At the State Water Board meeting on December 12, the Turlock and Modesto Irrigation Districts and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission supported a flow agreement for the lower Tuolumne River, which they had at least concluded in the concept with the DFW. A larger group of water users supported the DFW and DWR approach and recommended the framework for the Sacramento Valley Rivers and Delta Operations. These organizations have even proposed to develop, in whole or in part, a new CEQA replacement document on behalf of the National Water Management Board. How, then, can Mr Birmingham openly state that the new voluntary settlement agreements are a „good agreement“ when the many details of the agreements have yet to be worked out? How can other commentators in the water user community praise the agreements without really knowing what they are? This is because (with Mr Birmingham`s word) these cases „preempt“ a formal review of public trust. They do not assume that water is essential and fundamentally different for public confidence than water for development purposes. The outcome of these discussions includes a series of voluntary conflict resolution agreements on proposed changes to the bay-Delta water quality control plan that, if accepted by the Public Water Management Service, provides that „the vast majority of water users and government authorities commit to voluntary agreements because they offer a faster and more sustainable solution that improves flows and restores habitat while avoiding long legal wrangling. We appreciate the fact that today`s action by the National Water Management Board creates a working space to continue working on agreements that can bring real benefits to the environment while protecting all beneficial uses of water. Since August 2018, Reclamation and DWR, supported by public water authorities from almost every region of the state, have held lively discussions to review contributions from the Central Valley Project, the State Water Project and the public water authorities, which serve as voluntary conflict resolution agreements on proposed changes to the Bay Delta Water Quality Control Plan. , and to revise the common formulas as part of the 1986 Coordinated Operations Agreement. The last-minute proposal was based on voluntary transaction agreements (VSAs) with the Central Valley water services; However, only the agencies in the tuolumne basin have signed a voluntary transaction agreement. The proposals are provisional and, for the most part, theoretical at this stage.
Other features include restoration projects recycled from river plans and the long-running Delta Bay Conservation Plan. The hope is that this new process would create a comprehensive plan that would end the water wars in California. The political capital that NGOs and resource agencies bring to the fish and other resource protection processes of the public trust is precisely their representation of the public interest. The five non-proliferation agreements retained by NGOs that cut them off from their political base and allies. They have isolated themselves from the broader NGO community coalition, severely limited their resources and strategic opportunities and, above all, weakened their moral authority indefinitely. DFW management has brutally weakened any influence it could have had in implementing a secret process by separating itself from the environment and wider fishing community. A long way has also been made to break the working relationships developed and strengthened by NGOs and DFW staff over the past decade in hydroelectric power plants and before the National Water Management Service. Meanwhile, Senators Feinstein and McCarthy in Washington have tried to extend the deregulation of drought water quality by seven years, which Jeff Knightlier, executive director of the Metropolitan Water District, says would provide water guarantees for exporters involved in the voluntary unification process.