A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment
July 23, 2007
3. Watersheds
STEELHEAD RESTORATION PROJECT:
GIVING FISH A CHANCE; Project aims to remove barriers to help steelhead - Oakland Tribune
Salton Sea: Clock ticking on restoration bill -
Editorial: Don’t limit early sea work -
DELTA ISSUES:
Editorial: A P.C. peripheral canal; A loaded term in water wars, the well-worn proposal to route supplies around the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta deserves a look -
Guest Column: Charting
Guest Column: Peripheral Canal Debate Returns; Charting California's water future; Panic makes poor policy - San Francisco Chronicle
Guest Opinion: Our water system's out of whack - Woodland Daily Democrat
Editorial: Remain vigilant against Delta canal - Tracy Press
Editorial: Delta canal plan holds great risk for north state -
Schwarzenegger Directs Immediate Actions to Improve the Deteriorating Delta,
STEELHEAD RESTORATION PROJECT:
GIVING FISH A CHANCE; Project aims to remove barriers to help steelhead
By Julia Scott, staff writer
HALF MOON BAY — Gilbert Gossett remembers watching the hundreds of silvery steelhead trout traveling up Apanolio Creek in the early 1970s, passing through a culvert near his home.
"You couldn't walk 20 or 30 feet in the creek without running into a school of fingerlings," he recalls.
In those days, Apanolio Creek ran strongly. Fishermen downstream caught healthy, 8- to-10-inch steelhead, and Gossett's culvert sat flush against the stream bed, with plenty of room for thefish to jump up and follow the creek to their primordial spawning grounds.
Over time, however, the creek became channelized, partly from fallen trees and sediment. The constant velocity of the water ate away at the stream bed, causing it to sink. And the culvert — essentially a metal water tunnel, caked by concrete and a dirt road passing over it — became perched in the air, too high for the steelhead to access.
By 1999, steelhead trout throughout
After years of effort and collaboration with various agencies and local environmental groups, the San Mateo County Resource Conservation District has finally been able to secure funding to remove two of the most destructive barriers near Half Moon Bay: one on Frenchman's Creek, which flows out to the ocean, and one in Apanolio Creek, which flows into Pilarcitos Creek.
Whether in the form of dams — some of which date back to the 1800s — or culverts, fish barriers are common on the
"There's definitely some that still make in it through in high flows, but it's severely restricted," said Kellyx Nelson, executive director of the Resource Conservation District.
The project, which began last week with a crew from the California Conservation Corps weeding the creek banks, will stretch through mid-October, when the culverts will be replaced with span bridges. Engineers will also re-contour about two hundred feet of creek bed and add a series of stepped pools, together with boulders, that will give the fish a chance to jump up the stream and rest before continuing. The banks will be revegetated with redwoods and other native trees.
In spite of steelhead's status as a threatened species, it took seven years to secure the project permits from eight separate state and federal agencies, said Nelson. Funding was another matter: the construction and monitoring alone will cost about $600,000 for both creeks, and grants were obtained from sources as diverse as the State Water Resources Control Board, the California Department of Fish and Game, the California Coastal Conservancy, and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, which owns two major dams at the top of Pilarcitos Creek.
Gossett noted with irony that the Department of Fish and Game is now paying to remove many of the culverts their agency approved decades ago. Starting in the 1980s, he said, agency representatives would walk the creek, noting the decreased water flow and dwindling steelhead population.
"As our knowledge of the natural world evolves, our techniques will change ... There are times when we thought we did something well but we didn't," said Nelson, noting that in this case, it was up to humans to undo damage caused by other humans.
Many of the same agencies collaborated on the Pilarcitos Creek Restoration Plan in 1996, a document that noted the perilously low levels of one-thriving steelhead throughout the Pilarcitos watershed, which flows from the
Several fish barriers in Mills Creek and upper Arroyo
Tim Frahm, of the Pilarcitos Creek Advisory Committee, said culverts aren't the only reason the steelhead are suffering: some years, the water level drops so much that Pilarcitos Creek, of which Apanolio is a tributary, doesn't even meet the sea. Humans have drawn on the creek with their wells for 100 years. A wastewater treatment plant discharges treated water into it, and storm water pushes toxins into it.
Without more studies, it's difficult to tell whether the culverts were the primary problem, said Frahm. But removing them is a step in the right direction.
"Anytime you can remove a barrier, you set the stage for fish recovery. In the meantime, if you can address the other issues that are affecting them, you've laid the groundwork for them to spawn."
The Resource Conservation District hopes to do just that with a new Pilarcitos watershed management plan released last month.
The draft report, which Nelson plans to present at a public meeting in August, aims to fill in the gaps in scientific knowledge about how much steelhead populations have rebounded since the first impediments were removed. It will also recommend ways for locals to reduce their reliance on the water supply, such as developing a recycled water plant, and single out the remaining fish barriers for extraction. The two remaining culverts on Apanolio Creek are at the top of the list, said Nelson. #
http://origin.insidebayarea.com/sanmateocountytimes/localnews/ci_6441863
By Jonathan Athens, staff writer
The clock is ticking for
State lawmakers are slated to end this legislative session Aug. 31 and they will not reconvene until January.
One of the major political players in the longstanding debate on restoring the sea on Thursday expressed his concerns that time is running out.
Politicking by other stakeholders, specifically environmental groups, could shift control of a proposed $8.9 billion restoration plan to the state rather than local stakeholders, Salton Sea Authority Executive Director Rick Daniels said.
“The central issue is governance. How are we going to organize ourselves?” Daniels said.
Last month lawmakers decided to put California Resources Secretary Mike Chrisman temporarily in charge of implementing the restoration plan, but an amended version of Ducheny’s bill currently being debated by lawmakers would keep Chrisman’s agency as the lead agency on restoration “unless and until” lawmakers agree to establish a new governing body on or after Jan. 1.
“We need to keep this as high a priority as possible,” Daniels said.
Daniels said he’s concerned that if lawmakers fail to approve a new governing body in time that includes local decision makers, efforts to restore the sea could be skewed to emphasize habitat and wildlife restoration at the expense of other critical projects such as building a dam and establishing a recreational lake.
California Resources spokesman Sandy Cooney said, “We want a governing structure that is completely inclusive of local interests.”
The Salton Sea Coalition, which consists of environmental groups, did not return calls placed by the Imperial Valley Press seeking comment.
The state’s restoration plan, expected to take 75 years to completely implement, is the sum of three years of talks and engineering studies from various stakeholders.
Daniels said time is running out for lawmakers to come to a consensus — water transfer agreements that shift water to
Scientists have predicted the sea will start drying up in a matter of eight years and building a dam could take as long as six years.
The
http://www.ivpressonline.com/articles/2007/07/21/news/news01.txt
Editorial: Don’t limit early sea work
It seems the fight over restoring the
Now the politicians and special interest groups are digging their hands into the deal — and could be fouling it up.
We knew the expensive, 75-year plan would not be approved without changes, but what is happening to the bill is problematic, to say the least. It appears that the environmental lobby has added language to the bill that would limit state and federal expenditures over the first five years to habitat and water quality improvements as well as air-quality monitoring. That’s it.
While those areas obviously need attention, they are not enough. The environmental impact report as well as soil testing to find the best place to locate a dike on the sea needs to be done quickly. These are important steps that can’t wait five years to be started. The dike or dam, which will help clean the sea and create the lakes, will take six years to build.
So by 2011 the construction needs to be under way because by 2017 a full third of the water that flows into the sea will be lost because of the
We also support forming a new governing body that includes local decision makers. This project is much too important to leave in the hands of state or federal officials only.
We understand that this is a large, complex and costly project. We also understand that the input of many is not only required but will ultimately be good for the sea.
At the same time, we believe that the people who will most be impacted by what does or does not happen with the
State lawmakers cannot sit on this and must establish a new
http://www.ivpressonline.com/articles/2007/07/22/opinion/ed02_7-22-07.txt
DELTA ISSUES:
Editorial: A P.C. peripheral canal; A loaded term in water wars, the well-worn proposal to route supplies around the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta deserves a look
"
The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is an expanse of islands and levees that's home to farmers, vacationers and a unique native ecosystem. It's also a conduit for more than a third of
Those users saw it as an extension of the system that greened their cities.
Much has changed in the quarter of a century since. Hurricane Katrina's spectacular floods demonstrated why protecting a state's water supply from old levees might make a lot of sense. Environmentalists who opposed the peripheral canal assumed that leaving the delta "alone" (that is, as an engineered freshwater system, with State Water Project pumps operating at its southern flank) would be a good way to preserve its ecosystem. That has not proved true. Scientists now know that delta species thrive when salinity fluctuates, as it did for millions of years. New research suggests that a canal might help mimic natural fluctuations, especially as global warming raises sea levels. And the old North-South political battle lines have shifted. Water districts in
A peripheral canal is not, and should not be, a fait accompli. To the extent that the governor's speeches this week gave the impression that "conveyance," as he calls it, is more than an option, Schwarzenegger has done the state a disservice. But to the extent that canal talk prompts the state to grapple with its long-term water infrastructure needs, the governor is to be commended. Californians should surrender old hysterias and give a considered delta solution — perhaps one that incorporates a peripheral canal — a chance to emerge. #
Guest Column: Charting
San Francisco Chronicle – 7/22/07
By Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto
It's easy to get lost in
But rescue missions for the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta itself -- where an environmental and economic disaster is unfolding -- are another story. While fish, farms and drinking water are all endangered, proposals to fix the delta drift into political swamps, never to be seen again.
Last year, I introduced a bill to change the way that water for drinking and irrigation is moved from the north end of the delta to the south. The most encouraging responses I got were the noncommittal pleasantries that sensible people use to humor the deluded. The legislation that is now Senate Bill 27 stalled.
Since then, a judge temporarily shut off the massive pumps that send water south from the delta in order to save the endangered delta smelt. Cities and farms were forced to think about other ways to deliver water. Also, a major think tank, the Public Policy Institute of California, re-sounded the alarm about the delta's decline: native salmon and smelt are disappearing; delta lands are sinking; the sea is rising; levees that protect farms and towns are eroding; water for drinking and irrigation is getting dirtier, it found in its report.
These are merely the latest reminders that disaster looms. Scientists estimate a 2-in-3 chance of a Katrina-like catastrophe within the delta within 50 years. Levees will fail, towns and farms will flood and drinking water for 23 million Californians will be polluted as saltwater pushes upstream. Expect the price tag to be $40 billion.
Hardly anyone disputes this grim forecast. Yet too often the response is hand-wringing, feuding and procrastinating. Enough. If you agree with the diagnosis, you have to agree that the sensible course is to reconfigure the plumbing in the delta. What's delusional is sticking with the status quo and hoping for the best.
A revised version of SB27 has passed the state Senate and moved to the Assembly. The unanimous vote in the Senate is a hopeful sign that the delta paralysis is ending.
The bill now requires state officials to propose a delta plan by Jan. 1 so the Legislature can act on it and put it on the November 2008 ballot.
Six months is a short deadline. But the governor has already appointed a Blue Ribbon Task Force on the matter and more research is on the way. What is lacking is the resolve to choose among options already thoroughly studied.
To get the discussion going last year, the bill proposed a specific solution, a "conveyance," to move water around, instead of through, the delta. I still think that makes sense. Since then, however, the PPIC's study has suggested other alternatives.
The PPIC study considered nine alternatives, and eliminated four of them. My bill directs the Legislature to choose one of the remaining five, or a hybrid of two or more.
All of those plans would address the damage that state and federal water systems cause in the delta by first moving water through it, and then pulling water from its southern end, in ways contrary to the natural flow. At times of low flow, the huge pumps change the direction of the flow, confusing salmon swimming toward the ocean. Delta smelt are sucked into the pumps and destroyed.
As bad as this is for the fish, it is not optimal for people either. Drinking and irrigation water are pumped after Sierra snowmelt has passed by farms, after it has marinated in marshes, and near the point it begins to mingle with saltwater pushing through San Francisco Bay from the ocean. Why not grab it when it is clean and fresh?
The PPIC study gives the highest consideration to solutions which divert drinking and irrigation water around the delta, or isolate it within the delta.
Repeatedly, rescue plans for the delta have collapsed under the canard that any physically workable solution requires some pivotal interest -- farmers, environmentalists, Southern California cities,
Such fears -- including the Bay Area suspecting that ever-more-thirsty Los Angeles would "steal its water" -- killed the attempt 25 years go to build a "peripheral canal'' around the delta.
Saving the delta does not require someone to climb on the sacrificial altar. Whatever the specific engineering plan, the financing and operational philosophy can accommodate all interests. We can't give everybody everything they want, but we can give them what they need.
Water users, urban and agricultural, would pay increased fees for water delivered through new canals or aqueducts. They would agree, as well, to use less water per capita, leaving more for the delta's fish, birds and plants.
In return, water users would get water that is cleaner than the water pumped to them from the delta. Their supply would be more reliable -- far less vulnerable to a large earthquake or flood, or to shutdowns needed to protect salmon or smelt.
The extra fees would finance environmental restoration in the delta, which would begin to return to its natural cycle of ebbs and flows, benefiting the native species. Funding would be available, as well, for the water conservation efforts that are an essential element in any delta solution.
And finally, real guarantees against a raid on
Everybody gives some and everybody gets some.
Altering a system as complex as the delta carries risks for the environment, for farms and cities -- and for elected officials. They pale next to the certainties of inaction -- a devastated delta that nourishes neither fish, nor farms nor
Cool, clear water series
Water cutbacks in Marin and
Peter Gleick, whose institute is a co-sponsor with the Commonwealth Club, will give the Aug. 2 keynote address. The series includes 24 programs covering a wide range of water issues facing
For a detailed schedule, visit www.commonwealthclub.org/water.
State Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, represents the state's 11th Senate District and chairs the Senate Environmental Quality Committee. He is the author of SB27. #
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/07/22/EDGOTQ8JMP1.DTL
Guest Column:
San Francisco Chronicle – 7/22/07
By Peter Gleick, Ph.D, a MacArthur fellow, is the president of the Pacific Institute in Oakland
Ignoring a problem tends to make it worse. A worsening problem tends to lead to panic. Panic tends to make for bad public policy. Welcome to 21st century
We are experiencing our driest year in more than a decade, and our policymakers are panicking. They are proposing that you and I cough up billions of dollars in new bonds to subsidize new dams and other large infrastructure that, at best, won't contribute to meeting our needs for decades to come and, at worst, will siphon off precious funds needed for faster and more effective water solutions.
We may need some kind of peripheral canal, an idea that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger wants to reintroduce, but we also need to stop fantasizing that one more $1 billion dam or pipeline will, at long last, solve our water problems. Pushing through these expensive proposals during a crisis doesn't show "vision."
Basically, we all need to take a deep breath and come up with a plan. It has been an extremely dry year, but our taps aren't going dry and our farms aren't blowing away. We need short-term solutions in case the drought continues next year, long-term thinking for the future and a willingness to tackle the water taboos long neglected in
We can meet our needs this year by making smart, careful efforts to ratchet down our wasteful and unnecessary water uses.
Taking shorter showers will help, but replacing old toilets, showerheads and washing machines with efficient models can substantially cut our largest indoor water uses permanently. Ironically, our green governor vetoed a water efficiency bill last October that would have freed up enough water to serve 1.5 million new Californians at far lower cost than the new dams he now wants us to buy.
We must also begin implementing longer-term, more permanent responses. We have to stop pretending that groundwater is free, and start monitoring and managing this precious resource. We can acknowledge the progress our cities have made in improving water efficiency, but let's also admit that much more remains to be done, such as replacing wasteful lawns with low-water using gardens. Water districts must reinvigorate programs to fix leaks and expand the use of recycled and reclaimed water where appropriate. Where the environmental and economic implications are well understood and resolved, desalination plants may have a role to play for high valued uses.
It is also time to stop letting agriculture off the hook.
To date, the agricultural sector has largely failed to take responsibility for its share of our water problems and to participate in implementing real solutions.
We should temporarily take some cropland out of rotation, if we have to, and consider permanently retiring poor quality lands, replace flood irrigation with sprinklers and drip systems, eliminate perverse incentives for growing cotton and other high-water crops, and encourage farms to switch to vegetables and other more water efficient or drought-tolerant crops.
Cool, clear water series
Water cutbacks in Marin and
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/07/22/EDG48R353Q9.DTL&hw=water&sn=027&sc=932
Guest Opinion: Our water system's out of whack
Woodland Daily Democrat – 7/22/07
By Dave Cogdill, Senator, a Modesto resident who represents Senate District 14 in the California Legislature
I am writing to provide an added perspective on a critical issue that has garnered much media attention of late, that of water policy. An adequate and reliable source of water supply is essential for economic vitality and quality of life in every region of our state. Yet, nearly 30 years have passed since the state has made improvements to its water system on the scale required to keep pace with its growing population and changing needs.
The time to address
This year is on track to be one of the driest years on record. Throughout the state, water experts have been stating that we would be in trouble if it were not for our full reservoirs (thanks to a wet winter in 2005-06). Even still, many communities have called for both voluntary and involuntary conservation, or rationing.
If a couple of dry years could threaten the availability of water for the current number of Californians, imagine how much more dire a couple of dry years will be 10, 20 or 30 years from now if we do not increase our supply and California continues to grow at the rate of nearly a half-million people per year.
In addition to
The Delta is the hub of
Additionally, the Delta is exceedingly susceptible to earthquakes. One large magnitude earthquake could decimate the Delta and the system used to convey water to
While addressing water supply, the precarious nature of the Delta, and conveyance issues, we must also continue to make progress with water use efficiency and conservation efforts.
Water is a precious resource that cannot be wasted. We need to use it wisely and effectively. Efforts such as this can effectively reduce demand on new water supplies to a degree. Although we will still need additional supply, we may not need as much down the road if we continue to implement efficiency and conservation measures.
Given the heightened attention to water issues in the Capitol and throughout the State, including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's vocal support for a comprehensive approach, problems with the Delta and the shutting off of the pumps, and a potential, impending drought, the time is now for something to be done. That is why I continue to push the issue within the Legislature. #
http://www.dailydemocrat.com/search//ci_6438047
Editorial: Remain vigilant against Delta canal
Tracy Press – 7/19/07
In 1982, state voters overwhelmingly rejected plans for a peripheral canal around the Delta to improve water reliability and guarantee quality to a thirsty
So what’s changed in 25 years? Little, except perhaps the motivation for change.
The water that flows to the state and federal pumps northwest of
With post-Katrina syndrome and facing global warming and drought issues, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has again morphed into an action hero. Standing on the state government-owned Twitchell Island Tuesday morning, Schwarzenegger directed the Department of Water Resources to take immediate steps to improve conditions in the Delta, help restore its natural habitat and protect the Delta smelt and other animal and plant species.
He left it to his assistants to mouth the words "peripheral canal." And they couched them in softer terms, perhaps to not terrify voters whose livelihoods depend on the Delta. Said Jerry Johns, deputy director of the Department of Water Resources, "The way (the state and federal governments) move the water isn’t the best for the Delta. There are operational issues of facilities versus fish. Once we solve the fish problem (Delta smelt), we can fix the reliability. It will require new infrastructure."
Hence, the governor’s $5.9 billion comprehensive water plan that dedicates $4.5 billion to new dams and reservoirs and state Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata’s proposed $5 billion bond that calls for $2 billion for water storage.
There is a generational difference in the focus on the Delta. In 1982, most state officials didn’t appreciate what Johns Tuesday called "a tremendously important jewel." Today, agreements, laws and court decisions are protecting the Delta. However, this kinder and gentler view shouldn’t preclude us from maintaining our vigilance against water robbery. #
http://tracypress.com/content/view/10236/2244/
Editorial: Delta canal plan holds great risk for north state
Redding Record Searchlight – 7/22/07
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger last week began stumping for a series of large water projects that could be built with a water bond in February, including two new reservoirs and a canal that would bypass the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the diseased heart of
The canal -- a revival of the infamous old
But the improvements would put the north state's water at great risk.
The canal would almost certainly increase the capacity to move water to
For starters,
Already in dry years, the dropping lake leaves an enormous, ugly bathtub ring that puts hardship on marinas and boat ramps and leaves tourists canceling their reservations. What would stop larger water shipments from drawing the lake down to drought levels every year? And, in the long run, what would that do to the
Even if total water shipments from the Central Valley Project were stable, it's almost inevitable that water users south of the Delta would get more. Simple arithmetic shows that would leave less for users in the north, including Shasta and Tehama counties.
Because of the Delta bottleneck,
Once the rest of their water can be reliably moved, they'll demand a more equal split -- at our expense. Locally, the cities of
What's more, water-hungry districts' lawyers could wander north to challenge old water rights that might not stand up under the hot lights.
The bottom line,
That means Southern California-size demand for our resources and Southern California-style conservation measures pushed on us -- despite state laws that theoretically protect the rights of source regions like the north state.
Without serious new guarantees for our region, the state's headwaters, it's hard to see how we the governor's canal holds anything but danger for the north state. #
http://www.redding.com/news/2007/jul/22/delta-canal-plan-holds-great-risk-for-north-state/
Schwarzenegger Directs Immediate Actions to Improve the Deteriorating Delta,
News Release, Office of the Governor – 7/18/07
YubaNet.com
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger directed the Department of Water Resources to take immediate action steps to improve conditions in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, to help restore its natural habitat and protect the Delta smelt and other species. The Governor also identified more than $120 million in specific Delta restoration projects to be part of his comprehensive water plan, which he is calling on the Legislature to pass by the end of this year. He made the announcements on
"Today, I am calling for actions to help restore the Delta, the largest estuary on the West Coast and home to hundreds of native plant and animal species. The Delta is also one of the most vulnerable areas of our state. It faces dangers of contamination from a natural disaster or rising sea levels. And, we saw an example of its vulnerability when we had to shut off the pumps for nine days to protect the threatened Delta smelt," said Governor Schwarzenegger.
"The Delta is one of
Without immediate changes, the Delta will fail as a reliable water source, according to state water experts. Climate models and current weather patterns require that we prepare for more severe floods, droughts and rising sea levels, which the Delta must be able to withstand to protect
Building on his Strategic Growth Plan from last year, the Governor introduced a $5.9 billion comprehensive water plan in January. The Governor's plan invests $4.5 billion to develop additional surface and groundwater storage. The plan also includes $1 billion toward restoration of the Delta, including development of a new conveyance system, $250 million to support restoration projects on the Klamath, San Joaquin and
Today, the Governor issued immediate directives to protect the Delta. Using existing resources, the Department of Water Resources will implement these actions:
- Prevent the spread of invasive species. Invasive species like the quagga mussel compete with native species like the smelt.
- Improve research on the Delta Smelt. State and federal agencies will upgrade and continue operation of a smelt culture laboratory.
- Screen Delta agricultural intakes to protect smelt. The state will install fish screens to protect the smelt when water is diverted from the Delta to irrigate state-owned lands on
- Restore the North Delta's natural habitat. The state will restore tidal wetlands and aquatic habitats at Cache Slough to provide spawning areas and promote the production of organisms that the smelt and other native fish eat. Dutch Slough is also a candidate for longer-term restoration.
- Improve Central Delta water flow patterns. The state will study and, if feasible, modify water circulation in the Central Delta near Frank's Tract to protect fish and improve water quality.
- Improve our ability to respond to Delta emergencies. The state will enhance Delta emergency response and levee failure plans and stockpile materials to repair damaged levees.
The Governor also called for additional actions to be included as part of a comprehensive water package, negotiated after the budget is passed. Totaling at more than $120 million, these actions could be funded out of the $1 billion proposed in the Governor's comprehensive plan, or by other funding sources:
- Restoring additional Delta habitats such as Dutch Slough. ($48 million)
- Helping local water agencies take actions to conserve and manage limited water supplies.
- Improving emergency planning in the event of an earthquake or flood. ($74 million)
- Assessing the feasibility of additional screening at state facilities to protect Delta smelt and expediting projects to modify water circulation and improve water quality. ($2.25 million)
- Funding subsidence and carbon sequestration projects on
The actions are not intended to replace recommendations from ongoing Delta planning efforts. Instead, they are to make incremental improvements until long-term plans are in place. They will be compatible with any long-term Delta plan and will not preclude future restoration options.
The Governor has directed the Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force to develop a Delta management plan. The task force will present its findings and recommendations by January 1, 2008 and its Strategic Plan by October 31, 2008. The Bay Delta Conservation Plan is also underway, being developed with broad participation from water agencies, environmental organizations and local representatives. The $1 billion proposed in the Governor's comprehensive plan will be used to fund their recommendations. #
http://www.yubanet.com/artman/publish/article_61459.shtml
####
No comments:
Post a Comment