By Dan Bacher
From IndyBay Media - Wednesday, Dec. 14, 2011
Coalition response...The claims included in this article are wide-ranging and without merit. DWR officials have repeatedly stated their commitment to developing a document that will serve all of California, including those interests in the Delta and its ecosystem. If any statement is made...if any report is written...if any action is taken that is not lockstep in line with the viewpoints of these critics to the BDCP, then they are automatically opposed. It doesn't matter that Ramos' experience and knowledge will make the final BDCP a valuable document for all Californians. It doesn't matter that the decision-making process remains with the State and federal agencies overseeing the BDCP.
Even the weak attempt to include former Judge Wanger in their criticism is baseless. Remember, it was Judge Wanger who ruled against Westlands Water District and told federal agencies to strengthen protections for the Delta smelt. Consider these comments from Bill Jennings, executive director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance: "He's done all that could be asked of a human being. The decisions by a number of judges reflect their political opinions -- I don't get that from Judge Wanger."
Also, claims of "drainage impaired land laced with selenium and other toxic salts" is really getting old. These lands produce more than a billion dollars of fresh fruits and vegetables each year. How would this be possible if the land was so "impaired" with toxic minerals?
From California Lawyer - December 2011
From Hanford Sentinel - Monday, Dec. 12, 2011
From Union Democrat - Wednesday, Dec. 14, 2011
By Tom Stienstra
From SF Chronicle - Wednesday, Dec. 14, 2011
From Press Democrat - Wednesday, Dec. 14, 2011