Water Education Foundation
This is just one post in the Delta Issues Category
Click here to view all posts

Assemblymember Jared Huffman: “My Assembly Bill 39—in either its current form or the soon-to-be-released full form—does NOT authorize, “argue for” or “call for” construction of the peripheral canal”

Posted by: Maven on July 31, 2009 at 9:08 am

From the website of Assemblymember Jared Huffman:

Today, Assemblymember Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael), Water Parks and Wildlife Chair, clarified that his Assembly Bill 39–in either its current form or the soon-to-be-released full form–does NOT authorize, “argue for” or “call for” construction of the Peripheral Canal.

Huffman’s legislation on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta requires an independent Delta Stewardship Council to develop a comprehensive plan to address California’s crisis in the Delta, but Huffman’s bill has been repeatedly mischaracterized as legislation to build a peripheral canal. In response, he sent the following statement to these sources to clear up any confusion regarding the intent of his legislation:

“In all the debate about the Delta, I want to make one fact clear at the outset: My Assembly Bill 39—in either its current form or the soon-to-be-released full form—does NOT authorize, “argue for” or “call for” construction of the Peripheral Canal.

Instead, my bill for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta requires an independent Delta Stewardship Council to develop a comprehensive plan to get California out of the crisis we face in the Delta. From the beginning, I have kept my focus on ecosystem restoration and how we save the fishery that depends on the Delta, particularly Central Valley salmon that migrate through the Delta between upstream spawning grounds and the Pacific Ocean, as well as water supply issues. AB 39 requires a comprehensive ecosystem restoration plan that aims at recovery of our fishery and improving reliability of our water supply. This bill would add protections for the Delta—not take them away. …

Many different strategies are being proposed for addressing the devastating impacts of the current water export system, which relies on massive pumping from the south Delta and reversing the flow of many of the Delta’s channels in order to support water exports. The impacts to the Delta estuary and its fisheries are undeniable, and well documented. The need for change is obvious. The specific solution, however, is less clear.

I am not endorsing, advocating for, attempting to fund, or in any other way supporting a peripheral canal or any other specific strategy to address the Delta conveyance issue, nor has my legislation (AB 39) ever explicitly or implicitly done so. All of these claims have been falsely attributed to me and my legislation recently by blog posters.

I do believe we have exceeded the Delta’s carrying capacity in this decade, and that a variety of factors require water users to reduce their reliance on exports from the Delta in the years ahead. Further, I believe any decision as to specific conveyance infrastructure and operational parameters must include comprehensive alternatives analyses and independent scientific review, must support ecosystem recovery, and must also work for the Delta community.

Complete legislative language for all five Delta and water bills should be available shortly. As we proceed with full, public legislative deliberations on the Delta and water conservation bills, I look forward to engaging with all who care about the health of the Delta as I do.”

July 31, 2009 · Filed Under Delta Issues

Comments

Leave a Reply