Farm Water News: News articles and links from March 21, 2013

Congressman John Garamendi calls Delta plan 'irrational, destructive and foolish'

Story

From Woodland Daily Democrat - Wednesday, March 20, 2013

Solano County leaders speak out on Delta plan

Story

From The Reporter - Wednesday, March 20, 2013

(The following response is submitted to the above stories.)

Coalition response...Rep. John Garamendi's opinion on what the Bay Delta Conservation Plan is doesn't seem to be rooted in the facts. Saying the Plan "...doesn't create one gallon of water, but takes water from the Delta, destroying it in the process," is contrary to the science that has been driving the BDCP for seven years. In simple terms, returning the Delta to a more natural "east-to-west" flow is better for fish and allows water in the system to be moved to water rights holders when plentiful supplies are available.

This year is a perfect example. When huge amounts of water were flowing in December and January, Endangered Species Act restrictions cut water deliveries by more than 800,000 acre-feet. If used to produce food, that quantity of water is worth more than $2 billion to California's economy. But all that happened was the water flowed to the ocean without ANY measurable environmental benefit. Mismanagement of our resources hurt people from the Bay Area to San Diego.

I suspect Congressman Garamendi's upcoming plan will have something to do with "fat levees" or "regional self reliance," neither of which provide real protections against earthquakes, meet the water supply needs of California or the co-equal goals of ecosystem restoration and water supply reliability. If that's the direction he's going then his plan is a non-starter, both legally and from a water supply perspective. On the other hand, if Congressman Garamendi is willing to talk about why 93 percent of the baby salmon end up in the bellies of predatory fish lurking in the Delta or how he plans to clean up poor water quality that has altered the base of the Delta food chain, then there is hope for progress.

Flawed water proposal will drain public dollars

Opinion

By Carolee Krieger

From San Diego Union-Tribune - Wednesday, March 20, 2013

Coalition response...The author's insistence that the Bay Delta Conservation Plan and its twin tunnels will "drain billions of public dollars away from schools...." is false. Both urban and agricultural water users are responsible for paying their fair share of the costs associated with their water supply. Conclusions by urban water agencies show that the "ruinous rates" claimed by the author will be less than $5 per month for Southern California families, which will likely not drive anyone into bankruptcy.

BDCP is governed by a measure adopted by the California Legislature in 2009 that called for the establishment of a reliable water supply and a restored Delta ecosystem. The improved water supply will send water to users in Southern California and almost 4,000 family farms in the San Joaquin Valley where that water grows the fresh fruits and vegetables that consumers seek in their grocery stores. BDCP also proposes to create 140,000 acres of habitat in the Delta.

The twin tunnels are vastly different from the Peripheral Canal of years ago. The tunnels will include a capacity to move 9,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) while the Peripheral Canal's capacity was 21,800 cfs. An analysis (www.farmwater.org/p-canalcomparison.pdf) of the two projects reveals more differences.

RIVERS

Viewpoints: Should state dedicate more flows for salmon? No

Opinion

By Allen Short

From Sacramento Bee - Thursday, March 21, 2013

Coalition response...The water board has failed to demonstrate that its plan will benefit salmon. Now is not the time to embark on an unproven pathway that will take jobs away from people and cost millions of dollars to the economy.

Viewpoints: Should state dedicate more flows for salmon? Yes

Opinion

By Chandra Ferrari and John McManus

From Sacramento Bee - Thursday, March 21, 2013

Coalition response...The uncertainty of whether the water board's proposal will benefit salmon is startling, especially when one considers the board's action would take jobs away from thousands of people and remove $187 million from the local economy each year. Science does not exist to support the plan as evident with board data that indicates it cannot guarantee benefits for salmon when water is taken away from farmers and cities.

WATER SUPPLY

Plans for Sites Reservoir nearing environmental review

Story

From Chico Enterprise-Record - Thursday, March 21, 2013

IID unveils water apportionment plan

Story

From Imperial Valley Press - Wednesday, March 20, 2013

BAY DELTA CONSERVATION PLAN

State releases first portion of water plan

Story

From Patterson Irrigator - Thursday, March 21, 2013

To be continued