Alex Brietler’s blog: ‘They just think it’s too big’ [the periperhal tunnel, that is]

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on February 25, 2010 at 8:02 am

From Alex Breitler’s blog:

“Jonas Minton of the enviro group Planning and Conservation League told the audience at Monday’s UOP water forum that the state and water exporters should consider building one small tunnel, rather than two large ones, to convey water past the Delta.

The plan right now is to focus analysis on two tunnels, each capable of carrying 7,500 cubic feet per second of water. Combined, that’s 112,200 gallons per second — enough to fill an Olympic-sized swimming pool in five seconds. (See this post for visuals.)

That’s too large to reassure opponents that any future guidelines on how much water can be taken will not be bypassed the next time there’s a water crisis in the south San Joaquin Valley, Minton said. He used U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s recent proposal to tweak biological opinions and send more water south as an example. … “

February 25, 2010 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Alex Brietler: What to call the “peripheral tunnel”? We have a nomination…

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on February 20, 2010 at 9:33 am

From Alex Brietler’s blog:

“After last week’s decision to focus study on a tunnel beneath the Delta — instead of a peripheral canal — I was wracking my brain to think of some clever nickname.

The “Peripheral Tunnel” is boring and arguably inaccurate. The “Subterranean Tunnel” is redundant. Some folks already call it the “Chunnel” in comparison to the train tube connecting England with France, but let’s face it, that name’s taken already.

How about a hybrid: The Punnel. … “

Continue reading this post at Alex Brietler’s blog by clicking here.

February 20, 2010 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

1 Comment

Barry Nelson: Reason #1 – trust: “Lack of trust among stakeholders has been a major obstacle to progress on Delta issues for years”

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on February 18, 2010 at 8:04 am

From Barry Nelson at the NRDC Switchboard Blog:

“There are many complex reasons why legislation to block ESA protections in the Delta would be unproductive. One of the most important reasons, however, is simple: trust. The lack of trust among stakeholders has been a major obstacle to progress on Delta issues for years. As a result, discussions about solutions to the challenges in the Delta often don’t get out of the starting gate.

Over the past several months, I’ve written many times about the provisions of the policy reform package that the state legislature passed last November. However, beyond the details of the many bills in that package, that legislation started to rebuild trust among some of the warring parties in the Delta. That trust is fragile, and it’s not universal, but it’s an important ingredient for progress.

For example, NRDC has been a long-time opponent of a peripheral canal in the Delta. However, as a result of increasing awareness of sea level rise, subsidence and earthquake risks in the Delta, we’ve moved from that simple position to a more open and nuanced one. In short, our position on Delta infrastructure will be determined by its design, proposed operations and assurances that it will be operated responsibly. That last point is where trust comes in. … ”

February 18, 2010 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

1 Comment

Commentary: Fish out of water? Peripheral-canal opponents claim lobbying and political donations have tainted decision process

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on February 18, 2010 at 7:53 am

From the Sacramento News & Review, this commentary by Alistair Bland:

“The three-year public process that could lead to construction of the controversial peripheral canal connecting the Sacramento River and the Delta to Southern California has been steered by private interests and campaign contributions, claim conservation groups opposed to the watery delivery project.

The Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force was launched by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in September 2006 as a tool for creating a sustainable long-term water-management program for the Sacramento-San Joaquin river system.

Proponents of the canal include Southern California and Bay Area water agencies and state agricultural interests which have collectively spent hundreds of thousands of dollars influencing the process.

Canal opponents, including environmentalists, commercial and sports fishermen groups and in-Delta farmers, claim the blue-ribbon panel was planted with key individuals likely to support building a peripheral canal and that their input as stakeholders in the process has been ignored.

“The task force ignored a great deal of the recommendations of the stakeholder group,” said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, campaign director with Restore the Delta, a conservation group in Stockton. “The state just ran this whole process to make it appear like the public had input, but they didn’t really listen to the public. I think it was precalculated by the government.” … “

February 18, 2010 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Blog commentary: California water – A battle for hearts and minds

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on February 13, 2010 at 8:08 am

From InfoSpigot: The Chronicles (a blog), a post regarding the recent story in the Sacramento Bee about the tunnel option for a possible peripheral canal. Noting that although the peripheral canal was shot down by voters soundly in a 1982 ballot proposition, the idea is gaining ground, even garnering the (cautious) support of environmental groups. Why is this?, the post asks:

” … I think it comes down to the widespread recognition that the tortuous method of channeling water from the Sacramento River into the Delta and then into the aqueducts is broken and is a prime suspect in the collapse of the Central Valley’s once-magnificent chinook salmon runs and other environmental problems. The thinking is that if you straighten out the plumbing, you take care of the major hazards to the fish and to the Delta ecosystem.

Once you have the new canal or tunnel, all you have to do is manage the water flowing through it to the benefit of everyone involved.

And that’s the problem. To believe a canal will fix an environmental disaster, one must believe that the demand for new water and the machinations to get it by any means possible will suddenly just evaporate. Letting high river flows sweep through the Delta and out to sea–part of what’s necessary to aid salmon migrate to the Pacific–is condemned as a waste by those who want to put that water to work in the San Joaquin Valley and Southern California. That belief just won’t disappear overnight. … “

Continue reading this post at Infospigot: The Chronicles by clicking here.

February 13, 2010 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

1 Comment

Co-equally bad: The On the Public Record blog comments on the peripheral canal

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on January 28, 2010 at 4:09 pm

From the On the Public Record blog:

“This op-ed by MWD pretty well sums up my reasons for supporting the Peripheral Canal, even though some of the other people supporting the Peripheral Canal are politicking in terrible ways. I can believe that the studies that show the benefit of the Peripheral Canal are artifically inflated, and still think that LA will need water from the north after they max out every local option. (I have no interest in a Peripheral Canal to delay the inevitable salt death of Westlands. Retire the west side, says I.)

I don’t think the dual-function Delta is working. Right now it is neither a healthy ecosystem nor adequate conveyance. I think of a canal as a way to separate those. … “

January 28, 2010 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Record editorial: Standing their ground – 170 Delta landowners resist push toward peripheral canal

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on January 11, 2010 at 8:06 am

From Stockton’s Record, this editorial:

“State water officials are seeking access to 170 Delta properties whose owners are saying no. But this access dispute has less to do with property rights and privacy than with the state’s obvious interest in digging a ditch – a peripheral canal – to take north state water around the Delta and ship it south.

These landowners, some of them anyway, are trying to block a water project they believe is ill-conceived, being rammed down their throats or both.

No peripheral canal, which supporter Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger likes to call a conveyance system, has been formally proposed, let alone approved. But the just-passed package of five state water bills allows it to happen, and a seven-member Delta panel that will oversee state water issues will have the power to make it happen. The fact that the governor will name four of the panel’s seven members is a pretty clear indication that’s the direction the state is headed, the lack of a strong scientific or engineering basis and the concerns of Delta region residents and officials be damned. … “

January 11, 2010 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

No resolution in Delta land access dispute

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on January 7, 2010 at 8:30 am

From Stockton’s Record:

“STOCKTON – Attorney Thomas Keeling says there’ll never be another case like this: Owners of about 170 Delta properties refuse to allow state officials onto their land to survey for a possible peripheral canal.

And nearly one year after the first court actions were filed, the issue does not appear close to resolution.

The Department of Water Resources in late 2008 and early 2009 sent letters to landowners seeking permission to access their lands for environmental surveys, such as drilling, trapping animals, observing boats or searching for historic artifacts.

For those who refused to comply, the department filed petitions seeking court orders in the five Delta counties. … “

January 7, 2010 · Filed Under Delta Issues, Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Sunday’s top of the scroll: Sacramento Delta farmers, families fret over potential canal

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on December 20, 2009 at 9:01 am

From the Sacramento Bee:

” … Lifelong farmers Wally Chan, Graham Connor, Bill Correa and hundreds of other Delta families are heirs to a river culture that spans races and reaches deep into California history.

It’s a culture they fear will be washed away by the state’s $10 billion project to build a canal or tunnel to divert water to Southern California.

The Schwarzenegger administration – which says the project will help restore the Delta’s environment – plans to start building in 2011 even without voter approval.

Delta dwellers say the project will kill the Delta lifestyle. Thousands of acres of farmland could be turned into salt marshes, making ghost towns of Hood, Courtland and Clarksburg.

Now, the Delta nights sparkle with Christmas displays on the docks that reflect colorfully across the river. Pear king Wally Chan – whose Chinese grandfather fled the 1906 San Francisco earthquake to grow Bartlett pears on Grand Island – decorates his tractors with Christmas lights. … “

December 20, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Assemblywoman Huber to reintroduce bill requiring canal vote

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on December 20, 2009 at 8:59 am

From the Stockton Record:

“Assemblywoman Alyson Huber, D-El Dorado Hills, said Friday she will reintroduce a bill that would require a legislative vote before a controversial peripheral canal can be built around the Delta.

Huber, whose district includes portions of Lodi, north Stockton and the Delta, opposed lawmakers’ historic water deal last month. The package of legislation did not authorize a canal but delegated such a decision to a new seven-member council. … “

December 20, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Canal price tag going up, tunneling option looking better

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on December 11, 2009 at 7:54 am

From the Contra Costa Times:

“Cost estimates for a long-sought but hotly debated canal to carry water around the Delta have doubled in the past year, increasing to the point that boring tunnels may be an attractive and less controversial project.

The numbers are preliminary, but the cost of buying the land, designing and building a Peripheral Canal around the Delta’s eastern flank has soared from $4.2 billion to between $7.9 billion and $8.5 billion, according to state Department of Water Resources. The latest figures are closing in on a roughly $10 billion cost of sending the water through a pair of tunnels beneath the Delta.

The estimates do not include inflation, levee improvements needed to maintain existing water delivery operations, water storage facilities, some of the costs to repair environmental damage and other features, some of which have been included in of higher estimates in the past year.

But the figures, given to a group of water officials, regulators and environmentalists last week, provide an apples-to-apples comparison that shows the state’s official cost estimate for a Peripheral Canal is rising rapidly. “We knew this was never going to be cheap,” said Jerry Johns, deputy director for the state Department of Water Resources. … “

December 11, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Blog commentary: Uncivil engineering – Canal or tunnel?

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on December 7, 2009 at 6:25 am

From the Delta National Park blog:

” … It is clear that the tunnel option is being seriously considered. This Delta Habitat Conservation and Conveyance Program comparison of the two isolated conveyance and the tunnel is illuminating.

Conclusions? The eastern isolated conveyance (the Peripheral Canal), the preferable of the two surface alternatives, is less expensive and less of a technological risk. But the tunnel is more viable politically because building a structure no one will ever see makes it ostensibly less environmentally impactful and greatly reduces necessary land takings, something that will no doubt be bitterly contested.

The DHCCP estimates that the difference in cost between the two to be about 1.5 billion. It would not surprise the DNP if the cost differences are described essentially as a wash, because the litigation associated with land takings may end up making it so.

But would the tunnel really be a better alternative from a strictly environmental perspective? … “

December 7, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Friday’s top of the scroll: California eyes $10.6 billion cost for water tunnel

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on December 4, 2009 at 8:12 am

From the Fresno Bee:

“State water officials said Thursday it could cost $10.6 billion to send water to Southern California through a proposed project of tunnels under the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.

The Department of Water Resources presented the cost estimate to a group of state and federal agencies studying ideas to safeguard water deliveries from the delta.

Two tunnels, about 150 feet underground, are being considered as an alternative to building a proposed canal around the fragile estuary. A third tunnel would serve as an intake tunnel, completing the 43-mile path under the delta.

Jerry Johns, DWR deputy director, described the cost as preliminary and said more design work needs to be done over the next year.

“I think it’s so preliminary at this stage, it’s hard to take the numbers seriously,” said Ann Hayden, a water expert at the Environmental Defense Fund. “The potential is there but we have a long way to go.” … “

Check out this presentation to the BDCP on tunnel alignment & option comparisons (hat tip to the Delta National Park twitter):

ato bdcp steering committee presentation 12-3-09 rev i mlc

December 4, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

1 Comment

Commentary: Recalling water war of ‘82, and how it continues to affect Southern California

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on December 1, 2009 at 7:50 am

From Leon Furgatch at the Los Angeles Daily News, this commentary:

“It is difficult for Californians to obtain a true picture of their water problems because they hear the state is suffering from a drought.

The implication is that relief will come as soon as rainfall returns to normal. This message masks a more serious problem that can be traced to decades of political interference in planning to avoid such shortages.

To put this in perspective, the Central Valley, California’s agricultural breadbasket, and heavily populated Southern California receive very little rain and rely mostly on imported water from distant watersheds.

The opposite is true in the upper third of the state. It receives huge amounts of rain and has so little population that most of this water empties into the ocean. In fact, the average annual flow of the rivers in this north coastal region are capable of supplying more than 100 million people a year with water.

In 1985, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a federal law advocated by environmental groups designating the Eel, Trinity, American, Smith and Klamath rivers in the north as scenic wild rivers, and protecting them from development.

By indirection, this delivered a fatal blow to the California Water Plan approved by voters in 1960 to insulate the state against future water shortages. … “

December 1, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Tuesday’s top of the scroll: Wolk says money, time will keep peripheral canal at bay

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 17, 2009 at 8:35 am

From Stockton’s Record:

“A 49-mile canal carrying water around the Delta is the wrong solution for Southern California, and it is too expensive and “won’t ever get done,” State Sen. Lois Wolk said.

Wolk, D-Davis, is still steaming about the process that led to legislation Nov. 4 designed to reform state water policy. She told The Record’s editorial board Monday that, realistically, the efforts were a waste.

“It was awful, incredibly awful,” Wolk said. “I’ve never seen anything like this.”

She said the legislation was written by Westlands Water District, which serves western Fresno and Kings counties, and the Metropolitan Water District, which serves much of Southern California. “They wrote it in private meetings, and then it emerged in the middle of the night.”

Wolk estimated total canal costs, including landowner and environmental mitigation, at somewhere between $38 billion and $60 billion. She also said construction will take “50 years – or never.” … “

Read more from the Record by clicking here.

November 17, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

1 Comment

Ann Haydent/EDF: No slam dunk for the peripheral canal

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 12, 2009 at 8:27 am

From Ann Hayden at the Environmental Defense Fund’s On the Water Front blog:

“As our recent blog highlights , there are many reasons to be pleased about the recent passage of the water policy reform package[1]. As a member of the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan Steering Committee, I think it’s also worth enumerating how the legislation provides significant environmental safeguards for this process. After all, the BDCP is where new conveyance around the Delta, (otherwise known as the peripheral canal) is being analyzed as part of a habitat conservation plan with the aim of ensuring both water supply reliability and ecosystem recovery.

What does the legislation mean for the BDCP?

It doesn’t authorize a canal.

Many are concerned that the legislation authorizes a peripheral canal. This is simply not true. In fact, the legislation includes an important new layer of oversight of the BDCP—the Delta Stewardship Council. Before it can be implemented, the BDCP will need to demonstrate to the Council that it meets both the water supply reliability and ecosystem recovery goals it set out to achieve, and will have to consider Council recommendations on both the design and implementation of the Plan (Sec 85320 (g)). In addition, the BDCP will have to show that it is consistent with the overall Delta plan and other existing environmental mandates. The legislation also requires the Department of Fish and Game to report regularly to the Council on results from monitoring and adaptive management to make sure BDCP implementation is moving in a positive direction (Sec 85320 (f)). …”

Read the rest of Ann Hayden’s post at the Environmental Defense Fund’s On the Water Front blog by clicking here.

November 12, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Governor backs off remarks on canal

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 12, 2009 at 7:29 am

From Stockton’s Record:

“FRESNO – Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has backtracked a bit from comments in Stockton last week that he wants to move ahead with construction of a peripheral canal around the Delta.

In an interview with the editorial board of the Fresno Bee this week, Schwarzenegger said “canal” may not be the right word to describe the new infrastructure that would send water past – rather than through – the Delta.

He said the state also is studying a pair of tunnels underneath the estuary, an alternative that would be less disruptive to Delta farming.

“There could be farmers that say (they’re) not going to sell their land, which is OK, but the problem is we still have to build this delivery system,” Schwarzenegger said. …”

Read more of this article from the Record by clicking here.

November 12, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Assemblymember Huber delivers anti-peripheral canal message in the form of 2,000 postcards

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 10, 2009 at 8:31 am

From the Stockton Record:

“They haven’t come together on much lately, but there was one thing Assemblywoman Alyson Huber and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s office could agree on Monday: Plastic crates full of postcards are heavy.

The Democratic lawmaker, whose district includes portions of San Joaquin County and the Delta, continued her public protest of Schwarzenegger’s support for a peripheral canal with an early morning photo op outside his Capitol office, where she hand-delivered an estimated 2,000 postcards from concerned constituents.

The postage-paid correspondence – detached from anti-canal mailers Huber circulated late last month – came from all over her district spanning San Joaquin, Sacramento, El Dorado and Amador counties.

They carried brief messages and many exclamation points, from “impeach!” and “is he crazy!!” to “this idea is simply ridiculous!” …”

Read more from the Record by clicking here.

From the Lodi News-Sentinel:

” … “The governor showed how out of touch he is with my communities when, just hours after the water package was passed, he touted his plans to build a canal through the (Sacramento-San Joaquin) Delta at a business event in Stockton,” Huber said in a written statement. “He just doesn’t get it — he might as well walk into a Giants game wearing a Dodgers jersey.” …”

More from the News-Sentinel by clicking here.

November 10, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

YouTube: Assemblymember Huber delivers messages from constituents to Governor

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 10, 2009 at 8:24 am

From Assembly Access:

“(Sacramento) – Assemblymember Alyson Huber (D-El Dorado Hills) today delivered 2000 postcards to the Governors office. The postcards are from Delta residents who are opposed to Governor Schwarzenegger’s plan to build a peripheral canal. I have heard from my constituents residents of the Delta region and they have said loud and clear they oppose the construction of a peripheral canal, said Assemblymember Huber. Assemblymember Huber says Delta residents will not stand aside while the Governor and his Southern California water buddies bulldoze their way through the Delta. Here’s more in this Assembly Access video:

November 10, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Governor’s remarks were pouring salt in the wound, says editorial

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 9, 2009 at 8:09 am

From Stockton’s Record, this editorial:

“Real classy, governor.

It showed class, sensitivity even, to come to Stockton the day lawmakers pass water legislation and brag that the peripheral canal he holds so dear will be built. Not it could be built. Or should be built. But will be built.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger was in town to celebrate the opening of Electric Vehicles International, a new company here that builds electric trucks. Locals were on hand to hear a few words about EVI.

Instead, the governor, ebullient from his water victory, came to the heart of the Delta – where feelings about a peripheral canal run deeper than the ditch he wants to dig – to rub salt in our wounds. …”

Read the rest of this editorial from the Record by clicking here.

November 9, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

McNerney response to Governor’s remarks on peripheral canal

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 8, 2009 at 7:14 am

From the website of Congressman Jerry McNerney:

“Washington, D.C. – Congressman Jerry McNerney issued the following statement today in response to the Governor’s remarks at an event in Stockton yesterday during which he confirmed that the water agreement passed by the California legislature will be used to, “build a canal around the Delta.”

The text of the Congressman’s statement is below:

“Governor Schwarzenegger confirmed yesterday what so many of us have feared – that he intends to use this water package to build a peripheral canal around the families, farmers, and small businesses that make up the four million people in the San Joaquin Delta region.

“I am committed to providing relief to drought affected areas, but the peripheral canal is the wrong answer. His comments are unacceptable, and I remain concerned that a decision of this magnitude has come without sufficiently consulting residents and farmers from the San Joaquin Delta region.

“The fact that the Governor announced his intentions in Stockton, the heart of the region that would be most harmed by a canal, shines a bright spotlight on the problem; Sacramento bureaucrats don’t recognize what’s right for our communities.

“I urge the Governor to reconsider his support for a canal, and I will firmly oppose any proposals that are harmful to my constituents.””

November 8, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

1 Comment

Dan Bacher commentary: The MLPA process and peripheral canal: One ugly, environmentally injust process

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 7, 2009 at 7:25 am

From Dan Bacher, this commentary:

“Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) and peripheral canal boondoggles, although they may be at first appear to be different issues, are effectively one and the same process. The Resources Legacy Fund Foundation, the League of Conservation Voters, the Nature Conservancy, NRDC and their corporate buddies have collaborated with Schwarzenegger to engineer both processes with no regard for local communities or environmental justice.

Mike Carpenter, a sea urchin diver and organizer of a recent fundraiser for the California Fisheries Coalition in Albion on the Mendocino coast, made the vital connection between the MLPA process and Scharzenegger’s campaign to build a peripheral canal. Carpenter emphasized that the MLPA is just a “cover-up” for the Governor’s plans to build a peripheral canal around the California Delta, the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas, through the Delta Vision and Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) process.

The peripheral canal and MLPA process are intimately linked by: …”

Read more

November 7, 2009 · Filed Under Other Oceans & Beaches Stories, Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Governor drops ‘bomb’ on Delta: He angers local officials by declaring state clear to build peripheral canal (with video clip)

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 5, 2009 at 8:24 am

From Stockton’s Record:

“Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger came to plug electric vehicles at a new manufacturing plant, but in the process he stunned local officials by saying that a water agreement by legislators early Wednesday will allow the state to “fix the Delta and to build a canal around the Delta.”

It’s well-known that Schwarzenegger supports a peripheral canal, but Wednesday’s comment – one of his most direct endorsements to date – stung in Stockton, the heart of anti-canal country.

He spoke at the grand opening for Electric Vehicles International, near the Port of Stockton.

“You don’t come in our backyard, where you could spit and hit the Delta, and tell us he’s going to put the canal in without really understanding the impacts,” said San Joaquin County Supervisor Leroy Ornellas, who was invited to Wednesday’s ceremony but had to cancel after it was delayed to accommodate the governor’s news conference in Sacramento. …”

Read more from the Record by clicking here.

WATCH THE VIDEO CLIP of Schwarzenegger’s speech by clicking here.

November 5, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Water retailers worry about Peripheral Canal cost

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 5, 2009 at 8:19 am

From Capitol Weekly:

“The legislature passed an $11 billion water bond on Tuesday night, but that doesn’t include the most talked-about potential water project in the state, a proposed “peripheral canal” to shuttle water around the California Delta to points south.

That project, if it comes about, would be paid for by several large water agencies in Central and Southern California: including the Westlands Water District and the immense Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), whose members include dozens of water retailers serving 18 million people in six counties from Ventura to San Diego.

The cost, they say, would be passed on to these retailers in the form of rate increases.

That has some retailers worried. While there is little open dissent at this point, some are openly wondering whether the price tag could balloon. Most retailers seem to agree that ensuring the reliability of water from the Delta is important, but many also say limited dollars could be better spent on conservation, recycling and other smaller scale projects. …”

Read more from Capitol Weekly by clicking here.

November 5, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

1 Comment

Governor says state will build Peripheral Canal

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 4, 2009 at 3:48 pm

From Capitol Weekly:

“Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, visiting an area where sentiment against the Peripheral Canal is intense, told a business group in Stockton that the state was “going to fix the delta and to build a canal around the delta.”

The governor made the comments at a gathering at the opening of an electric vehicle plant. His statement was first reported by The Stockton Record. After the speech, the governor did not take questions from reporters, the Record said.

It was one of his most direct comments to date about the canal, which is not popular in San Joaquin County. Among those who were surprised and displeased was Douglass Wilhoit, CEO of the Greater Stockton Chamber of Commerce, who said the newly approved water package did not address “the very faulty and incomplete water legislation which we fear does not go far enough to protect and restore the Delta.” …”

Read more from Capitol Weekly by clicking here.

November 4, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal, Water Legislation

1 Comment

Peripheral canal issue should be front and center, says columnist

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 4, 2009 at 8:15 am

From the Ventura County Star, this from columnist Timm Herdt:

“It’s a thought that’s impossible to get your head around at the time you take your morning shower in Camarillo or Thousand Oaks, but it is a fact of life in Southern California that the same drops of water that rinse the shampoo from your hair may have once cascaded over Yosemite Falls or fallen to earth as a snowflake atop Mount Shasta.

For all the high-minded talk about restoring ecosystems, ramping up conservation, promoting regional self-sufficiency and the other noble goals of a comprehensive, long-term water plan for California, the bottom line is that the core objective of the plan is to make sure that you don’t walk out of the shower some morning with your head still covered with suds.

That’s not meant to be as glib as it may sound.

A reliable water supply, whether for hygiene, consumption or food production, is essential for human existence — and 25 million people are dependent to some degree on the water that flows into the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, which drains a watershed that covers a quarter of the state. …”

Read more of Timm Herdt’s column by clicking here.

November 4, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Peripheral Vision: Can state and federal officials agree on comprehensive reform before it’s too late?

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 1, 2009 at 11:25 am

Hat tip to the Delta National Park blog/website (via Twitter) for this and the next post from Comstock’s Magazine:

“For centuries, the biggest environmental concern for most California water users was how to squeeze every last drop from nature. While a wet year might shift concerns to flood control, grab-as-grab-can gusto came back almost as soon as the waters receded. But that was then. Today, environmental concerns are center stage in the state’s ongoing effort to reform its water system.

There is good reason for this sea change: Virtually no part of the state’s complex water system is free from an environmental challenge. Key fish species are in rapid decline, particularly in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, one of California’s most sensitive ecosystems. Pollution from both agricultural and urban runoff has sharply degraded water quality in some areas of the state. Withdrawing massive amounts of groundwater in the Central Valley is causing some parts of its floor to sink, while many of the Delta levees that protect people, homes and businesses throughout Northern California are rapidly eroding, placing lives and the state’s economy in peril. Global climate change is also a factor, spurring a rising sea level and threatening to dramatically change the Sierra snowpack, the state’s natural water storage and supply system.

This potential disaster is most evident in the Delta, the state’s central hub for moving water north to south. According to the California Department of Water Resources, approximately 25 million people from San Diego to San Francisco rely on Delta transports for at least part of their water supply, as do millions of acres of Central Valley farmland. But the Delta is more than just a large pipe for getting water to California’s drier half: It’s the largest estuary on the West Coast and home to more than 55 fish and 750 animal and plant species. …”

Read more from Comstock’s Magazine by clicking here.

Note: It says that this article is the third installment in a series of articles. You can check out the previous articles in the archives by clicking here.

November 1, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Salt of the Dearth: The role of desalination in California’s water crisis

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 1, 2009 at 11:21 am

From Comstock’s Magazine:

“If Sir Isaac Newton were around today to assess California’s interest in seawater desalination, he would likely reference his own third law of motion, which in simple terms states that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. In short, as our water supply dwindles, the desire to glean freshwater from salty oceans and brackish groundwater is growing.

Desalination has been used in some form for centuries. Modern systems began to surface in the early 1920s, though it didn’t begin to see real global expansion until the 1960s. Desalination, however, often carries a high price tag, both economically and environmentally. The price per acre-foot varies significantly by region, and most experts agree desalinated water costs approximately two to four times that of water gleaned through traditional methods. The U.S. Geological Survey, for instance, pegs the average price for desalinated water at about $1,000 per acre-foot, while traditional water supply usually comes in around $200 per acre-foot.

Reverse osmosis used in desalination also has plenty of environmental concerns, most notably the potentially negative impact of brine residue that often ends up in the ocean. In the battle over Delta smelt, environmentalists say pipes pumping ocean water into a desalination plant could harm fish populations. …”

Read more from Comstock’s Magazine by clicking here.

November 1, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

1 Comment

Huber bill on peripheral canal will provide protections and ensure due process

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 31, 2009 at 8:31 am

From Assemblymember Alyson Huber:

“Sacramento – Assemblymember Alyson Huber introduced a bill today, co-authored by Senator Lois Wolk, which would prohibit the construction of a peripheral canal around the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta without a full fiscal analysis and a vote of the state legislature.

“It is important that we maintain legislative oversight of large-scale projects and not delegate that authority to unelected bureaucrats,” said Assemblymember Huber. “I am very concerned that the current water policy bill provides a clear path to building a canal and this ensures we get answers to some very important questions, and give the Delta a voice in the process.”

“The people of California deserve to know that due process will take place before tax payers and rate payers are asked to spend billions of dollars on a peripheral canal, “ said Senator Wolk, who chairs the Senate Select Committee on Delta Stewardship and Sustainability. “This bill ensures that the legislature is fully informed and that historic protections are maintained prior to moving forward with such a large-scale project.”

The bill would also require the non-partisan Legislative Analyst’s office to conduct an economic feasibility analysis to ensure that the Southern California ratepayers who are supposedly being asked to cover the cost of this massive project actually know how much this will cost. It would also ensure that the canal will not have a negative impact on water in the Delta and upstream communities – be it for our local cities or our farmers.

Assemblymembers Bill Berryhill and Wes Chesbro have also signed on as co-authors.

Audio clips available at Assemblymember Huber’s website – click here.

October 31, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Dan Bacher commentary: Congressman McNerney urges Governor to drop canal plan

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 30, 2009 at 8:26 am

From Dan Bacher, this commentary:

“In a letter to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on October 23, Congressman Jerry McNerney (D-Pleasanton) criticized plans to build a peripheral canal and the exclusion of input from Delta residents in the current Delta/water bill package now being considered by the California legislature.

The letter reiterates the Congressman’s plan to “closely monitor’ initiatives that require federal participation and his concern about any proposals that lay groundwork for a peripheral canal.

“I am deeply concerned by initiatives that may be intended to lay the groundwork for a canal that diverts additional fresh water from the San Joaquin Delta,” said Jerry McNerney. “Such a canal would further erode water quality for several million people. A canal and related proposals are expected to threaten jobs by turning family farms into uninhabitable salty marshlands and could raise water rates by decreasing the supply of clean water for families and businesses in the San Joaquin Delta area.”

He emphasized, “Public health and economic opportunity in Contra Costa County, San Joaquin County, and other San Joaquin Delta communities should not be sacrificed in pursuit of expensive and counterproductive water projects. I will oppose federal support for water proposals that threaten the millions of people that call the San Joaquin Delta home.” …

Read more

October 30, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

2 Comments

New canal is pushed by various interests

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 29, 2009 at 7:51 am

Michael Gardner of the San Diego Union Tribune reports on the peripheral canal angle of the water legislation:

“California’s most important water delivery network is undergoing a broad redesign that could feature a fish-friendly canal being pushed by an alliance of powerful urban and farm interests.

Unlike the failed 1982 campaign for the Peripheral Canal, this fundamental shift in water policy is unfolding beyond the direct control of lawmakers, voters and ratepayers.

The emerging route and size of the plumbing system, which would carry water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to Southern California, has been largely left up to an unelected committee of state and federal officials working closely with selected water agencies and environmentalists.

Since 2006, they have been engineering various canal proposals as part of a broader mission to chart a new course for revitalizing the ecologically fragile delta, which is close to collapse. Fish populations are falling, levees are crumbling and a strong earthquake could disrupt water deliveries from the area. …”

Read more from the San Diego Union Tribune by clicking here.

October 29, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Proposed water canal around Sac Delta spark lawsuits

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 27, 2009 at 8:28 am

From the Woodland Daily Democrat:

“Peter Hunn has a simple wish: He’d like his children to farm the land in California’s delta that his great, great grandfather settled more than a century ago.

The cucumber farmer cherishes the land so much that he refuses to allow state engineers onto his property to survey possible routes for a new canal he believes could disrupt his water supply. Hunn and 160 other landowners along this fertile stretch of land between San Francisco and the state capital are joined in a revolt against the canal that has evolved into something of a modern-day sagebrush rebellion.

“All the pumps and systems to get water out of the river and put in a canal will have to be done in our area. They will reduce the quality of the water,” said Hunn, who lives outside Clarksburg, a former sugar beet town just south of Sacramento. “We’d be displaced and have to figure out a whole new life.”

The state’s surveys are critical to determining whether a canal is viable. That it is having so much trouble even getting on the delta’s ranches and vineyards illustrates the political challenges in trying to reshape California’s aging water system. …”

Read more from the Woodland Daily Democrat by clicking here.

October 27, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Delta residents know what’s best for the Delta: No canal, says commentary

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 24, 2009 at 7:14 am

From the Lodi News-Sentinel, this commentary by Assemblymember Alyson Huber:

“I have fond memories of growing up on the Delta. We lived in a trailer park at Tower Park Marina, right on Little Potato Slough. Having the Delta in my backyard as a child makes me especially protective of its future for the next generation.

A new vision is needed for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta — one that includes the people of the Delta. Today, the Delta is home to more than five million Californians, including many who rely on the Delta to support their jobs and the local economy. Those that live within the five Delta counties must be part of the public policy process that determines what happens to the local water supply.

Right now, a package of water proposals is being crafted in the Capitol and decisions are being made that will dramatically impact the Delta region. The most troubling piece of the proposals: Gov. Schwarzenegger’s new “peripheral canal” that would take existing water from the Sacramento River and move it around the Delta to Southern California. His plan would hurt our local communities, cost our state billions of dollars and not produce one drop of water. This measure is being backed primarily by Southern California Water Agencies. …”

Read more of Assemblymember Huber’s commentary by clicking here.

October 24, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Dan Bacher commentary: Schwarzenegger calls special session to approve his peripheral canal plan

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 13, 2009 at 8:36 am

From Dan Bacher, this commentary:

“Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger yesterday backed down from his threat to veto all 704 bills and starting signing and vetoing the legislation on his desk. He then issued a proclamation calling for the legislature to meet in an extraordinary session to “address California’s water crisis.”

“Over the past few days we have made enough progress in our negotiations that I am calling a special session on water,” said Schwarzenegger. “While we still have a few remaining issues to work out, I commend the legislative leaders for their focus and commitment to solving this crisis and I will weigh all the bills on their merits.”

His call for a special session is yet one more episode in Schwarzenegger’s campaign to build a peripheral canal and Temperance Flat and Sites Reservoirs through a general obligation bond.

The resolution resurrects the “co-equal” goals of water supply and environmental “restoration” of CalFed, the joint state and federal process that has led to the unprecedented collapse of Central Valley salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, striped bass, threadfin shad, green sturgeon and other species, due to massive exports of water from the California Delta to corporate agribusiness. …”

October 13, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Michael Fitzgerald: Peripheral canal project getting bigger, unbelievable by the minute

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 11, 2009 at 8:42 am

From Stockton’s Record, this column by Michael Fitzgerald:

“A humdrum story about the Port of Stockton’s position on the proposed peripheral canal this week contained a remarkable fact: The canal may go underground.

Big time. One design envisions the canal diving underground by Stockton and flowing through four giant tunnels totaling two miles long. Another design envisions a 17-mile subterranean stretch. A third “all-tunnel conveyance” design hides the whole shebang underground all 36 miles from Freeport to Tracy through two 33-foot pipes.

“It’s not going to be like putting sprinklers in your front lawn,” said Matt Knotley, a spokesman for the Department of Water Resources.

The canal will pass deep beneath the San Joaquin and Mokelumne rivers, other waterways, railroads, etc. It’s a lower-impact, ecologically friendlier way to grab water. …”

Read more of Michael Fitzgerald’s column by clicking here.

October 11, 2009 · Filed Under Peripheral Canal

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment