Department of Water Resources
A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment
July 23, 2007
5. Agencies, Programs, People
LEVEE INSPECTIONS:
State says levees ‘unsound’ - Lathrop
SACRAMENTO
Editorial: In Natomas, flood protection has to come first; FEMA should limit further development until levee improvements are a reality - Sacramento Bee
WATER POLICY:
Guest Column: We must secure state's water future - Contra Costa Times
Guest Opinion: Growing
Editorial: Craft
Editorial: Act soon to avoid
Editorial: Auburn Dam, not
NEW FLOOD CONTROL AGENCY:
Flood control agency in works - Marysville Appeal Democrat
WATER PRIVATIZATION:
Editorial:
SAFETY IN THE DELTA:
Safety advocates hand out free life jackets in Delta - Contra Costa Times
LEVEE INSPECTIONS:
State says levees ‘unsound’
Lathrop
By Ben Marrone, staff writer
The state says levees around Lathrop and
A state water board has declared that the levees that protect most of Lathrop and parts of
Recent test drilling by the state Department of Water Resources showed that enough water would seep underneath the levees during a flood to make them unstable, Deputy Director Leslie Harder wrote in a June 19 letter to the cities.
More than a general warning, the state’s letter could mean large swaths of Lathrop and
In that case, homeowners with federally backed mortgages in the flood-prone areas would be forced to buy insurance, and builders would face heavy limitations.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency, which is developing the maps, offered earlier this month to recognize the levees for the next two years while its officials determined whether they were adequate — but only if levee owners and nearby cities signed an agreement that the levees were OK.
Officials from Reclamation District 17, the local body that maintains and owns easements for the levees, have already said the levees are fine, and city officials from
“At the end of the day, they hold the states accountable,” Harder said last week.
But reclamation district attorney Dante Nomellini said it’s unclear who is responsible for the levees. He complained that the state is holding the district to a higher standard than the federal government requires.
“The (state) is, in my view, seeking to set a new standard,” Nomellini said. “And that’s OK, but it should be evenly enforced.”
Water seepage has always been a problem, Nomellini said, but the district’s ability to patrol the levees and fight leaks during a flood was effective enough in 1990 for FEMA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to certify the levees.
By encouraging federal officials to mark local areas as flood-prone, Nomellini added, the state will drive away development money that could be used to make the levees stronger.
But Harder was adamant that the area’s protections do not stand up to federal standards.
“The levee does not meet current design factors that the federal government requires. It’s not even close,” Harder said. “It looks like it needs major structural improvement.”
Federal officials say levees must be able to withstand the worst 1 percent of floods — the “100-year flood.”
The agency has yet to decide whether to accept a temporary agreement to extend the area’s accreditation without the state’s signature, FEMA spokesman Frank Mansell said.
Nomellini and
Stone met with a federal engineer Monday, July 16, and said he thinks the early approval is “certainly a possibility, though the FEMA spokesman said he could not confirm that at this time.”
Still, Stone said people who live in areas protected by levees should take out flood insurance no matter the outcome of the mapping process. #
http://sunpost.net/content/view/1044/1/
SACRAMENTO
Editorial: In Natomas, flood protection has to come first; FEMA should limit further development until levee improvements are a reality
Sacramento
Everywhere flood experts look in the
Many of these levees are a century old and built on foundations of sand. When the rivers run high, water flows underneath these levees. Too much flow, and the levees could collapse.
Because local, state and federal flood agencies were diligent in investigating these problems, the federal government last year declared that Natomas no longer met minimum standards for flood protection. In a post-Katrina era, it won't be the last
Because the stakes are so high, the decisions of the Federal Emergency Management Agency will be crucial in coming months.
Natomas will be a test case. Communities nationwide will be watching to see how FEMA administers its regulations in one of the deepest and fastest growing floodplains in the country. Congress and taxpayer groups will also be watching, since the agency's actions could either increase or decrease the liabilities faced by the National Flood Insurance Program.
One certainty in Natomas is that property owners will be required to purchase flood insurance. Beyond that, FEMA has several options: It could ban new development in Natomas, or limit building to infill and elevated structures until Natomas' levees are upgraded. Or it could adopt a more lenient A-99 designation for Natomas, which would impose no land-use restrictions.
Not surprisingly, Sutter and
Back in the 1980s, the precedent of granting the A-99 designation was made less egregious by the city's decision effectively to suspend housing construction in Natomas until the levees were upgraded. This time, there's no sign local governments plan to adopt similar restrictions. Indeed, there are strong signs that both counties and the city plan to approve thousands of homes even during this vulnerable period.
Much has changed since the 1980s. Hurricane Katrina revealed the horrific cost of deep flooding, and recent court decisions have made state taxpayers increasingly liable for levee breaks. While a building moratorium would do nothing to help protect the 67,000 people who now live in Natomas, it would ensure that the city isn't adding to the risk of life and property while the levees are being worked on.
Given the city's stance, FEMA must act in the national interest and limit new development in Natomas. It should do the same in any flood basin that doesn't meet a minimal level of flood protection. #
http://www.sacbee.com/110/story/284061.html
WATER POLICY:
Guest Column: We must secure state's water future
Contra Costa Times – 7/22/07
By Lester Snow, Director, Department of Water Resources
LAST WEEK, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger toured the Delta for one of a series of events that he used to talk about his plan for
Today, the Delta's ecological health and its water-export reliability are threatened by aging levees, seismic risks, invasive species, toxic runoff and other factors.
We need both short and long-term solutions to protect this important natural resource.
With a growing population, climate change and aging infrastructure, we have an enormous challenge to make sure
That is why the governor has proposed a comprehensive water strategy to help
New infrastructure is needed to reliably supply the domestic, industrial and agricultural water needs of
We must capture more water from storms and snowmelt run-off.
The governor's plan calls for a $4.5 billion investment in surface and groundwater storage.
The funding in the governor's plan also will help implement his Delta Vision, a process created last September to develop a long-term Delta management plan.
One way to begin restoring the Delta's delicate ecosystem and ensuring water deliveries is by exploring the possibly of building an alternative conveyance system in the Delta.
The governor's Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force and a broad based stakeholder group will help determine the best ways to restore this estuary.
Very real factors outside of the Delta are also threatening the state's water supply.
Planning and conservation are essential to provide water to communities throughout
Conservation is a constant necessity in all water planning, but it's especially critical in dry years, such as this one.
A dry winter reduced this year's snowpack to record lows, leaving us with less summer runoff to feed the Delta and fill our reservoirs.
If
Our water system must be ready to cope with too much water, or too little, and to accommodate shifting watershed precipitation and runoff patterns.
The Delta is one of the most vulnerable areas in our state. Whether it is a natural disaster, contamination from rising sea levels, or the recent shutdown of the state water project pumps to protect threatened Delta smelt, we can no longer ignore threats to the Delta and
We need a lasting solution that will protect our environment, and our water supply.
Moving quickly to address flood safety, water storage, conveyance and more conservation is the only path to securing our water future. #
http://www.contracostatimes.com/columns/ci_6437798
Guest Opinion: Growing
Redding Record Searchlight – 7/20/07
By Doug LaMalfa, Assemblyman, represents the 2nd Assembly District
Earlier this year, Gov. Schwarzenegger proposed raising nearly $6 billion to upgrade
Carried by Sen. Dave Cogdill as Senate Bill 59, and co-authored by me, the governor’s plan will provide two new reservoirs, one in the Sacramento Valley and one in the San Joaquin Valley, to ensure that the state’s growing population has safe and clean drinking water, shortages are prevented in dry years and our state’s farmers have water to grow their world-famous crops.
Unfortunately, Senate Bill 59 didn’t make it through the legislature; however, the plan is still widely supported and still has a possibility of success though introduction of a newer, very similar bill or a bond measure that could appear on next year’s ballot.
I believe that
The governor’s proposal will help prepare our state for the future by directing billions of dollars toward long-term water supply projects. Thankfully, the vast majority of these proposed funds will be spent directly on constructing water storage facilities, rather than costly and inconclusive studies. Of the billions that would be invested under this plan, three-quarters would be used on the proposed Sites and Temperance Flat reservoirs, and increased groundwater storage. When constructed, these two reservoirs will provide in excess of 2 million acre-feet of additional storage, yielding over 500,000 acre-feet of new water each year, enough to supply hundreds of thousands of California families with water and help meet the growing water demands of our state.
While other water plans have been proposed, they fail to recognize the vital need to prepare for population growth and would instead direct hundreds of millions of dollars to untested environmental projects and studies, none of which would help provide a drop of water for families or farmers. If we gathered all the bond money wasted on fruitless studies over the years, we would likely be able to provide new water storage with those funds alone.
I believe that Gov. Schwarzenegger’s proposal moves us toward real solutions for
http://redding.com/news/2007/jul/20/growing-california-direly-needs-new-reservoirs/
Editorial: Craft
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata stirred up
It's laudable that leaders of both parties are facing up to this challenge of growing need and fragile supply. But they're reaching too hastily for voters' wallets.
First, they need a consensus on what to do - and flesh out the specifics - before asking taxpayers to foot another water bill. And they should look at using some of the funding from the $10 billion in water-related bonds that voters passed last year.
In pitching his nearly $6 billion bond package, Schwarzenegger says the state needs to get on with building its water infrastructure, including two dams, one near Fresno and the other near Sacramento. Perata's $5 billion bond package would let local and regional water authorities decide on their own projects.
Should the state resume building dams? The governor thinks so, but it's tremendously expensive, and many environmentalists and Democrats will oppose it.
What's the best way to improve the fragile health of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the nerve center of the state's water system?
The governor last year appointed a task force to figure this out, but its report isn't expected until the end of this year.
How should state, regional and local authorities share decision-making and costs of building new waterworks? Perata's proposal raises this question, but it needs more fleshing out and leaves open the possibility that a patchwork of disconnected local projects might not help much.
The governor has been trying for months to push his water plan through the Legislature. But the package, SB 59, died in a Senate committee in April, with Democrats opposing the dams.
Hand it to the governor for keeping up the pressure for a comprehensive solution to
Water must be a priority this year. But leaders need to get the strategy and the costs straight before asking the public to ante up more money. #
http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_6441285?nclick_check=1
Editorial: Act soon to avoid
Contra Costa Times – 7/22/07
FOR TOO MANY YEARS,
By the middle of this century,
Urban and suburban areas are likely to expand in some of the most arid parts of the state. Even with this growth,
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger recognizes the challenge facing
In addition to money already approved for water projects and flood protection, the governor is seeking another $6 billion in water bonds. The money could be used for new reservoirs, other water storage and perhaps an aqueduct around the Delta.
Schwarzenegger hopes that the time is ripe for a political agreement on how to prepare for
Increased conservation, particularly in agriculture, more underground storage and perhaps some desalination should be part of any long-range water plan. But they are not enough.
One wonders what would happen if the pumps sending water to the Central Valley and Southern California are slowed down as proposed or if the Sierra snowpack is reduced for a few years, or if we have another drought like the one in the late 1970s.
These "ifs" are cause for concern as
At the same time, the Delta is suffering from a decline in several species of fish. The threatened ecosystem makes it impossible to predict how much water can be pumped to the 25 million Californians who depend on supplies that flow through the Delta.
Certainly, Delta protection must be addressed, and it is. The state is speeding up levee repairs, boosting efforts to combat invasive species, placing new screens for water intakes to protect fish and restoring wetlands in the northern Delta.
However, there is still the possibility that the only way to get a dependable supply of fresh water from Northern California to the Central Valley and
Some Bay Area water agencies, such as Contra Costa Water District, should be allowed to tap into it as well.
It is too early to make any decisions about any Delta bypass until a task force appointed by Schwarzenegger last year makes its recommendations. But neither should an aqueduct be rejected out of hand as long as an assured amount of fresh water is allowed to flow into the Delta.
A long-term water plan could include a new reservoir and a Delta aqueduct. Bypassing the Delta would keep fish out of pumps, and a reservoir could supply the Delta with adequate volumes of fresh water in dry periods and droughts.
What is needed now is the political will by the Legislature to take bold action now while there is still time to avoid a water crisis. #
http://www.contracostatimes.com/opinion/ci_6437797
Editorial: Auburn Dam, not
By Dennis Wyatt, Managing Editor
The state's population is expected to boom from 37 million to 48 million by the year 2025.
The 806-page California Water Plan report released in 1998 noted the state already has an annual shortfall of 1.6 million acre feet of water.
By 2025, the shortfall will expand to 2.9 million acre feet. This is not good news. Southern California is already using
As water demands grow in
The California Department of Resources offers three potential solutions - the political snake pit known as the
The
Everyone in urban water planning looks at the amount of fresh water flowing into the Bay as a waste. Many farming interests share that position while environmentalists view any attempt to stem the flow of fresh water as having the same impact on the Bay-Delta environment as dropping the atomic bomb had on
The 44-mile canal would skirt the Delta to deliver fresh water from the Sacramento River to the pumps at the start of the California Aqueduct near
Save the water from flowing into the Bay. It is a dangerously, simplistic solution. There are court mandates regarding salinity levels. Salt intrusion has to be kept below a certain level or else the federal government hijacks fresh water to add to the flows flushing the Delta.
If the Peripheral Canal takes Sacramento River water headed for Southern California and bypasses the Delta, that leaves only the San Joaquin River system to make up for any shortfalls of fresh water. The most likely target for cleansing the Delta is the New Melones Reservoir on the
It is closest to the Delta and it has the least political baggage accompanying large releases. Water storage behind the New Melones is seriously over committed just as it is elsewhere such as behind Friant Dam. There is a difference, though. Some agencies haven't been able to tap New Melones water due to environmental delays. The agencies aren't as powerful with federal and state lobbying muscle as those elsewhere on the
Backers of the canal think this is the best option to manage Bay-Delta salinity issues while maintaining the quality of water being exported from Northern California to quench Los Angeles' ever growing thirst.
Raising the height of Shasta Dam is fraught with environmental concerns as is building the Auburn Dam.
The Auburn Dam, though, can add the most storage and effectively handle one of the heaviest precipitation watersheds on the western slopes of the Sierra. The reservoir could hold 2.1 million acre feet - almost enough to meet statewide water shortfalls projected for 2020.
The dam site already has had trees and vegetation removed and other improvements such as a foundation and bridges in place. After hippies were unable to stop the dam from flooding a nude beach, the earth rumbled in 1972 to effectively stop Congress from authorizing the money for actual construction until seismic safety issues were studied further.
The Auburn Dam - operated in tandem with Hell Hole, French Meadows and Folsom Dam reservoirs - offers a powerful one-two punch of expanding water storage for growing south state urban needs as well as enhancing flood protection.
The Shasta Dam proposal only increases storage and only by half the amount of Auburn Dam. The
The Auburn Dam is a case of getting more bang for the buck.
Environmentalists argue more conservation will squeeze out more water. Experts believe
We need more water for our growing cities, industries and agriculture. If steps aren't taken now, it will come down to a health and safety issue. Water could be taken from agricultural users. It wouldn't, though, be a once in a while "borrowing." It would be permanent. This would prompt farmers to put even more pressure on underground water sources already showing signs of serious overdrafting or else may force land to go fallow.
When other states take their rightful claim to Colorado River water,
The winner in a north versus south battle with health and safety issues at stake isn't likely to be anyone north of the
That's why it is prudent for
http://mantecabulletin.com/main.asp?SectionID=24&SubSectionID=54&ArticleID=816
NEW FLOOD CONTROL AGENCY:
Flood control agency in works
Marysville Appeal Democrat – 7/20/07
BY John Dickey, staff writer
A regional flood control agency in Sutter and
Sutter County Administrator Larry Combs said agreements for the Sutter-Butte Flood Control Agency, which will spearhead levee improvements needed to protect residents on the west side of the Feather River, should be completed in mid-August.
The agency received a boost this week when
The City Council authorized Mayor John Miller to sign the agreement and chipped in $525,000 to get the agency started.
Levee District 1 will have to vote again at a special meeting Aug. 6 after approving an early version of the agency’s agreement that was later changed at
LD 1 has also agreed to give $50,000 toward the agency.
The Sutter-Butte Flood Control Agency, which will replace the West Feather River Levee Reconstruction Agency, will have the power to issue bonds, implement assessments and enter into contracts for repairs.
Proposed membership includes
The 13-member agency will function similar to the Three Rivers Levee Improvement Authority, an agency created in
A year later, in November 2006 after Proposition 1E was passed, LD 1 talked about increasing the pressure to get the dormant WRFLA going after the agency had met once in 2006, after a director asked several times to get the agency back together.
Supervisor Dan Silva said the agency’s mission was unclear until Proposition 1E was passed.
“I don’t know what it would have been doing up until this time,” said Silva.
The agency may have even have spent money unwisely had it been formed earlier, said Silva.
“I call it wasteful – to do a job that isn’t quite ready yet,” Silva said.
The new agency might have taken shape a month or two earlier, but Butte County’s chief executive officer and county attorney both quit, said Silva.
Silva noted that TRLIA’s formation in 2004 was prompted by houses in harm’s way and Reclamation Board action. #
http://www.appeal-democrat.com/news/agency_51473___article.html/county_sutter.html
WATER PRIVATIZATION:
Editorial:
Power to the people.
That's what members of the Concerned Citizens Coalition of Stockton demonstrated on July 17 when the Stockton City Council voted unanimously to flush away a $600 million water-privatization agreement.
The Concerned Citizens - once characterized by city officials as an insignificant organization - have established themselves as important watchdogs of the public good.
Joining the Sierra Club and League of Women Voters in
In January, San Joaquin County Superior Court Judge Elizabeth Humphreys agreed with them. The council's vote ended the city's appeal.
Only one current council member, Leslie Martin, had voted for the original agreement in 2002. This time, she voted not to pursue the deal any further.
The effort to privatize water and wastewater operations - promoted heavily by former mayor Gary Podesto - was a textbook example of good intentions gone awry. The collapse of the deal also demonstrates that process does matter.
The original agreement was the focus of "Thirst," a 2004 PBS documentary that used the
For many
The arrogance of that maneuver helped motivate the lawsuit.
The City Council's 5-0 vote on July 17 is rooted in recent events at the sewage-treatment plant. City officials have pressured OMI-Thames managers to follow through on capital improvements. The London-based company needed the original 20-year agreement to be completed fully in order for it to pay off financially.
Now, almost $2 million in city funds will be spent to pay the coalition's legal fees.
OMI-Thames officials must complete some upgrades and pay the city about $2.1 million for unfinished business.
The temptation is to declare the failed four-year attempt at privatization a waste.
However,
Now, the Concerned Citizens Coalition - and all
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070723/A_OPINION/707230309
SAFETY IN THE DELTA:
Safety advocates hand out free life jackets in Delta
Contra Costa Times – 7/22/07
By Andrew Becker, staff writer
BETHEL ISLAND -- Boating fatalities in California are up 48 percent this year, so the state Department of Boating and Waterways handed out nearly 100 free inflatable life jackets as part of its campaign to promote boater safety.
A "Wear It California" campaign team stationed at Sugar Barge Marina distributed the suspender- and belt-style jackets on land and out on the Delta. The jackets are valued at $100.
Sponsored by the U.S. Coast Guard, the Department of Boating and Waterways, the National Safe Boating Council, and BoatU.S., the campaign runs through Labor Day, according to Gloria Sandoval, a Department of Boating and Waterways spokeswoman.
Although common complaints about life jackets are that they are too bulky and hot or interfere with tan lines, Sandoval said that four out of five drowning victims would have survived if they had worn one. In 2005, 87 percent of
On Saturday, Ryan Selsor, 21, and Ian Osugi, 20, both college students, patrolled the Delta, offering life jackets, floatable key chains and beverage containers to boaters.
"We want everything to float," Selsor said.
Osugi tossed two belt-style inflatable life jackets to
The campaign team has traveled up and down the Delta to the areas where boating accidents are most common, Sandoval said.
Last year, a Times analysis of 10 years of Coast Guard data showed that boaters who didn't know or ignored basic safety rules caused 88 percent of the accidents on Northern California's inland waterways. In the Delta, that figure was 92 percent.
Despite promoting boating safety, the Department of Boating and Waterways refuses to release data detailing when and exactly where accidents take place, saying state harbor codes block release. On Friday, department lawyer Joy Fisher rejected a public records request from the Times for electronic data on boating accidents, saying the newspaper had no right to it. #
DWR's California Water News is distributed to California Department of Water Resources management and staff, for information purposes, by the DWR Public Affairs Office. For reader's services, including new subscriptions, temporary cancellations and address changes, please use the online page: http://listhost1.water.ca.gov/mailman/listinfo/water_news. DWR operates and maintains the State Water Project, provides dam safety and flood control and inspection services, assists local water districts in water management and water conservation planning, and plans for future statewide water needs. Inclusion of materials is not to be construed as an endorsement of any programs, projects, or viewpoints by the Department or the State of
No comments:
Post a Comment