[env-trinity] L A Times Editorial - Westlands Implications

Tue May 29 10:39:04 PDT 2007

Yikes... this is a gigantic plug for the Peripheral Canal!

Dan
On May 29, 2007, at 10:22 AM, Byron Leydecker wrote:

> Opinion: Preserving the imperiled California Delta; The fragile  
> Northern California ecosystem from which L.A. gets much of its  
> water can't wait very long for a plan to fix it
>
> Los Angeles Times – 5/26/07
>
> By Bill Stall, contributing editor to the Opinion page
>
>
>
> DELTA AND DAWN, the wayward humpback whales stranded near Rio  
> Vista, have taught thousands about the location of the California  
> Delta, where the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers meet and flow  
> toward San Francisco Bay. It's about time: An estimated 23 million  
> of us receive some or most of our water from the delta.
>
> And the delta is in trouble. Has been for at least 30 years. But  
> this year, the juvenile population of the endangered delta smelt —  
> an "indicator" species — dropped by 93%, a plunge toward extinction  
> that could signal imminent disaster. Arresting that disaster could  
> require a cut in water delivered to you and me.
>
> The delta is a 700-square-mile maze of river channels, sloughs,  
> marshes and mostly artificial islands protected by a tenuous levee  
> system. Two giant water-delivery systems — the State Water Project  
> and the federal Central Valley Project — draw their water from the  
> delta and send it southward in canals to the farms of the San  
> Joaquin Valley and homes and businesses in Southern California.
>
> The problem is that extensive pumping over the last half a century  
> has disrupted the environment of the delta. Fish sometimes end up  
> in the machinery, and the pumping is so strong that it sometimes  
> reverses the natural river-to-delta-to-bay water flow. Temperature,  
> depth and salinity are affected. On top of that, increased  
> irrigation using pumped delta water means increased irrigation  
> runoff, which has reduced the overall quality of delta water.
>
> Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's Delta Vision task force recognizes the  
> problem, and it is supposed to produce a comprehensive solution to  
> a host of delta problems by the end of 2008. Good luck.
>
> Efforts to address the situation go back to the 1960s and the  
> original State Water Project, which was supposed to deliver 4.2  
> million acre-feet of water a year to Kern County farms and urban  
> Southern California (one acre-foot meets the needs of two families  
> for a year). But the project was only half-built, and it delivers  
> only half the water that was promised. The biggest missing piece is  
> the "peripheral canal," meant to bypass the delta and deliver  
> Sacramento River water directly to the pumps and the aqueduct,  
> while still injecting enough fresh water downstream to maintain the  
> ecosystem.
>
> In 1982, however, California voters voted down the peripheral canal  
> because northerners feared a Southern California water grab. So the  
> delta struggled along for another 20 years as the demand for water  
> increased.
>
> Next came Cal-Fed, a consortium of state and federal agencies and a  
> score of "stakeholders" (environmental groups, commercial  
> fishermen, urban water users, irrigators, etc.) that attempted to  
> negotiate an end to the state water wars. The process had a warm  
> and fuzzy feel, and in 2001, we got a multiyear, $13-billion plan  
> for more infrastructure, to be paid for by state and federal funds.
>
> Turns out, however, that consensus works best when it comes to  
> "protecting the environment" and "serving the needs of people."  
> This one fell apart over details like where to spend the money  
> first and who would pay which bill. Each stakeholder wanted to come  
> out ahead, but there's not enough water left in California for "win- 
> win" solutions. It didn't help that the federal government never  
> came up with its share of the cash.
>
> The delta doesn't have another 30 years for more warm and fuzzy  
> negotiations. The state — beginning with Schwarzenegger's task  
> force — must make tough decisions now.
>
> Once and for all, it has to build a canal or another conveyance to  
> send Sacramento River water to the aqueduct without destroying the  
> delta. This time, the design must allay northern fears of a water  
> grab. And, like new reservoirs, dams and levees (which the system  
> also needs), the project should be paid for by those who will  
> benefit from it. That means irrigation districts and urban water  
> districts must raise money and pass the costs to their customers.
>
> The state should immediately buy up thousands of acres of irrigated  
> farmland on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley and give it a  
> rest. That land is laden with poisonous selenium; the more it's  
> irrigated (with delta water), the more the tainted runoff pollutes  
> the environment.
>
> And finally, California needs a tough water czar — a real enforcer  
> with the authority to implement a broad plan and let the experts  
> work out the details. The Times once proposed Bruce Babbitt, who  
> worked water wonders as governor of Arizona and secretary of the  
> Interior — and bent arms during the Cal-Fed negotiations — as the  
> ideal candidate. Assuming he's available, it's still a good idea.
>
>
>
>
>
> Byron Leydecker
>
> Friends of Trinity River, Chair
>
> California Trout, Inc., Advisor
>
> PO Box 2327
>
> Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327
>
> 415 383 4810
>
> 415 519 4810 cell
>
> bwl3 at comcast.net
>
> bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org
>
> http://www.fotr.org
>
> http://www.caltrout.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> env-trinity mailing list
> env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us
> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20070529/01c6981c/attachment.html>