Groundwater
From: Michael Raineri, Modesto
Bee
Regarding "Water would be
the focus" (Dec. 16, Page B1): A 20-person committee to study the county's
groundwater? Sounds like a recipe to get nothing accomplished and prolong
indecision. As supervisors, do the research, and make the choices for the long
range.
Coalition response... Mr. Raineri astutely observes there is a need for local solutions to
groundwater challenges in California. Finding rational, workable answers to
these issues will take the active engagement of all local water users.
Bay Delta
Conservation Plan
From: Douglas Obegi, NRDC Blog
As California begins what appears
to be a third consecutive dry year, corporate agribusinesses and politicians in
the San Joaquin Valley have begun calling for the State and federal government
to waive environmental rules governing the Bay-Delta estuary - the same
environmental rules that not only protect salmon and other wildlife in the
largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas, but also protect thousands
of fishing jobs and water quality for Delta farmers.
Coalition response...
Doug Obegi needs to turn up his
reality meter when he's talking about farmers asking for "a waiver of
environmental protections." As a lawyer he should know the difference
between a waiver and a governmental agency exercising the discretion it has
under the law. All farmers are asking for is that agencies consider a wide
range of impacts, as they were directed by federal judge Oliver Wanger, and be
a little flexible in difficult times.
That said, does Obegi think that
fish should be insulated from the drought? They weren't 100 years ago before
California's big water projects were built. Is it responsible to be using water
stored for other purposes to maintain a dependable flow year-round for fish
despite the fact that it is completely unnatural?
There is some middle ground to be
had and the Governor, scientists, water planners and others are working hard to
find it. Too bad Obegi isn't.
From: John McManus, Sacramento
Bee
Re "Tunnels' wildlife impact
unclear" (Page A1, Dec. 18): The Golden Gate Salmon Association agrees
that the Bay Delta Conservation Plan's proposed tunnels are bad for
California's iconic salmon and salmon-dependent communities. The plan calls for
two gigantic tunnels, big enough to divert the entire Sacramento River at most
times of the year. History shows we'd be fools to trust the tunnel backers'
promise they'll never divert enough water to harm salmon. And restoration of
100,000 acres of Delta wetland won't do much for salmon, even though it may be
good for waterfowl. Let's be honest. The "peripheral tunnels" were
conceived to help a handful of San Joaquin Valley growers get more water, not
recover imperiled species like winter and spring run salmon. Why not put this
to a vote of the people?
Coalition
response... It is stunning that an
organization like the Golden Gate Salmon Association is fighting the best
opportunity in years to fix problems in the Delta that could improve salmon
populations. Twenty years of water supply cuts have achieved nothing and he
wants to keep doing the same thing? Unbelievable.
He doesn't trust water project
operators to limit use during times of the year when it's necessary to help
fish? What does he think is the reason many farmers are facing a 20 percent or
less supply of water this year? It is regulatory restrictions that are keeping
the pumps from running.
And his statement that the
project is intended to benefit "a handful of San Joaquin Valley
growers" is not even close to the facts. Water flowing through the Delta
meets part of the needs of 25 million Californians and almost 4,000 family
farms encompassing 3 million acres from Patterson to the Coachella Valley.
An honest discussion would
include questions about how many baby salmon are consumed by other fish in the
Delta, such as bass, which have doubled in population since 1982. A recent
Tuolumne Rivers study shows that more than 90 percent of the baby salmon never
make it through the Delta because they become lunch for non-native game fish.
Think about the long-term population consequences of millions of baby salmon
never making to the ocean to mature and then return to spawn. Why isn't GGSA
troubled by that?
Bay Delta
Conservation Plan
From: Jerry Meral, BDCP Blog
This is the last of a three-part
blog summarizing the evolution of public policy for Delta water supplies. Part I examined the original planning for the
State Water Project. Part II discussed the impact of the controversy
over the Peripheral Canal.
There should be no question that
public thinking about the Delta will continue to change in the future, given
the lessons of the past. The first question anyone must ask about the future of
the Delta is whether the voters will continue to subsidize the maintenance and
improvement of the Delta levees, based on the public benefits the levees
provide.
Salton Sea
From: Antoine Abou-Diwan,
Imperial Valley Press
The Salton Sea Authority approved
a resolution of support for the Salton Sea Restoration and Renewable Energy
Initiative on Thursday.
"As we move forward on the
restoration and the renewable initiative, it's going to become very important
that that we all get on the same page," said Jim Hanks, Imperial
Irrigation District director and Salton Sea Authority president.
No comments:
Post a Comment