Steve Sinton sets the record straight

February 20, 2014


One would think that something as expensive as litigation would be founded on sound principles, rather than false accusations against your neighbors and fellow landowners. Neither PRAAGS nor Pro Water Equity have ever suggested or supported the export of our groundwater to Kern County or anywhere else. That is just a fiction created by Ms. Steinbeck to give her something to fight. PRAAGS is not looking for a fight, we are looking for long term solutions to what we believe is a declining water supply.

Ms. Steinbeck has somehow completely twisted my presentation at the SLO Cattlemen’s meeting to make it the exact opposite of what I said. The following is a direct quote from a supporting slide from that presentation that everyone (including Ms. Steinbeck) could see:

“It has never been suggested, nor is it logical, to sell local water to other regions when it is so desperately needed here. However, to ease the recently expressed public concern, language has been added to the petition: The District shall not export water from the Paso Robles Groundwater Basin.”

After that, what I did say is that if surplus water might be available in wet years from the state, the district might buy it and store it in Kern County so that we could bring it into San Luis Obispo County in a dry year when the State Water Project pipeline had excess capacity. Isn’t that the exact opposite of Ms. Steinbeck’s accusation?

The management of water banks and the marketing of water in other places has nothing to do with our focus on stopping our basin from becoming over drafted. Ms. Steinbeck’s litigation is contentiousness without solutions and will do nothing to help solve our local problems. Her “proud belligerency” will do nothing to help us, and in my experience as a water law attorney, will drag on for years in the courts. At the end of that, there will be no more water for us, but the litigation will generate nice revenues for her lawyers.

Her discussion of the right to surplus water is also just a distraction from real issues and solutions. There is no surplus water here, but if a district were created and were to bring us supplemental water, it would be for the sole purpose of stabilizing, and we hope, to restore our groundwater to historical levels.

The Board of Supervisors can surely see through the misinformation being generated by POWR and should support reasonable people working hard for real solutions.

Steve Sinton’s family has been ranching in San Luis Obispo County since 1875. He practiced water law for 20 years before returning full time to the family business of cattle ranching and growing wine grapes.


Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

So he states there will be no export of “local” water and no export of “water from the Paso Robles Groundwater Basin”. Notice how BOTH of these are in quotation marks. Intentionally misleading the public because they do not know the significance?

Answer this question: Will this District have the power to “EXPORT STATE WATER PROJECT WATER”? That is the question!

I am a bit confused. It has been said that the Paso water basin is the largest reserve west of the rockies. So why would we need a bank or exporting or the need to store water from wet years in Kern county. If we ever fill up the basin again to capacity it will surely last a few years and if we get that much rainfall the kern county basin will surely be at capacity as well. This is the same logic flaw that led to the nacimiento pipeline. The pipeline was intended to provide water especially in times of drought….Lake naci water level is at 20 percent and falling If we had built a desal plant we would have been drought resistant. Bank and sell all the water you want but only when the basin is full and that ain’t never gonna happen again. So have the water district with that restriction on banking and exporting and get on with making wine….protect our liquid assets