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

Sunday’s top of the scroll: San Francisco Chronicle’s comprehensive commentary on California salmon and pending legislation

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 5, 2009 at 8:03 am

This morning’s San Francisco Chronicle has an extensive commentary section on California water issues, beginning with this:

Take a good look at costly water bills – the ones in Sacramento, says this commentary on secret water legislation bills which we’ll likely see emerge this week in Sacramento from Traci Sheehan Van Thull, executive director of the Planning and Conservation League, and George Biagi, farmer and president of the Central Delta Water Agency:

While still not resolving the $26.3 billion budget crisis, the California Legislature is on the verge of considering an extensive and costly restructuring of California’s water laws and water infrastructure. Does the right hand know what the left hand is doing?

Several secret bills are set to emerge this week to cover some contentious water issues, including governance of the bay-delta region, water conservation, new dams and an updated proposal for a peripheral canal, which was overwhelmingly rejected by California voters in 1982.

We need to ask some tough questions about the goals and the long-term vision of our state and its water needs.

First, we need to be honest about how much water is available. The state has already given permits for much more water than nature provides – similar to Wall Street and its debt credit swaps. That means water agencies that depend on water from the delta must figure out ways to import less. Any meaningful reform must require that these agencies increase their self-sufficiency through water conservation, recycling and improved groundwater management.

More of Traci’s and George’s commentary can be found by clicking here.

Limit agribusiness – for salmon’s sake: Author Paul Johnson, president of Monterey Fish Market of San Francisco and Berkeley, says salmon are part of California, sustaining its populations for generations:

This is a heritage we are in danger of losing forever. For the second year in a row, the Pacific Coast has been closed to salmon fishing, both commercial and recreational, because of the collapse of Sacramento River runs. But it is not only the salmon and the salmon community that are suffering, it is the entire Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta ecosystem, the most important and productive wetlands on the West Coast, that is threatened.

In five years, we’ve seen the complete collapse of the food web in the delta. Populations of plankton and fish that feed on them – delta smelt, longfin smelt, shad, immature striped bass and salmon – have declined by 90 percent or more. We are experiencing a catastrophic collapse of the entire delta ecosystem.

The reason for this is plain and simple: water exports. Not enough water is flowing through the delta. Water issues in California are often framed as “water needed for agriculture, jobs and cities is being sacrificed for an inconsequential little fish, the delta smelt.”

The truth is, water that could be used to the benefit of wildlife, cities, family farmers, fishermen and California’s Indian tribes has been appropriated by corporate agribusiness. Tens of thousands of jobs and billions of dollars are being lost because of the delta crisis, and the treasured salmon runs of California are in real danger of disappearing.

Read more of Paul’s commentary by clicking here.

As the delta goes, so go our salmon, says Zeke Grader, executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fisherman’s Associations, says the reason for the salmon’s decline and the closing of the salmon fishery for two years in a row is no mystery:

The estuary is dying. California has long viewed the delta as a massive reservoir it could endlessly plumb for agriculture and development. Water “wasting” to the sea is seen as a massive leak. In reality, the delta is an ecosystem – it is our Everglades, our Chesapeake Bay. An estuary’s lifeblood is its freshwater inflow mixing with saline tidal flows to create a rich, brackish water that nourishes salmon, crabs, sole, oysters and shrimp.

As the estuary dies, so do California salmon. Another icon is lost. Salmon, however, are different from grizzlies or bald eagles.

These wild fish are what sustained California’s native peoples for 10,000 years. They fed the miners headed for the gold fields. They are fine dining, the purpose of a day’s ocean excursion, what we grill on the Fourth of July. They are food, jobs, recreation and part of who are on the Pacific Coast.

So we have a choice: Are we going to destroy our salmon or restore them? Restoring California’s salmon fishery begins with the delta. We can reallocate flows to the estuary, as the science recommends, or continue business as usual – diverting more from the delta or grabbing flow upstream through a peripheral canal. The better choice, it seems, is to develop sources of water outside the delta, saving the estuary and creating a truly reliable water supply. In the end, sustaining salmon might sustain California.

More of Zeke’s commentary by clicking here.

Water use must change whether fish live or die, says Cynthia Koehler, a consulting attorney for the Environmental Defense Fund:

As we ignore these warning signs and call for more water and less fish, we miss an important opportunity to prepare for a smarter water future. We have water in California, but an ancient system of rights and distribution leads to some farmers paying higher prices for limited supplies, while others receive full allocations at relatively low rates. Some urban areas use 100 gallons per person per day, while others use more than 300.

We have tremendous potential to grow “new” water supplies with recycling and conservation. Innovators like PureSense are helping growers realize more profit per acre through the efficient use of water. Hydropoint is helping eBay, Lockheed Martin, Cisco, Amazon and Advanced Micro Devices use less water in landscaping. There are reasonable answers to these conflicts if we avoid getting trapped in rhetorical divides.

We could pump water out of this estuary indiscriminately as some are calling for, but at some point, California would still bump up against limitations in the amount of water in its system, the rising costs of extracting and moving it, and increasing droughts from climate change.

We could, in other words, destroy what is left of the most important estuary on the West Coast and still not solve the economic problems facing much of the Central Valley. Sooner or later California is going to have to change how it uses water. We can do it before we lose our salmon, or after.

Read the rest of Cynthia’s commentary by clicking here.

Bay-Delta litigation, by species: The section also includes a brief rundown of litigation – click here.

July 5, 2009 · Filed Under Salmon, Water Legislation

Comments

Leave a Reply