Two weeks after Butte County asked for the federal government’s intervention on the Lake Oroville problem, the state got around to filing a response. The five pages in the state’s response can be summarized in three words: Go pound sand.

It’s exactly the type of response we’d expect from the state Department of Water Resources.

As we’ve documented many times over many years on this page, the state doesn’t like to answer to anybody when it comes to operation of the Lake Oroville hydroelectric project. This is the same allegedly public agency that demanded private meetings with other public agencies, that told those agencies behind closed doors that they’d be rewarded for supporting DWR’s relicensing application with the federal government, but only if they adhered to a gag order.

Some played. Some didn’t. Butte County was one of the agencies that didn’t. It’s been a small-scale war ever since. The state agency doesn’t like to be questioned.

After the evacuation of more than 180,000 residents downstream of Lake Oroville on Feb. 12 because of a crumbling spillway, the county filed a petition with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the federal agency that licenses all hydroelectric dams.

In its petition, the county asked that the state be stuck with all bills for this crisis, including all county costs incurred and all future bills related to developing emergency plans and staffing an emergency services department.

Two weeks later, the DWR’s attorney filed its response with the federal agency. It said DWR is complying with all regulations. It said DWR has a “robust” dam and public safety program. It said courts have sided with the state so far and that FERC shouldn’t even be hearing the issue. So it asks FERC to dismiss the petition.

Now the county will have to wait, like it’s doing with its court appeal, while FERC decides whether to even touch the dueling complaints.

Asked about the DWR’s assertion that the agency has an emergency action plan “developed in consultation with federal, state and local agencies that is updated every year,” Butte County Counsel Bruce Alpert says that emergency plan just deals with what happens if the dam fails.

That hasn’t been the issue in this case. The dam is fine. The problem is a spillway failure, a subsequent failure of the emergency spillway and damage downstream from an uncontrolled release of water down those deficient spillways. Alpert says none of the plans address these contingencies — but should.

Unfortunately, stung by years of combat and angst, the DWR refuses to listen to any idea that comes from the county, seemingly out of spite.

Our message to DWR: Get over it. There are much bigger issues at stake here.