Tuesday, May 28, 2013

News articles and links from May 28, 2013

Bay Delta Conservation Plan

From: Jim King, Fresno Bee

Coalition response...It would require 120 desalination plants the size of the recently approved Poseidon facility in San Diego County to meet the 6 MAF requirements of the State Water Project and federal Central Valley Project. With 840 miles of California coastline, a desal plant would have to be placed every seven miles and would still not connect to our current water distribution system.

The BDCP is a much cheaper and more environmentally-friendly solution.

From: Bill Jennings, The Record

Coalition response...Public water agencies have already spent $150 million to fund the research by scientists, economists and engineers to develop the Bay Delta Conservation Plan with the expected results of a reliability in water deliveries, which they have a right to receive. That reliability is absent today because of environmental regulations that have taken water away from 25 million Californians and thousands of farmers. See the impacts caused by these regulations at farmwater.org/watersupplycutshurtusall.pdf

The public water users already have the right to receive water that flows through the Delta and is planned to be conveyed through the tunnels. The amount of water that will flow through the tunnels will be limited by the actual day-by-day conditions and flows of the Sacramento River. Studies have concluded that water diversions will likely be in the range of average exports over the past 20 years. When flows are high more water can be moved through the tunnels. When flows are lower less water will be moved...or none at all under dry conditions. Learn more at www.farmwater.org/exportthrottle.pdf.

Endangered species will not benefit from "new state-of-the-art fish screens in the south Delta," as proposed by the author. Instead, fish will be trapped in a channel with no way out that will become heavily populated by predator fish waiting for a meal. BDCP scientists and engineers have already concluded that screens at the south Delta pumps will not help the fish; yet, the author and others continue to ignore years of research and study.

The Bay Delta Conservation Plan remains the best alternative to provide a reliable supply of water and at the same time restore the Delta ecosystem. Accomplishing these two goals as set forth by the California Legislature will provide a secure water future for our state.


From: Carolee Krieger, Contra Costa Times

Coalition response...Carolee Krieger is wrong about the proposed actions within Rep. Costa's legislation and she exaggerates the potential impacts on the ecosystem.

The legislation introduced by Rep. Costa, H.R. 1927: More Water and Security for Californians Act, will not "drain the Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta" and her interpretation is simply false. In fact, a careful read of the proposal at http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr1927/text reveals numerous safeguards to preserve in-Delta water supplies and enhancements to improve fish species but Kreiger is betting that you won't read it. 


From: Dan Nelson, San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority

From: Tom Birmingham, Westlands Water District

From: Fresno Business Journal

From: John Bass, Delta National Park

Bay Delta Conservation Plan

From: Steven Harmon, San Jose Mercury News

From: Matt Weiser, Sacramento Bee

From: Alex Breitler, The Record

From: Alex Breitler, The Record


From: Sacramento Bee

Water Supply

From: David Castellon, Visalia Times-Delta

From: Wayne Zipser, Modesto Bee

Water Quality

From: Alex Breitler, The Record


From: Thaddeus Bettner, Chico Enterprise-Record


From: Victor A. Patton, Sacramento Bee

From: Henry Brean, Las Vegas Review-Journal

From: Tony Perry, Los Angeles Times
From: Sacramento Bee, Associated Press
From: San Francisco Chronicle, Associated Press
From: Desert Sun, Associated Press
From: KFMB-TV 8, Associated Press


From: Fresh Plaza


From: Lake County News

From: Alex Breitler, The Record

From: Aaron Kinney, Contra Costa Times
From: Aaron Kinney, San Mateo County Times

No comments:

Post a Comment