[Water_news] 2. DWR'S CALIFORNIA WATER NEWS: SUPPLY - 10/17/07

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment 

 

October 17, 2007

 

2. Supply -

 

Opinion:

Lester Snow: Conservation alone can't fix water crisis

Sacramento Bee

 

Editorial:  Moving beyond the water bond

Failure to craft a bond measure presents a chance to tackle the deeper issues about water.

Los Angeles Times

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

 

Opinion:

Lester Snow: Conservation alone can't fix water crisis

Sacramento Bee – 10/17/07

By Lester Snow – Director, DWR

 

The battle cry to "fix the Delta" is being heard loud and clear. The region, a vital estuary that provides water for 25 million Californians and 2.5 million acres of farmland, is in the midst of a severe ecological crisis. Much attention has been focused on the plight of the Delta smelt and a promising "Delta Vision" process launched by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to find long-term solutions for the environment and water supply reliability.

 

But fixing the Delta will also take changes to other parts of our water system, including the development of new surface storage.

 

The governor's water plan calls for more surface storage. We need this water for many reasons. Our state is growing – adding nearly the equivalent of a state of Wyoming each year. Climate change has arrived, bringing sea level rise and changing how and when precipitation falls. Delta water deliveries to Central Valley farmers, the Bay Area and Southern California are being drastically cut to protect a threatened species of fish.

 

But there are also specific and direct benefits for the Delta. In fact, we cannot fix the Delta without more surface storage. That's because additional water is needed to stabilize the environment and fish populations in the Delta. The water is needed to improve water quality in the Delta, benefiting local residents as well as farmers and residents who receive water supplies from the region. Reservoirs will help stabilize the hydrograph and respond to the higher river peak flows we are experiencing in the winter. This helps protect aging Delta levees from flooding. Capturing water in new reservoirs also provides an important source of drinking and irrigation water for Californians during dry years.

 

Nothing less than the future of the Delta is at stake in the current debate at the state Capitol over California's water infrastructure.

 

Opponents of building new reservoirs argue that California already has plenty of reservoir capacity. Second, they argue that we can solve California's growing water crisis with conservation and recycling. And third, they assert that water storage should be paid for only by local water agencies, not the statewide public.

 

The last major state-built surface storage projects were completed 34 years ago and are not adequate to serve today's population. Due to limited storage capacity and drought conditions this year, the state's major reservoirs are storing 2.5 million acre-feet less than normal for this time of year.

 

Conservation is important to our water future, but conservation alone cannot solve California's growing water crisis. Even the most successful conservation measure would not have allowed us to benefit from the flood flows we experienced two years ago because we were simply limited by the amount of available space in our existing reservoirs.

 

This water, had some of it been captured, could have been used to maintain water quality in the Delta, protect threatened fish populations and complete water deliveries to cities and farms when the Delta pumps were shut down to protect endangered fish.

 

The public has a strong interest in building and operating new reservoirs. Some critics claim state government should not agree to build new reservoirs until private water users agree to pay for all or most of it. They point to former Gov. Pat Brown and the State Water Project as a model to replicate. But the fact is the Legislature approved the funding to build the State Water Project before a single private contract was in place to pay for any portion of it. Government leaders then had a vision for California's water needs, and they took the lead in building the project knowing that local governments and water agencies would pay their fair share of the cost if they wanted to enjoy the benefits.

 

California needs a balanced and comprehensive plan in order to protect the state's water supply in the face of growing uncertainty. The future of the Delta and of the state depends on it.#

http://www.sacbee.com/110/story/436093.html

 

Editorial:  Moving beyond the water bond

Failure to craft a bond measure presents a chance to tackle the deeper issues about water.

Los Angeles Times – 10/17/07

 

It's no tragedy that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Democrats in Sacramento may fail to reach a compromise on a water bond for the February ballot. Sure, it's a setback for constituents in the Central Valley who sought extraordinary levels of statewide backing for dams in their communities. And it signals a political defeat for the governor, who has made water policy a centerpiece of his agenda this year. Nevertheless, it could still be a victory for California.

With climate change and population growth looming on the horizon, the state must secure its water supply. But despite Schwarzenegger's repeated assurances, building a few expensive dams is not the key to achieving this goal. Neither is the alternative proposal from state Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland), who seeks a bond measure to fund regional groundwater cleanup, conservation and storage projects. The most crucial project remains reworking the way the state moves water through the environmentally sensitive Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.

Postponing action on a bond in no way derails several ongoing initiatives that aim to fix the delta, including the governor's own widely lauded Delta Vision Process, a study whose findings are slated to be delivered by the end of the year. Indeed, putting off a bond gives voters, freshly reminded of the importance of updating the state's water system, an opportunity to hear what the experts have to say about the state's most pressing water crisis before they're asked to decide on any "comprehensive" plan.

It's unclear what will happen with the bonds now. Schwarzenegger's aides are still trying to get their proposal on the ballot in February, but their prospects are uncertain. The two sides might come up with a compromise measure for the November 2008 ballot, or Californians might be faced with the dismal prospect of deciding on two competing measures next fall. That last alternative is the worst. Asking voters to choose between dueling bonds -- neither of which solves the main problem -- would mark a historic failure.

Sensibly re-plumbing a parched state of 37 million people and 26 million acres of farmland isn't easy. We elected our governor and legislators to tackle such problems. When they petulantly toss the task to voters, offering "solutions" that are hard to understand, not open for amendment and insufficient to solve the state's problems, it's nothing less than an abdication of duty.

The conversation on this bond may be coming to a close, but a promising discussion about California's water future could now get off the ground -- if politicians in Sacramento will let it.#

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-waterbond17oct17,0,7012532.story?coll=la-opinion-leftrail