[Water_news] 3. DWR'S CALIFORNIA WATER NEWS: WATERSHEDS - 5/31/07

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment

 

May 31, 2007

 

3. Watersheds

 

Editorial: Sea timetable is ridiculous

Imperial Valley Press – 5/31/07

 

While the state’s recommended plan for the Salton Sea realistically takes into account some Imperial County concerns, the timeline to get a restoration done at the sea is far from realistic.

California Resources Agency Secretary Michael Chrisman last week turned over to the state Legislature his selection of a plan to restore and revitalize the Salton Sea.

The sea straddles the border of Riverside and Imperial counties and long has been plagued by salt buildup, pollution and lack of freshwater inflows. Many environmentalists say the sea is terribly close to dead.

That the revitalization plan includes a cleaner but smaller sea that would still reach into Imperial County and that land would be provided for geothermal development in Imperial County both demonstrate that Chrisman and his staff actually considered input from leaders in our area.

The plan selected by Chrisman certainly has some better aspects than did previous versions coming from the state. Considering that Imperial County has little political sway in Sacramento, getting the concessions we did get is a pleasant surprise.

 

 

That said, it seems ridiculous that the $8.9 billion restoration plan has a 75-year time span. Basically, such an amount of time divorces everyone involved from accountability and does not allow those at the genesis of the restoration to see their work come to fruition.

Frankly, many of us would like to see with our own eyes a revitalized Salton Sea while our own eyes are still functioning.

Seventy-five years in this scenario might as well be 175 years. Ten, 15 or even 20 years to get this project done would be a time frame people could wrap their minds around, although paying $8.9 billion for the revitalization over 75 years rather than 15 or 20 years may make it more palatable to many in the statehouse.

The proposal still must make it through the Legislature and in the process it may face alterations. We hope our representatives in Sacramento will work hard to keep the positives for Imperial County included in Chrisman’s plan in whatever bill ultimately is approved by the Legislature.

Considering reality and all the political ramifications, we are happier with Chrisman’s Salton Sea restoration proposal than we thought we would be.

Now we would like to see is a sensible timeline attached to the plan. #

http://www.ivpressonline.com/articles/2007/05/31/opinion/ed02_5-31-07.txt

###