[Still Thinking]

The federales have a good point that the taxpayers should not be reponsible for cleaning up their mess. How about making the judgment against those staff members who proposed or fought for this action as well as those outside the dept who lobbied for it?

[RightlySo]

I think the word "their" in the sentence you are reffering to is in regards to government agencies, not the supposed perpetrators of environmental damage. In this case, the farmers did no damage. Rather, the federal government reduced the amount of water coming from the delta basin upstream because the local government's water pumps sucked up and killed fish.

Certainly the fed's argument is a fallacy. They argued in court that the taxpayer should not have to pay end users (aka, farmers) for the government's choice to reduce water in order to save fish.

A short tangent: what happened to "life, liberty and property"?! FWIW, that phrase I just quoted was the one almost used instead of "...life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". It was changed at the last moment, just before the venerable document was signed. The founders of this country knew the importance of private property, and they knew that the government needs to compensate owners at fair market value when the government imposes an easement.

We're seeing a fairly rapid deterioration of that very, very important founding principle.

[Ben Hecks]

"... as well as those outside the dept who lobbied for it?"

I would bet that the Sierra Club was involved in this bright idea - we should send them the bill.

[Carry_Okie]

The federales have a good point that the taxpayers should not be reponsible for cleaning up their mess.

No, they don't. The demand for water for fish is an urban democratic claim on the use of a private asset. It's terrible environmental policy because it ends up being used for the profit of those wishing to use regulatory power to put their competitors out of business. That process distorts priorities, misallocates capital, and destroys the wealth that pays for environmental protection. Takings such as these devalue the resource to the point where land is abandoned and overrun with weeds and pests.