The philosophical divide over the Obama administration's Western water policy could be boiled down to this: abundance versus balance.

Republicans once again in control of House committee gavels are calling for the Bureau of Reclamation to return to its pre-1960 mission of creating as much water and electricity for the West's thirsty farms and fast-growing cities as possible by building more reservoirs and damming more rivers -- regardless of the setbacks this might cause fish migrations or natural ecosystems.

Water and Power Subcommittee Chairman Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) kicked off a budget hearing yesterday for the Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Geological Survey's water resources program by saying that the meeting "will begin the process of restoring abundance as the principal objective of America's federal water and power policy."

Democrats see balance as the goal -- balance between the water needs of the people and the ecosystems and fisheries that have declined sharply, in part, for lack of water.

"We need water. We also need balance," said California Democratic Rep. John Garamendi. "The agenda that was laid out by the chairman is not balanced. It is one that would lead to destruction of very important economic activities and very important ecological activities that we must pay attention to because we live in a complex world."

With that, California's infamous water wars erupted again, this time in a committee meeting room on Capitol Hill before a House Natural Resources subcommittee. For more than two hours, Democrats largely helped play defense as Republicans peppered Reclamation Commissioner Michael Connor with questions and criticisms about an array of issues, some far removed from the agency's budget.

Among them: Reclamation's tight-fisted releases of water to California's Central Valley farms following a massive snow season, plans for removing dams on the Klamath River, struggles to restore endangered species populations, grants bestowed on environmental groups that are suing the federal government over environmental policy, and plans to open a new office in the bay delta in California.

Yesterday's hearing unfolded against the backdrop of the ongoing political tug-of-war between the water needs of Central Valley farmers and efforts by federal scientists and environmentalists to restore populations of the delta smelt, a tiny, endangered fish considered to be a barometer for the waterway's health.

Keying on that controversy, South Dakota Republican Rep. Kristi Noem questioned Connor about the agency's emphasis on dealing with climate change, restoring ecosystems and protecting endangered species.

"I'm wondering where people factor into that," Noem said.

"I'd say everything we do is about people, quite frankly," said Connor, explaining that talking about endangered species protection and environmental restoration "in the abstract" ignored the benefits commuted to people who depend on healthy fisheries and ecosystems.

Connor also faced sharp questions about Reclamation's decision to deliver just half of Central Valley farmers' water allocation despite well-above-average snowfall this past winter.

"The biggest concern I have right now is, what is Reclamation doing to replace the water that has been lost, so we can actually get our agriculture working again in the Central Valley?" asked California Republican Rep. Jeff Denham, who represents part of the valley. Republicans on the subcommittee have called the Central Valley's water shortages a "man-made drought" precipitated by efforts to save the tiny smelt.

Connor defended the decision, noting that the Central Valley has not received its full water allocation in more than 20 years and that a 50 percent allocation at this point in the year represents an above-average delivery. Typically, 46 percent would have been delivered this time of year, Connor said.

"We're a conservative bunch over at the Bureau of Reclamation," he said.

Questions turned to the study under way to remove dams along the Klamath River, which Republicans have criticized sharply, saying it would cause electricity bills to rise. Connor said costs and benefits were being analyzed but that removal would save PacifiCorp, the owner of the dams, whose permits are up for renewal, $400 million from having to retrofit them to allow for fish passage and meet other requirements.

"We've got an ongoing history of conflict, we've got additional costs that will be incurred if everything stays the status quo," Connor said. Resolution would bring certainty to water and fisheries users while power costs would be "held in check," he said.

Under a barrage of questions from McClintock about the agency's planning, Connor acknowledged that Reclamation had not projected the water needs in the region over the long term or analyzed where dams, rivers and reservoirs could be built to meet those needs.

"Obviously, you don't have a plan to apply those undeveloped resources to meet those needs over the region," McClintock said.

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) criticized Reclamation's "horrible, horrible efficiency" at protecting endangered species, despite its many efforts. Connor conceded the agency's struggles and said the solution was "more efficiency and better science."

Gohmert also criticized the agency's doling out project grants to environmental groups that have lawsuits against the government's enforcement of environmental law.

"Is this a common thing, where we give grants to people who are suing us?" Gohmert asked. Connor said it was, because project awards often go to not only environmental groups but also irrigation districts that sue over Reclamation's water policies, although the awards are directed to specific projects and not paying attorneys fees.

Democrats periodically rode to the rescue, with ranking member Grace Napolitano of California praising Reclamation's water conservation programs such as Title XVI and WaterSMART. Reclamation and USGS water program budgets for 2012 proposed by the administration would shrink by about 10 percent, although both conservation programs would remain priorities.

But Connor took heat for the agency's plan to open a new office in the bay delta region from Denham.

"We're cutting right now," Denham reminded Connor.

"We're just consolidating. We're not adding new people," Connor replied. "We think it's a more efficient way for us to address the array of issues that are before us in California."