[env-trinity] Chronicle: Activists decry plan to cut habitat aid from delta tunnel project

[Tom Stokely]

 http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Activists-decry-plan-to-cut-habitat-aid-from-6212404.php
  
Activists decry plan to cut habitat aid from delta tunnel project
By Peter Fimrite 
Updated 7:09 pm, Monday, April 20, 2015
   
   - 
    
   - 5
   
   - 
    
   - 
    
   - 
    
   - 
    
   - 
    
   - 
Environmental groups Monday blasted a proposal by the state to jettison the habitat restoration portion of the massive delta water tunnel project as an ill-conceived “bait and switch” that will only make California’s water woes worse. The $25 billion twin-tunnel project was supposed to include $7.8 billion to restore 100,000 acres of habitat for fish, birds and other species in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. The environmental portion of the plan was designed to minimize the impact of siphoning out water and moving it south, but long-term water guarantees could not be justified, forcing state officials to consider alternatives.The new plan, according to water resources officials, is to use $17 billion from state water contractors just to build and operate the tunnels. That would allow habitat restoration work on the delta and surrounding waterways to begin immediately regardless of what happens with the tunnel project, said Richard Stapler, the spokesman for the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, which has been championed by Gov. Jerry Brown. “The status quo in the delta is unsustainable,” Stapler said. “By decoupling habitat from the tunnel portion, we can get started immediately with the habitat restoration.” Stapler said contractors would no longer be liable for the vast majority of the environmental work. Details about who — and how — that work would be funded will be released within the next two weeks, he said.Longtime opponents of the tunnel plan were skeptical. “They are saying that they will, on a parallel track, pursue restoration,” but “no details have been provided,” said Jonas Minton, a water policy adviser for the Planning and Conservation League. “Where (the governor) thinks those dollars will come from is a mystery. So this is bait and switch, without the bait.”Conservationists are battling the giant water project, which is designed to bypass the delta pumps used by both the state and federal water projects. They have come up with a laundry list of possible alternatives, including water recycling, groundwater storage and even cloud seeding.Rates likely to go upCentral Valley farming contractors, Southern California water agencies and some Bay Area water suppliers, meanwhile, complain that federal protections for fish have forced reductions in the amount of water they get from the delta.The tunnels would be paid for with bonds sold by water districts, which would likely increase water rates to pay off the debt.The idea of separating habitat restoration and tunnel construction came about because one of the primary tenets of the plan over the past eight years — 50-year water guarantees to the contractors paying for the project — appears to be falling apart.“We cannot from a scientific standpoint accurately predict what the conditions will be like in the delta 50 years from now,” Stapler said, blaming climate change and the unpredictability of drought. The new environmental plan will include shorter 10-year permits that would still require contractors to pay for 9,000 acres of habitat restoration, Stapler said. He acknowledged that the money could conceivably come from Proposition 1, the $7.5 billion water bond that California passed last year.Not enough moneyProp. 1 promised new storage facilities, conservation, recycled water, desalination and general drought preparedness, but prohibited spending any funds on “delta conveyance facilities.” Separating the two projects might allow that money to be used on the delta, but Minton said there is not enough money in that pot to complete the job.Meanwhile, large water contractors footing the bill have said they aren’t willing to pay for the plan if they don’t have long-term water guarantees. Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, the executive director of Restore the Delta, said the twin-tunnels plan is palatable to some environmentalists because it includes habitat restoration and to farming contractors because the long-term contracts would protect supplies against endangered species lawsuits.Besides, she said, the new plan bolsters the perception that this is all a water grab by Southern California.“We oppose the delta tunnels because it makes it easier to deliver water to water wasters,” she said, calling it “a naked tunnels-only water grab for the unsustainable mega-farms.”Peter Fimrite is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: pfimrite at sfchronicle.com. Twitter: @pfimrite
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20150421/26f95177/attachment.html>