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.
Delta
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.
Courts
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
Delta
From: Sacramento
Bee
Water Supply
From: David
Castellon, Visalia Times-Delta
From: Wayne
Zipser, Modesto Bee
Water Quality
From: Alex
Breitler, The Record
Transfers
From: Thaddeus
Bettner, Chico Enterprise-Record
Rivers
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
Farming
From: Fresh
Plaza
Fisheries
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