Delta task force comes together on proposed plan, but peripheral canal issue still can divide

From the Sacramento Bee, the Governor’s Delta Vision panel has two proposals for fixing the Delta that seem to hold promise and, for the most part, all members agree on. From the article:

Agreement by the advisory panel is a major step toward a new vision for managing the Delta, since the group’s members — environmentalists, farmers, water users, business and fishing groups — have fought over its resources for years. “There’s a big difference this time,” said Topper van Loben Sels, a Delta farmer and member of the Delta Protection Commission. “It’s vital to the state of California that we get this right. If we upset the economy, we’re all going to suffer.”

The panel’s proposal comes in two versions.

Both focus on armoring levees along the Middle River and the South Fork Mokelumne River in a north-south path through the center of the Delta. The goal is to create a corridor within the Delta for Sacramento River water to reach state and federal water pumps near Tracy. These powerful pumps have been blamed for reversing natural flows and drawing seawater into the Delta, killing fish and altering the habitat. An armored water path might isolate the rest of the Delta from pumping effects so it could be restored.

Both proposals include gates on False River and Old River in the west Delta to control seawater intrusion, and a broad mix of levee improvements and habitat restoration. Steamboat Slough and Old River would become habitat corridors, while sinking islands in the west Delta might be used to grow tules rather than for farming, helping restore island interiors. Webb Tract and Bacon Island would be studied as water storage facilities.

One version of the plan proposes studying a peripheral canal that would be operated in concert with the armored channel. Some advisory group members believe this “dual facility” approach offers more flexibility.

This is where alliances begin to fracture.

The peripheral canal still has the potential to break up any consensus, but the group is still hopeful. A lot of the features of the proposal can be built quickly, with the added benefit that they can be easily removed if they don’t seem to be working as planned. Many portions could be started within 90 to 100 days.

To read the full text of the story from the Sacramento Bee, click here.

Comments

Admin

• Log in

Credits

Powered by Vertigo & WordPress
WordPress Themes by Brian Gardner