|
 | 
Jul-24-2008Federal judge orders protection plan for migrating salmon(topic overview)
CONTENTS:
SOURCES
FIND OUT MORE ON THIS SUBJECT
'''Neither the PPIC Report authors nor officials with the State have done a full-scale economic analysis of how a change in water quality with the operation of a peripheral canal would impact farming, recreation, or fisheries. It is estimated that Delta farming alone contributes $2 billion per year to our local economy, and recreation like boating and fishing another $750 million. If the Delta is made into a salty inland sea the economic impacts will be devastating to those living in the surrounding five counties of the Delta.''' Last, Restore the Delta Board Member, Betsy Reifsnider, notes problems with the report'''s conclusions regarding governance for the Delta and how these conclusions mirror problems with the Delta Vision Strategic Draft Plan. [1] The Public Policy Institute of California issued a report that endorsed the idea of a peripheral canal to carry water around the delta. The State Water Resources Control Board approved a work plan that it said will increase its efforts to improve water quality and habitat in the delta.[2] An influential public policy group has just released a report that says California should no longer draw water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to supply water to most of the state -- and that we should build a canal to pipe Sacramento River water around the Delta to the head of the California Aqueduct near Tracy.[3] A local think tank, the Public Policy Institute of California, also recently released a report supporting the construction of a new peripheral canal around the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.[4] Restore the Delta, a Delta-based coalition including Delta farmers, environmentalists, fishermen, business leaders, the faith community, recreation enthusiasts, and everyday folks today issued a statement calling into question many of the findings in the Public Policy Institute'''s "Comparing Futures for the Sacramento???San Joaquin Delta", a report calling for a peripheral canal. I urge everybody concerned about the fate of the California Delta and the state's fisheries to read their critique of the report's conclusions.[1] Sources close to the Restore the Delta campaign have learned that the Schwarzenegger Administration pushed for the publication of the report before it was complete. These same officials wanted to see this report out the door before the Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force moved too far forward with its own finding and recommendations for the future of the Delta, and the report's authors complied. While the details in the missing appendices will without a doubt support the report's many inaccurate claims promoting the peripheral canal, the Governor's attempts to alter public opinion through media orchestration in order to push his water agenda exemplify California water politics as its worst. Restore the Delta cannot help but to question the link between some of the funding for this study and its conclusion that the peripheral canal is the silver bullet for the Delta.[5]
Good water quality in the Delta is supporting an overall economy of at least nearly $3 billion annually, before we even add in commercial salmon fishing. Our "low value crops," as they are called by the report's authors, include asparagus, blueberries, grapes, and pears and cannot be sustained with degraded water quality. Furthermore corn and alfalfa are not such low value crops in today's economy, or when you consider the need for local food security. This report has gone a long way toward pitting the future of Delta family farmers, Delta business owners, boaters, wake boarders, and sports and commercial fishing communities against large corporate agri-business in the southern part of the Central Valley. It's not about fish being more important than Californians. It's about the people within Delta communities, our culture, our history, our way of life, and our public health being sacrificed for a water grab.[5] 'For decades, water users have sought to pump additional water out of our Central Valley streams, then species have declined, and ultimately the courts are forced to step in to prevent an environmental catastrophe. California has been mired in water wars for much of its history, but the situation is now particularly severe. The state's once prolific and profitable salmon fishery is at its lowest ebb in decades, and this year's salmon season was closed for the first time ever, resulting in huge economic losses to the fishing industry. Parts of California's famed agricultural economy also are suffering losses this summer because of severe drought, and courts have been forced to order water cutbacks to protect endangered fish, including salmon and the Delta smelt ' the 'canary in the coal mine' for the health of the overall Bay-Delta system.[4] FRESNO A federal judge on Wednesday ordered California water managers to rethink their plans to make sure pumping systems don't push native, wild salmon closer to extinction over the next eight months. The order could force regulators to make temporary changes to the way they move water so endangered winter-run Chinook salmon can spawn safely in the state's rivers and streams, said attorneys for environmental and fishermen's groups. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the state Department of Water Resources also will have to take a second look at how they operate water projects in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to avoid causing short-term harm to a second salmon species and the threatened Central Valley steelhead.[6] The first is the California Aqueduct, main artery of the State Water Project, which propels delta water on a 444-mile beeline to Southern California. Two miles down the road the Delta-Mendota Canal also has its fountainhead, feeding the federal Central Valley Project -- an audacious rewrite of nature designed, as the boosters sang, to "make a desert bloom."[7]
A new report entitled '''Fish Out of Water,''' released jointly by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen'''s Associations (PCFFA), and Water-4-Fish campaign says the survival of the fishery is threatened by massive water diversions by the state and federal water projects in the Central Valley.[8]
On Sept. 4, attorneys for federal and state regulators, farmers, environmentalists and commercial fishermen will meet at a hearing to determine what protections may be needed for the fish until early March. Federal biologists will have finished their new, permanent plan governing the massive delta water projects. Following the unprecedented collapse of West Coast salmon fishing this year, fishermen and environmentalists say more pumping cutbacks are necessary to keep the fish from being chopped up in the delta's pumps, which help distribute water to 23 million Californians.[6] Delta water supplies 25 million Californians with drinking water and irrigates 750,000 acres of cropland. It is also an integral part of the migration pattern of the vast majority of spawning salmon along the West Coast, where there was a near catastrophic decline in ocean salmon this year.[9]
The report concludes that providing a more reliable water supply for the San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary could help save fish, including salmon, while also helping to ensure adequate water for farms, cities, and the 25 million Californians who rely on the Bay-Delta's water.[4] The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) report is titled ' Finding the Balance: A Vision for Water Supply and Environmental Reliability in California.' The report outlines steps that state and federal leaders must take to end a vicious cycle of water shortages and environmental near-disasters, and instead create a stable and reliable water supply. That, in turn, should help guarantee environmental reliability ' a condition where all necessary ecological, political and economic systems are in place to ensure the Bay Delta and its fisheries are self-sustaining into the future.[4] We're happy to see Ornellas speak out on behalf of the Delta; we wish more Tracy residents would do the same. Anyone who says this is a state issue and not a local one needs to wake up. This isn't just about the future of much of California's water supply.[3] The Schwarzenegger/Feinstein water bond proposal has been sent to the state Legislature. "There is an urgent need for comprehensive water reform, and this bipartisan plan is offered as a potential compromise that puts us on the path toward restoring the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, expanding water supplies and promoting conservation efforts that will ensure a clean, reliable water supply for California," Schwarzenegger said.[2] Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein has proposed a compromise plan to the Legislature to update California's water system by increasing storage, improving conveyance, protecting the Delta's ecosystem and promoting greater water conservation. "There is an urgent need for comprehensive water reform, and this bipartisan plan is offered as a potential compromise that puts us on the path toward restoring the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, expanding water supplies and promoting conversation efforts that will ensure a clean, reliable water supply for California," Governor Schwarzenegger says. "I know that legislative leaders recognize the urgent need to address California's water crisis, and I look forward to working with them to present a plan to voters this November." "The goal of this plan is to break the long-standing stalemate over water," Senator Feinstein adds.[10]
The State Water Resources Control Board voted unanimously last week for a plan it said is designed to "rescue" the delta. The board, which has primary regulatory authority over both water supply and water quality in California, proposes a plan that relies heavily on stepped-up enforcement of water quality regulations. The work plan will establish and implement increased water quality objectives for those who discharge water into the delta and its tributaries. "We want this to be an inclusive process, but the delta is in crisis, and we recognize the need to act quickly," said State Water Board Chair Tam Doduc. "The State Water Board will look at how its authority in water rights and enforcement of water quality standards can best be brought to bear on the problems in the delta." She said the problems include depleted and endangered fisheries, salinity and alleged unauthorized diversions. The State Water Board plans to release a notice for an October public workshop to move forward on one of the activities called for in its bay-delta work plan--mandatory conservation practices.[2] If the probability of earthquakes is so high in the Delta, then we need a comprehensive emergency preparedness plan with materials set aside for a disaster. More importantly, we aren't we moving to reinforce levees crucial to water supply on the five islands considered critical to water supply in the report? Instead of hand wringing, existing bond money should be used to begin this work. There are problems with current state analysis regarding subsidence which the authors use for their data.[5]
Building a canal to shuttle water from the lower Sacramento River around the delta and then to the south would be cheaper, less disruptive to the water supply and might ultimately be better for the delta itself, the researchers say. That idea - known as the Peripheral Canal - has always been controversial in Northern California, where residents and businesses fear that it would lead to even more exports of water to the south. The state's voters rejected a proposal for such a canal in 1982.[11] The authors conclude that an "isolated conveyance" -- blather for peripheral canal -- would draw fresh water from the Sacramento River and divert better water to more than 25 million Californians for drinking and irrigation by bypassing the salty mixture found in the Delta.[3] Talk of a peripheral canal that would re-route Sacramento River water around Delta waterways is back, but we need to know more before we can weigh in.[3]
More importantly, environmentalists tell us that there isn't a fish screen big enough in the world to protect fish from the amount of water that would be diverted from the Sacramento River. The report says that the peripheral canal would have a major impact on salmon as they migrate upstream.[5]
The water quality analysis in the report is truly incomplete. It only features a discussion of a potential increase in salinity due to sea level rise, but it does not include a complete hydrological analysis of how climate change will affect the Delta. It does not examine the possibility that Sacramento River flows will decrease during dry periods, limiting or possibly stopping exports all together.[5] Rerouting the Sacramento River will take away the Delta last major fresh water source, worsening Delta water quality.[5]
The delta also serves as a transfer point for the state's water supply. Snowmelt from the Cascades and the Sierra drains into the Sacramento River and flows into the delta at its northern edge.[11] The delta is in crisis, and that crisis could undermine the water supply for Southern California and the Silicon Valley, and curtail agriculture in the southern San Joaquin Valley, doing damage to the state's economy and potentially making ghost towns out of many farming communities.[11] Instead of pumping from the delta -- a practice that contributes to the demise of fish and that has caught the stern attention of a federal judge -- river water would be shuttled around the estuary. This end run would ensure a more reliable flow of water for Southern California's Metropolitan Water District and several San Francisco Bay Area cities, and also for San Joaquin Valley farmers hooked into the federal waterworks.[7] Only in dry years do low-flow toilets and San Joaquin Valley crop patterns and delta fish counts become part of the public discourse. This has been a dry year, the second in a row. It has not been, at least not yet, bleached-bones-in-the-lake-bed dry -- "a marginal call," is how one veteran hydrologist politely described Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's decision last month to declare a drought. It's been dry enough to infuse the water debate with a jolt of heightened urgency and to generate interest beyond the ranks of its perpetual participants. In this particular form of trench warfare, dry spells present an ideal climate for advancement. Whether the objective is to build more dams or provide more cool, fresh water for salmon runs, it's better to push during a dry time than in a season of downpours.[7]
Make no mistake about it: the Delta's problem is not that it lacks a canal. The problem is that its water is over allocated, much of it to toxic land on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley that should have never been put into agricultural production.[1]
Just days after Governor Schwarzenegger and Senator Diane Feinstein made public a joint statement calling a new water bond that would include "improved conveyance" for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, the Public Policy Institute released a second Delta report entitled Comparing Future For the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.[5] Now, the Public Policy Institute of California and experts from University of California, Davis, say the risks posed by a changing Delta ecosystem -- with climate change, rising sea levels, levee failures from future earthquakes, increased runoff and new invasive species -- call for an aggressive approach to protecting California's long-term water supply.[3] Last week, the Public Policy Institute of California introduced what it calls the "best strategy to save the delta ecosystem and ensure a reliable water supply" by carrying water around the delta.[2]
In spite of the hypocritical rhetoric that Feinstein and Schwarzenegger and the Public Policy Institute report's talk about "ecosystem restoration," the only purpose of the peripheral canal is to create the capacity to export more water from the Delta.[1] Stockton, California -- Restore the Delta, a Delta-based coalition including Delta farmers, environmentalists, everyday citizens, fishermen, business leaders, the faith community, and recreation enthusiasts, is calling into questions many of the findings in the Public Policy Institute'''s Navigating the Delta, a report calling for a peripheral canal.[1]
As a friend with Restore the Delta notes, Bechtel's past practices in the area of water indicate "a sordid history in the name of profit." In addition to our disappointment with the report, Restore the Delta is dismayed that the Public Policy Institute accepted funding for this report from a source with such a questionable history in the area of water management.[5] The Public Policy's 184-page report says that continuing to channel water through the troubled estuary's maze of levees is risky and costly, and that fortifying the Delta's 74 islands would be a waste of taxpayer money.[3]
Beginning the transition from the current delta management system (pumping water into the state and federal water projects), which, the report says, harms fish and is vulnerable to earthquake, floods and levee failures.[2] The report comes just days after a federal judge in Fresno ruled that current Central Valley water operations jeopardize the survival of certain salmon runs and violate the Endangered Species Act. California fishermen and a representative from Scoma'''s Restaurant will discuss how the precarious state of the salmon fishery is affecting them personally. NRDC experts will summarize recommendations from their report on how to restore California'''s valuable commercial and recreational salmon fishery before it'''s too late.[8] To restore Central Valley chinook salmon and California Delta fish species, more water must be allowed to flow NATURALLY through the Delta, not less.[1] We need increased conservation of water so that we can restore Central Valley salmon, delta smelt, longfin smelt and other fish to historical levels, not increased water exports.[1]
Building a peripheral canal like the one that Senator Dianne Feinstein and Governor Arnold "Fish Terminator," the worst ever Governor for fish and the environment in California history, are pushing for, will only make the dramatic declines of Central Valley chinook salmon, steelhead, delta smelt, longfin smelt, striped bass and other fish species even worse.[1]
In the report, the authors assert that the peripheral canal is the best economic and environmental solution to managing California's water supply.[5] 'We have great opportunity right now to create a reliable water supply for future generations of Californians and for salmon as well,' said Cynthia Koehler, an environmental lawyer and consultant for EDF, and an author of the report.[4] The report's authors called that the "most promising strategy" to revive the delta ecosystem and ensure a high-quality water supply for Californians.[2]
Barrigan-Parrilla says that the report'''s authors have not engaged in any conversations with local Delta experts, South Delta farmers ''' some of whom have lived on the land for ninety years. Barrigan-Parrilla also adds that such changes in water quality to the Delta will result in economic chaos for the region.[1] Restore the Delta'''s Campaign Director, Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, adds that the report'''s analysis of water quality is also faulty. '''Their analysis assumes that water flowing into and out of the Delta remains unchanged when the point of diversion is changed.[1] Restore the Delta works to improve water quality so that fisheries and farming can thrive together again in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.[5] Of more pressing concern at present is the environmental cost -- an escalating collapse of the fragile Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the West Coast's largest estuary. It is a crisis marked by creeping saltwater, toxins and, most visibly, the disappearance of fish. "It all looks pretty innocuous, doesn't it?" said Bill Jennings, peering down into the rippling aqueduct at a point south of the pump house. "Just looking at it, you wouldn't know what this is doing to the delta, would you?" Jennings is a water person, a member of that insular society of experts and activists sometimes described as the Hydraulic Brotherhood. He happens to be an environmentalist.[7] The California water crisis has stimulated a cascade of proposals from political leaders, think tanks and state agencies, aimed at improving the reliability of water supplies and the environment in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.[2] With the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta ecosystem near collapse, court-ordered restrictions on water deliveries from the Delta have reduced supplies from the state's two largest water systems by 20 to 30%.[10]
The latest edition of the Delta Flows includes a great analysis of why the PPIC's report pushing for a peripheral canal, "Comparing Futures for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta," is an elaborate yet incomplete sales brochure for the peripheral canal.[5] The complete text of the study recommending a peripheral canal, "Comparing Futures for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta," can be found online at www.ppic.org.[2]
Restore the Delta Board Press President Bill Loyko questions how constructing a peripheral canal could possibly solve water needs throughout the state. '''A peripheral canal, first and foremost will not make more water," he said. [1] Our website now includes: information on the proposed peripheral canal and the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, an updated calendar, new templates for letters to send to newspaper editors, information on local Delta governing bodies, an overview of Delta agriculture, and position updates from Restore the Delta.[5] The peripheral canal will not alter the need for a comprehensive flood management plan for the Delta to protect property, infrastructure, and more importantly the 400,000 living around the Delta.[5]
The long term possibility of significantly reduced available flows also needs to be part of the water/cost analysis of a peripheral canal. Of course, there should be an analysis the evaporation factor that would result from moving such a large amount of water south in a warmer climate.[5] The county's resolution declared that a peripheral canal of any kind would harm water quality and the ecosystem and diminish agricultural land and even future urban development.[3] Loyko also asserts that the report'''s call for building a peripheral without limits in size is merely the means by which to take away the Delta'''s last major fresh water source, and thereby would worsen Delta water quality.[1] The report makes a highly inaccurate assumption that water quality would improve for farmers near the San Joaquin River.[1] An earlier state task force recommended the study of a "dual conveyance," one that would combine a pipeline with continued pumping through a repaired Delta. Following that report in May, the San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors took a formal stand against such a canal -- just as it did in 2007, 1998, 1991 and 1982 -- and challenged cities and agencies in the county to pass similar resolutions.[3] I can't prove it, but I'd be willing to bet that the delta formed by the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers is not exactly top of mind for most Californians, if they know about it at all.[11]
The researchers' support for reviving the idea will give a boost to a plan that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has been trying to move to the top of Sacramento's policy agenda. Californians from north to south can expect to start hearing a lot more about the delta, its future and a possible canal in the months ahead.[11] The marshy triangle south of Sacramento is home to relatively few people. While thousands drive past it every day on Interstate 5, and houseboaters and fishermen ply its waters on weekends, the delta and its bleak future have made a better topic for policy geeks than dinner table conversation. That might soon be changing.[11]
Restore the Delta is working everyday through public education and citizen activism to ensure the restoration and future sustainability of the California Delta. Your general contribution can help us sponsor outreach events, enable us to educate Californians on what makes the Delta so special, and assist us in building a coalition that will be recognized by government water agencies as they make water management decisions.[5] We need to prepare now for the future. This language is comprehensive, balanced and could help increase water supplies to meet the needs of the environment, our cities, and agriculture. I hope that all sides can come together around a consensus plan that can be approved this November." California is facing the most significant water crisis in its history. After experiencing two years of drought and the driest spring in recorded history, water reserves are extremely low and would not be able to meet public demand during a major disruption to the state's water delivery system such as an earthquake or levee breach.[10] The combination of drought, court-ordered water restrictions, global warming and an increasing population have placed a major strain on the existing infrastructure." In announcing the bond proposal, Schwarzenegger said California is facing the most significant water crisis in its history. After experiencing two years of drought and the driest spring in recorded history, he said water reserves are extremely low and would not be able to meet public demand during a major disruption to the state's water delivery system such as an earthquake or levee breach.[2]
The work plan also calls for hearings before the end of the year to establish the scientific information needed to prioritize threats to the delta. Added to the list of proposed solutions to California water problems, state Sen. Don Perata, D-Oakland, and Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, D-Los Angeles, announced last week that they are introducing two pieces of legislation to fund water storage, reliability and conservation efforts with already approved bond money. "It's imperative that we get to work immediately improving water conservation, water storage and water management--and that's exactly what these two bills do," Bass told the media. "This package sets a realistic target for boosting water conservation and uses already approved bond money to make big improvements in California's water system."[2] Improved water conveyance to increase supply options and reduce regional water shortages. Restoring the delta ecosystem in a way backers say would allow California to take control of its own water systems rather than having operations managed by state and federal courts.[2]
Conservationists, fishermen and a representative from Scoma'''s will hold a press conference at Scoma'''s Restaurant at Pier 47 at Fisherman'''s Wharf in San Francisco at 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, July 24, 2008 to discuss how the state and federal water projects threaten the future of California'''s salmon runs and the salmon fishery, and recommendations for restoring and sustaining this iconic resource.[8] Salmon fishing is part of our history and culture and deserves protection. The report says that the State Water Project serves as a sound precedent for the principle that water users should pay for water infrastructure from which they will benefit. As demonstrated through CAL Fed, once the water contractors and agencies have their water, they won't pay for environmental protections like fish screens.[5]
The sea level, meanwhile, has been rising, presenting another threat to the levees and the freshwater transfer point that the delta has become. The population of delta smelt - one of those creatures that elicit eye rolls from conservatives, but one that turns out to be a pretty crucial link in the food chain - is dwindling fast, with many baby fish destroyed by the pumps that move water south. The more widely admired Chinook salmon is also in danger, its numbers in such a slump this year that commercial salmon fishing has been banned along most of the West Coast.[11] California's current drought has been caused by a number of factors including two years of below-normal rainfall, an eight year drought on the Colorado River Basin and court-ordered restrictions on water deliveries from the Delta. This year's drought has already significantly damaged California's economy.[12] Testimony focused on the far-reaching impacts of the current drought and the loss of critical water supplies south of the delta due to the curtailment of pumping to protect fish. Comments helped to provide an awareness of the fact that California farmers and ranchers produce food for the nation and, without water, that will no longer be possible. She may be contacted at kcampbell@cfbf.com.)[2] Ending water exports from north to south, the researchers say, would be best for the fish. That would leave much of California with a huge hole in its water supply.[11] Due to California's water shortages, thousands of jobs are lost and construction projects are on hold because a water supply cannot be guaranteed.[10] Due to California's water shortages, there have been housing and business projects delayed and jobs lost.[12]
"Water is important to everything we care about in California-to our economy, our agriculture, our jobs, our families, our environment and our future-but we have fallen far behind," Governor Schwarzenegger said. "With a drought, court-ordered water restrictions, an increasing population, and agricultural fields being left fallow because of inadequate water, passing a comprehensive water plan that voters can approve this November is more important than ever before to making sure that California has the water it needs to keep our economy strong and our people working."[12] A new court ruling raised the possibility of further restrictions on water supplies in order to protect threatened salmon. California Farm Bureau Federation leaders and water experts welcomed the focus on the state's short- and long-term water needs as they reviewed the proposals to determine the potential impacts on the state's farming and ranching operations. "When some people hear the term 'water crisis,' they think of something that's far away," CFBF President Doug Mosebar said. "But for many family farmers, ranchers and their employees, the crisis is here and now. We're looking for proposals that provide the best chance for solving this crisis."[2] State and policy leaders have launched several efforts to address the crises, including creating the Governor's Blue Ribbon Delta Vision Task Force, supporting an Assembly bill to release emergency funds raised by earlier bonds, and proposing a new $9.3 billion water bond just announced by the governor.[4] Something isn't adding up here. The idea seems to be to rob the Delta of its fresh water for the economic benefit of another region. Their economic analysis (which is still not fully available to the public) values the islands that they are proposing to allow to flood in the Delta at $81 billion and calls Delta crops "low value crops."[5] The report's analysis assumes that water flowing into and out of the Delta remains unchanged when the point of diversion is changed.[5] The report does not contain a proposed solution. It merely asserts that because consensus cannot be reached on Delta water uses that local Delta stakeholders should not be part of governance.[5] Everyone who lives, works, and recreates in the Delta knows that with less fresh water flowing through the Delta, more salt water will intrude into local waterways.[5]
Just as we can't fathom a solution to our water woes that's not beneficial to all Californians, we can't recommend a canal without thoroughly analyzing the impacts on the Delta.[3] "Sometimes I wonder," mused Thomas Graff, an environmental lawyer and longtime key water person, "if we all just disappeared, would anything be all that different?" To make the deja vu complete, there even have been fresh calls to resurrect the Peripheral Canal, the 42-mile waterway that Californians rejected with vigor in 1982.[7] For every call to fallow the valley's west side, there are others to check suburban sprawl, or to build a Peripheral Canal, or even to let the delta go. What all corners can agree on is this: Year by year, the squeeze is getting tighter, and another dry year would be a killer.[7] Instead it posits that a peripheral canal would bring about a Central Valley Farming benefit of $1 billion per year.[5] Suburbs have been spreading across the Central Valley floor. Often they are built on flood plains. In wet years more and more water must be shunted around these new neighborhoods in flood canals and dispatched to San Francisco Bay.[7]
'Our water supplies will remain vulnerable as long as we allow the environment to remain at the brink of disaster,' said Laura Harnish, EDF's Regional Director in San Francisco and an author of the report.[4] SAN FRANCISCO - July 23 - California's salmon are teetering on the edge of extinction and the salmon fishing industry is facing economic devastation, but a report released today establishes a framework to help address this crisis.[4]
The report, which was developed with help from researchers at the University of California, Davis, said that with the proper safeguards, a peripheral canal can be economically and environmentally beneficial.[2] "No exports or a peripheral canal. Keeping the Delta as it is, is not one of them." This report isn't the first to weigh in on the Delta.[3] Costs in Delta Vision analysis have shown that a peripheral canal would cost more: one source says it could reach $80 billion.[5]
The other would be to build a canal around the delta so that water could still be shipped south without further endangering the region's environment. [11] The ever-present risk of a catastrophic flood or a major earthquake means that, at some point, all of the efforts to hold back the tides, literally, could be moot. A major levee failure could send seawater rushing in and transform the delta's ecology overnight, making its water useless to farms and residents to the south and west.[11] The levees also keep saltwater out of the delta, making it easier to send fresh water south for drinking and irrigation. This man-made landscape is not sustainable.[11]
Improved water conveyance to reduce water shortages. Restored Delta ecosystem to allow California to take control of its own water systems. [10] "The present problem with California'''s water system is that it is short 5 million acre-feet of water annually to meet current state needs."[1]
In the delta that is the state's water well, ecology vs. usage rises to the fore.[7] At some point, choices must be made. "If it comes down to water for Los Angeles children or water for delta fish," Jennings said, playing out the poster-child game as he drove a couple of visitors through the delta, "delta fish are going to lose every time.[7] Central Delta Water Agency'''s Dante Nomellini further explains that the inter-relationship between Delta islands extends to seepage, wind-wave generation, and fishery and wildlife habitat.[1] Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger today participated in a press conference hosted by the Latino Water Coalition to discuss the urgent need for comprehensive water reform that increases storage, improves conveyance, protects the Delta's ecosystem and promotes greater water conservation.[12]
Restore the Delta is a grassroots campaign committed to making the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta fishable, swimmable, drinkable, and farmable to benefit all of California.[5] The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is part of the largest estuary on the West Coast. More than 50 species of fish and 300 species of birds, mammals and wildlife have tried to make it their home.[11]
In two of the past three years, our once thriving Pacific salmon fisheries have been simply shut down as former salmon strongholds throughout the state have become dangerously imperiled. The populations of Delta smelt and other native Delta fish have collapsed to tiny fractions of their former levels.[10] Costs for fish screens are not listed. Last, as a friend of Restore the Delta mentioned yesterday, "It seems that the authors of the PPIC report are seeking to create an artificial Delta that mimics the idea of what the Delta once was, rather than improving what we have in the present."[5] Whenever an individual in the audience raised a question, the authors advised the questioning individual to look for the answer in the on-line appendices. Restore the Delta staff diligently went about seeking the answers to their questions in the appendices. To their surprise, the majority of the appendices could not be found on-line, and according to the report's website the missing appendices will not be made available to the public until later this summer. At first, Restore the Delta staffed, while irritated, assumed that this lack of full disclosure was a simple oversight, the result of a communications hiccup between the report's authors and those managing the website.[5] Before reviewing what is wrong with the report's faulty assumptions and conclusions, Restore the Delta staff feels compelled to share two key pieces of information regarding the report that have been ignored by the mainstream media. On July 18th, the report's authors held a media event in Sacramento to discuss their findings.[5]
The report's proposal to abandon Delta islands experiencing levee failures in the interior of the Delta - or the idea to purchase and deliberately flood Delta islands - is highly problematic for the surrounding urban areas. [5] Longtime Delta advocate, Tom Zuckerman, notes that the report'''s conclusion that Delta islands with highways were worth saving, while others are not worth maintaining, is an unrealistic conclusion.[1]
The report does not contain an accurate and full economic analysis of the Delta region.[5]
The fight was once about which rivers to dam, which valleys to flood. Now it's about how to save the delta -- and still quench the great California thirst.[7] Drought conditions in the Colorado River Basin and a Sierra snowpack is now dangerously unreliable due to global warming and is leaving many communities throughout California facing mandatory restrictions on water use and/or rising water bills.[10] More than 15 years have passed since California last sweated out a drought. That arid epoch gave rise to a raft of measures: legislation to protect fisheries, conservation initiatives, water banks and water trading, collaborative processes to forge consensus among competing "stakeholders."[7] For much of California, farm and city alike, the drought is little more than a word in a newscast. It all depends on where they stand on the hierarchical ladder of water rights. This leads to some contradictory images.[7] If California water litigation were rainfall, we'd all be building arks. Their ceaseless wrangling has gone on for decades, since the Gold Rush really, but typically without much notice.[7]
Improve enforcement so that water managers will be held accountable and promises will be kept. 'We believe that California has enough water for its people, farms, and fish,' said Harnish.[4]
Bechtel Corporation's history with the management of water projects, especially large-scale projects as tried in South America http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=6670, reveals the company's disregard for local communities, public health, local economies, and the environment. [5] Agricultural crops are being plowed under, housing and business projects are being delayed, and regional water authorities are instituting mandatory water rationing to a reliable water supply.[10] Increased water storage that bond proponents say would ensure water supply reliability and provide flexibility from year to year.[2]
There also seems to be some rethinking of basic rules. Not all farmers are short of water this year.[7]
The announcement of the State Water Board plan for the bay-delta may be found at www.waterboards.ca.gov. In related water developments, Sen. Jim Costa, D-Fresno, convened a hearing in Fresno this week in conjunction with Reps.[2] Conservation, once seen condescendingly as a noble gesture on the way to throwing up ever-bigger dams, has gone mainstream, embraced by a Republican governor, the state Department of Water Resources and the MWD alike as a main source of "new" water.[7] A new study by the Public Policy Institute of California and researchers from the University of California, Davis, concludes that the state has two viable choices to consider.[11]
Grumblings about plugging Sierra rivers to fill Los Angeles swimming pools and supplying farmers subsidized water to grow subsidized cotton have been staples of the state's political rhetoric for decades.[7] So some water people have begun to ask, quietly: Historic "rights" aside, what do Californians on top of the water entitlement ladder owe the rest of the state in dry times? One fundamental remains unaltered: Everybody wants more water than the system can deliver. Said former Assemblyman Phil Isenberg, who heads a state task force exploring the water dilemma: "We are, as they say in the water world, oversubscribed."[7]
Increased conservation and tools to ensure water quality and more efficient water use. "The goal of this plan is to break the long-standing stalemate over water," Feinstein said.[2]
The New and Improved Restore the Delta Website We encourage all our supporters to revisit the newly revised Restore the Delta website. [5] Welcome to the new Delta Flows, Restore the Delta's, once again, weekly newsletter on Delta news.[5]
Restore the Delta - a coalition of Delta residents, business leaders, civic organizations, community groups, faith-based communities, union locals, farmers, fishermen, and environmentalists - seeks to strengthen the health of the estuary and the well-being of Delta communities.[5]
Delta agriculture with secondary community benefits is estimated by local agencies to be worth $2 billion each year.[5] Delta recreation (boating, sportfishing and tourist industries) is estimated at $750 million per year.[5]
Now the delta is defined by more than 1,000 miles of man-made levees protecting dozens of islands, many of which are used for farming. [11] The state should invest in the levees that protect what the report called high-value land, ecosystem goals and critical infrastructure--and allow what it called lower-value (agricultural) islands to return to aquatic habitat.[2]
The report does not build in costs for fish screens for diverting the Sacramento River.[5] Stephen D. Bechtel, Jr., one of the report's financial contributors and co-owner of the Bechtel Corporation, would be eligible for a huge contract if a peripheral canal were to be constructed.[5]
California'''s salmon fishery was closed for the first time ever at the beginning of May because of record low numbers of fish returning to spawn. [8]
SOURCES
1. Restore the Delta Challenges Public Policy Institute's Report Supporting Peripheral Canal - California Progress Report
2. Flood of plans muddies water supply solution
3. Tracy Press - Our Voice
4. Environmental Defense Fund (EDF): New Report Says Providing Water for Fish Is the Surest Way to Create Water Supply Reliability for California Farms and Cities
5. Delta Flows: Weekly Highlights from Restore the Delta July 21, 2008 : Indybay
6. SignOnSanDiego.com > News > State -- Judge: water managers must protect Calif. salmon
7. Dry times revive an old debate - Los Angeles Times
8. Press Conference: California Water Operations Threaten Survival of Iconic Salmon Fishery : Indybay
9. Federal judge orders protection plan for migrating salmon
10. California Farmer
11. Daniel Weintraub: Delta is at heart of water crisis - Press-Telegram
12. Gov. Schwarzenegger Joins Latino Water Coalition to Highlight Need for Safe
Need a practical & comprehensive advice? Get your personalized recommendations here:
GENERATE A MULTI-SOURCE SUMMARY ON THIS SUBJECT:
Enter your search query below.
(Please WAIT 10-20 sec for the new window to open.)
Get more info on Federal judge orders protection plan for migrating salmon by using the iResearch Reporter tool from Power Text Solutions.
 |
|  |
|
