Tuesday, March 12, 2013

News articles and links from March 12, 2013


By Mike Sweeney and Jay Ziegler
From Sacramento Bee  - Tuesday, March 12, 2013

Coalition response...We have long advocated a "move beyond the heated rhetoric" to a "thoughtful discussion" in order to provide a secure water future for California. It is this type of approach that must be adopted in the review of the BDCP materials later this week of the long-awaited plan to establish a reliable water supply and a restored Delta ecosystem.

There is no question that the Delta is in peril and something must be done to protect it. At the same time, as clearly pointed out by the authors of this Viewpoint, there are "broader water challenges" that include the delivery of water to millions of acres of farmland and 25 million Californians.

The current conveyance of moving water through the Delta is not working for anyone. The BDCP's tunnels provide the most workable opportunity to restore the Delta while moving water to those who rely upon it, which includes the farmers who grow the food and the consumers who buy that supply of fresh fruits and vegetables in their grocery stores.

By Barry Nelson
From NRDC - Monday, March 11, 2013

Coalition response...While claiming that excerpts from the USC report validates the portfolio-based conceptual alternative that features a single tunnel through the Delta, the author of this blog conveniently avoids a recommendation of the report regarding State water planning that states: "All of these elements require substantial investment to ensure a sustainable water supply future for the State." (Page xxvi)

Applying this recommendation to the single tunnel in the alternative proves that the report does not provide support since the single tunnel would not deliver the water needed by millions of acres of farmland and 25 million Californians that rely on water that passes through the Delta.

BDCP researchers have studied (http://baydeltaconservationplan.com/Libraries/Dynamic_Document_Library/EIR-EIS_Alternatives_Update_Fact_Sheet_3-6-12.sflb.ashx) various sizes of tunnels, including 3,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) that is the size of the single tunnel. Their conclusion is that a 3,000 cfs tunnel simply does not provide the water needed for users. A comparison of the single versus twin-tunnels can be found at http://swc.org/images/stories/SWC.TunnelComparison.FINAL.pdf.

The USC report focused on three Southern Californian water districts---Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, Huntington Beach and Cucamonga Valley. None of these districts deliver water to farms. Individuals and groups who champion the single tunnel ignore the impacts it would have on California farmers. A recent analysis at www.farmwater.org/BDCP-NRDC_alt.pdf reveals that 750,000 acres of farmland would no longer have a water supply to produce the fresh fruits and vegetables that consumers seek in the marketplace. This is the unwelcomed result of a single tunnel. 


From BDCP - Friday, March 8, 2013

TV news
From News 10 - Monday, March 11, 2013

No comments:

Post a Comment