Trinity River
From: Editorial Staff, Eureka
Times-Standard
A U.S. District Court judge in
Fresno this week extended a temporary restraining order blocking vital water
releases from the Trinity River intended to prevent another massive fish kill
on the lower Klamath River.
From: Catherine Wong, Eureka
Times-Standard
The Board of Supervisors has a
message for the federal judge who halted flows meant to protect Klamath salmon:
Lawsuit or no lawsuit by Central California farmers, there's water in the
Trinity River that belongs to Humboldt County and we want it released.
(The following comment is in
response to the above articles.)
Coalition response...Reclamation had more than 400,000 acre-feet of water to use for fishery
protection this year and has determined that its necessary to take additional
water from other legal uses including protection of endangered species,
management of waterfowl, clean power generation, recreation, industry, daily
human needs, and, yes, farming. Regarding the question of what the judge's
ruling means for the future, northern California residents should take comfort
from a possible decision protecting existing water rights and uses.
What has been missing from the
discussion is the fact that current flows under the 2000 Trinity Record of
Decision are actually double what they would be this time of year under natural
conditions. That water is coming from storage. An unfortunate die-off occurred
one time more than a decade ago. No science exists that links diminished water
flows in 2002 to the incident. It is irresponsible to cut additional supplies
from rightful water users in an experiment to protect non-endangered fish.
Bay Delta
Conservation Plan
From: Editorial Board,
Sacramento Bee
Kudos are in order for Mark
Cowin, the director of the California Department of Water Resources. For
months, Cowin has taken seriously the concerns of farmers and landowners whose
lives and businesses could be upended by a gargantuan water tunnel project the
state wants to build through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
Coalition response...The changes announced last week to the Bay Delta Conservation Plan as
outlined by this editorial is a continuation of changes that have taken place
with the planning process. People may forget, or may not even be aware that at
one time the proposal called for three tunnels. These and other changes have
been the result of listening to comments and conducting studies and analyses to
determine if they would benefit the Plan.
It is puzzling why the editorial
continued to question how the project will be operated during different times
of the year or in wet or dry years. The BDCP Conservation Measure 1 - Water
Facilities and Operations brochure has been on the BDCP web site for five
months with an easy-to-understand diagram of variable export rates based on
Sacramento River flow conditions. When water levels are high in the Sacramento
River, more water will be available to move through the tunnels. When river
levels are low, less water will be diverted. Individuals seeking to learn more
about the flow of water through the tunnels can read it themselves at http://bit.ly/18FGxrl.
It is also important to remember
that the objective of BDCP is to obtain a 50-year endangered species permit
that will improve the Delta through a long-term conservation strategy. These
improvements should also increase the reliability of water supply deliveries to
almost 4,000 farms and 25 million Californians from the Bay Area to San Diego.
From: Editorial Staff, San Jose Mercury News
From: Editorial Staff, Contra Costa Times
The Bay Delta Conservation Plan
took a dramatic turn in the right direction Thursday, acknowledging some of the
concerns of Delta farmers by re-routing the proposed massive tunnel system to
affect a smaller area and stay mostly on public land.
Coalition response...Those who benefit from the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) and the
proposed tunnels will not only pay the construction costs, but also those costs
associated with the operation and maintenance during the lifespan of the
permit. The objective of BDCP is to obtain a 50-year endangered species permit
that will improve the Delta through a long-term conservation strategy. These
improvements should also increase the reliability of water supply deliveries to
almost 4,000 farms and 25 million Californians from the Bay Area to San Diego.
Consumers share farm water benefits through a variety of fresh, local and
affordable fruits and vegetables at the grocery store.
Regardless of the facts, some
individuals and organizations continue to argue against the BDCP and refuse to
accept the benefits resulting from BDCP. In monetary terms, California's
economy will receive an $84 billion boost, including the creation or protection
of 1.1 million jobs over the 50-year life of the permit, including an $11
billion payroll in the first ten years from construction of the project and
associated habitat components. These are real economic benefits that will help
California's economy.
Water Supply
From: Paul Rogers, Contra Costa Times
From: Paul Rogers, San Jose Mercury News
In 1805 Spanish soldiers camped
here in the oak-studded valleys. California's Robin Hood, Joaquin Murrieta, hid
out here during the Gold Rush. President John F. Kennedy made a visit in 1962.
There's no question the history around
San Luis Reservoir is colorful. But these days, the star attraction isn't much
to look at.
Colorado
River
From: Associated Press, Desert
Sun
After back-to-back driest years
in a century on the Colorado River, federal water managers are giving Arizona
and Nevada a 50-50 chance of having water deliveries cut in 2016.
From: Craig Mackey, LA Times
On Aug. 7, the head of the
Southern Nevada Water Authority called for federal disaster relief to address
the consequences of water scarcity in the Colorado River system. On Friday, the
Bureau of Reclamation announced it would be forced to cut the flow of water
into Lake Mead in 2014 to a historic low. Dominoes may now fall from California
to Washington, D.C.
From: Pete Spotts, Christian
Science Monitor
Fourteen years of drought in the
West and a revised rule book on allocating water along the Colorado River have
prompted the US Bureau of Reclamation to make the deepest cut in water released
from Lake Powell in the reservoir's 46-year history.
From: Staff, Imperial Valley
Press
As part of its ongoing management
of Colorado River reservoirs, the Bureau of Reclamation has determined that,
based on the best available data projections of Lake Powell and Lake Mead
reservoir elevations, under the 2007 Colorado River Interim Guidelines for
Lower Basin Shortages and Coordinated Operations for Lake Powell and Lake Mead
(2007 Interim Guidelines), a release of 7.48 million acre-feet from Lake Powell
is required in water year 2014 (Oct. 1, 2013-Sept. 30, 2014).
Bay Delta
Conservation Plan
From: Maven, Maven's
Notebook
No doubt, the big story today in
the papers will be regarding the changes made to the Bay Delta Conservation
Plan that were announced yesterday, but here at Maven's Notebook, I am always
striving to give you something a little different.
Probably the person who can best
describe all the changes made to the project is the engineer at the drawing
board who is making those changes, and that appears to be Gordon Enas,
principal engineer for the Delta Conveyance and Habitat Conservation
Program. Here is Mr. Enas, in his own words, describing the changes made
to the project.
From: Jan McCleery, Sacramento
Bee
Re "Water plan may shift
Delta tunnels" (Page A1, Aug. 15): When I saw the news headlines about
major changes to the Peripheral Tunnels plan, I felt a wave of relief.
From: Virginia M. McClain,
Sacramento Bee
Re "Water plan may shift
Delta tunnels" (Page A1, Aug. 15): For the past seven years, we Delta
residents have been following the Bay Delta Conservation Plan and have come to
the same, sad conclusion: there is nothing in this plan for the Delta, the bay
or northern California.
From: Bob Walters, Sacramento
Bee
Re "Water plan may shift
Delta tunnels" (Page A1, Aug. 15): While Thursday's announcement was an
excellent first step in addressing issues about the Bay Delta Conservation
Plan, we are still concerned about its implications to our region.
From: Cathy Hemly, Sacramento
Bee
Re "Water plan may shift
Delta tunnels" (Page A1, Aug. 15): No matter what you call it: the BDCP,
The Tunnels, or The Big Suck, there is no benefit for northern California in
this proposal. The newest version of the BDCP changes nothing--modifying a few
details won't improve a bad plan. The BDCP remains a water transfer with a
horrific footprint.
From: Steve Sherman,
Sacramento Bee
Re "Water plan may shift
Delta tunnels" (Page A1, Aug. 15): Instead of spending money on tunnels to
send water south we should be building the Auburn Dam.
Fisheries
From: Editorial Staff,
Marysville Appeal-Democrat
What we really need is "the
science, the whole science and nothing but the science." But the plain
truth is that every special interest group out there - whether it's a federal
agency, a utility company, an environmental group, or a local special interest
group - works to have the science considered that most supports their
individual preferred outcomes.
Thankfully, U.S. District Judge
Morrison C. England, Sacramento, ruled last week in favor of the Yuba County
Water Agency in a lawsuit filed last January challenging the old biological
opinion, which very likely would have led to some serious consideration of
removal of dams.
No comments:
Post a Comment