Steve Cameron: Pointing out the obvious

Two weeks ago, I wrote about the desperate plight of Valley farmers.

Specifically, I suggested they need massive help to alleviate damage -- fallow fields, thousands of unemployed workers -- created by long-term drought and the reduction of water being pumped into the Valley.

I was criticized in some corners for being overly simplistic, for sounding as though there's one easy, magic solution to California's hugely complicated water issues.

OK, let's set things straight.

I know doggone well how difficult it is to balance all the various problems with water in our state -- and particularly the Valley -- without causing harm in one area while you're doing rescue work somewhere else.

Steve Martarano, of the Bay-Delta office of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, explained at length how various agencies -- federal, state and local -- attempt to juggle ongoing scientific information with realities on the ground to achieve the best possible water use.

I had mentioned the delta smelt, a little fish on the endangered species list, and said that while I'm a lifelong environmentalist, my sympathies with the smelt could -- in certain circumstances -- be put on hold in order to halt what has become a catastrophe in Valley agriculture.

Martarano agreed, in principle, but pointed out that the delta smelt is also what scientists call an "indicator species."

In other words, if the delta is losing smelt, that's a sign that the entire ecosystem faces serious danger -- and one thing everyone in this debate understands is that California cannot afford a tragedy in the delta.

On top of all these balancing acts, Martarano said, is the most depressing factor of all.

"No matter what route you go," Martarano said, "it's likely to benefit one interest group more than another - and these days, that means a lawsuit. "Sometimes that can make you feel pretty helpless."

Still, there are people working on solutions.

The additional pumping that was part of Sen. Dianne Feinstein's now-defunct amendment to the jobs bill actually occurs now -- in increments as various target levels are studied and met on a weekly basis.

One possible beacon could be the massive water bond issue that California voters will see in November.

It's called "The Safe, Clean, and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act of 2010" -- and beyond that long and slightly confusing title, the act is meant to address the entire list of California's water issues.

For instance, money would be allocated to protect infrastructure in the delta, which all experts agree is outdated to the point of being dangerous. A single bad earthquake and we could face, according to one study, a $40 billion disaster fix.

The act puts money into the water supply chain -- joyous news to the agriculture industry -- and other hot-button problems like reducing pollution in run-off.

There are two huge hurdles, however.

The first is that a few environmental groups, like the Sierra Club, oppose the act because they see it as the first step toward building a canal through the delta.

And then there's the money. The bond issue asks voters to approve $11.14 billion, and no matter how critical the situation, in this economy there will be people who say "no" to anything.

Look, I'm a journalist, not a scientist.

But even I can see that for our water problems to be solved, there must be compromises. Some legislators and lawyers need to get out of the way for the good of the state -- and the public must understand that by doing nothing, we're looking at a catastrophe.

That's not oversimplifying.

It's merely pointing out the obvious.

Steve Cameron writes for the Sun-Star. He can be reached at stevecameron1000@gmail.com.