grape growers have urged the county to regulate them because they know the alternative from the state may be more heavy-handed and economically damaging.

The draft county ordinance is complex and raises several unresolved issues, but it offers the best hope as yet of a water management resolution that will protect fish and growers. Meanwhile, it has already gotten off on the wrong foot.

The draft ordinance wasn't released until Saturday, and yet the Board of Supervisors had its first reading of it on Tuesday, leaving interested parties little time to absorb it and offer feedback. An informational meeting is planned for today at 2 p.m. at the office of the Sonoma County agricultural commissioner, and supervisors have scheduled a public hearing of the ordinance on Dec. 7. But critics already are lining up against the ordinance for the lack of transparency in its drafting. Others argue that the ordinance doesn't go far enough in protecting fish.

Maybe so. But this still represents the best effort to date by growers to address the problem head-on, to have themselves regulated and to collect data on stream flows and water diversions. The county needs to take its time and get this ordinance right.

Meanwhile, environmentalists and growers should work with the county in developing a water management plan that makes sense and ensures resources for fish and frost protection. It can be done.