Here’s a news story showing some infrastructure in Fresno county that is sinking, cracking and breaking because farmers are overdrafting groundwater. The interesting part comes at 1:48, where the reporter says:
The price tag for just replacing this one small bridge is about two and a half million dollars. Much of the burden for fixing it will fall on the taxpayers.
Cut to Mr. Son, Deputy Director at Fresno County Public Works, saying:
The bridge itself is our responsibility. It is our responsibility to maintain and make repairs. … We could have a bridge that could be replaced for a million. We are currently working on some bridges that cost upwards of twenty-five million.
The reporter again at 2:40 (my bold):
Subsidence is also causing problems along the California Aqueduct, roads and railroad tracks. Fresno County hopes to get federal and state help in paying for the bridge work. The US Geological Survey is estimating the long term damage from sinking land could cost us billions of dollars.
There is clear case law. The farmers overdrafting groundwater are liable for the costs of fixing those bridges, roads and railroad tracks. Fresno County Public Works shows no willingness to go after them, hoping instead that we will all pay those costs. I wonder what it would take for Fresno County Public Works to change their stance. What if the broken infrastructure were very squarely within the drawdown from one identifiable well? What if there were good data that showed that the local damage is directly attributable to three local growers? What would be a direct enough connection that Fresno County would go directly after the vandals rather than spreading their costs to us? Maybe Fresno County can’t do it, because the defendants are also their constituents. In that case, what about Union Pacific? They owe no loyalty to local farmers, but Union Pacific is eating the costs of their behavior.
What is needed here? The belief that going after growers is the right thing to do? Clear data tying damage to specific wells? A taxpayer revolt when the county has to raise taxes on everyone who lives there, instead of the people who broke their bridges?