This is a site mirroring the emails of California Water News emailed by the California Department of Water Resources

[Water_news] 1. DWR'S CALIFORNIA WATER NEWS - Top Item for 8/25/08

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation for DWR personnel of significant news articles and comment

 

August 25, 2008

 

1.  Top Item -

 

Delta deadlock

A Peripheral Canal, new dams, court interventions and good old conservation. The quarter-century of debate has yielded no progress toward ending the impasse.

The Fresno Bee – 8/23/08

By Russell Clemings and Dennis Pollock

 

California voters rose up by a 3-to-2 margin in 1982 and torpedoed the most contentious water project in state history -- the Peripheral Canal.

The 42-mile ditch would have linked the Sacramento River to pumps near Stockton that send water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to thirsty Southern California and the San Joaquin Valley.

 

But rejection of Proposition 9 didn't settle anything. Instead, it locked state water politics, which revolve around the delta, into a chronic stalemate.

 

More than a quarter-century later, advocates for cities, farms and wildlife routinely duke it out in courtrooms and legislative halls. Crops on the San Joaquin Valley's west side die for lack of water. Fishing boats wait out a ban on salmon. No one is winning.

 

Today, some think only one thing may break the delta deadlock: an epic disaster.

 

The potential for such an event grows every year. Century-old levees within the delta grow ever weaker, raising prospects of a Hurricane Katrina-like catastrophe -- a flood of salty water that would submerge hundreds of square miles of farmland and historic towns like Isleton and Locke.

 

It might happen after an earthquake. Or it might happen as a result of erosion as sea levels rise amid global warming. No one knows when the delta will reach that tipping point. That it eventually will is viewed as certain.

 

"Major changes in the Delta and in California's use of Delta resources are inevitable," said a December report by Delta Vision, a two-year-old task force created by Gov. Schwarzenegger to find ways to avert a water disaster. "Current patterns of use are unsustainable, and catastrophic events, such as an earthquake, could cause dramatic changes in minutes."

 

The quarter-century of debate over the delta's fate since the Peripheral Canal vote has yielded no discernible progress toward a solution. Farms and urban water users regularly face cuts in their supplies to protect rare fish from the effects of pumping. About 10,000 acres of crops in the Westlands Water District were abandoned this spring after planting.

 

But the cuts haven't helped. Populations of salmon and delta smelt have crashed despite multiple court interventions. This year's California salmon season was closed even before it started.

 

The Peripheral Canal succumbed to fears that it would cost a fortune and suck the delta dry. But since its rejection, pumping from the delta to the San Joaquin Valley and Southern California has risen more than one-third anyway. In 2004, just as the fish decline became apparent, pumping reached its highest level.

 

The last effort to solve the delta's problems, called CalFed, took almost a decade and collapsed when Congress and the Legislature balked at writing blank checks for solutions designed to keep everyone happy.

 

Now, the Delta Vision task force is working on a new effort to repair the broken delta. Its biggest problem could be that every conceivable solution has its avid supporters, but also its bitter critics.

 

New dams, aggressive water conservation and farmland retirement are all on the table.

So, again, is the Peripheral Canal.

 

Prime habitat for fish

For almost a century, the central focus of California's development strategy has been moving water from the north, where it is plentiful, to the south, where it is scarce.

 

Between north and south, at the headwaters of San Francisco Bay, is the delta. Once, it was an inland marsh bigger than Rhode Island. Now, it is a maze of channels and low islands that would be flooded if not for 1,300 miles of levees.

 

Even in this altered state, the delta remains prime habitat for many fish species and a major migratory route for salmon. Once, their fry could count on being swept to sea by strong river currents. Now, they're as likely to be confused and diverted by suction from the water project pumps.

 

Water users who rely on those pumps aren't doing much better. Even as overall water exports have risen steadily, supplies for some San Joaquin Valley farms and Southern California cities have faced temporary court-ordered curbs to protect threatened fish that can die in the delta pumps.

 

The Delta Vision task force has begun work on strategies for dual goals of improving the delta ecosystem and making water supplies more reliable.

 

Hopes are high. But so were hopes for CalFed, a joint state-federal program launched in 1994, when the state was still shaking off its worst drought since the late 1970s.

 

In 2000, CalFed proposed an $8.6 billion program of water storage and improved conservation. Beset by bureaucratic rivalries and competing interests, the plans languished, even though they avoided the contentious Peripheral Canal.

 

Now, CalFed's collapse is a rare point of consensus among quarrelling parties.

"There isn't any doubt about the failure of the CalFed program," said Tom Birmingham, general manager of the Westlands Water District, one of the state's biggest farm water users.

 

No approach perfect

Simple solutions can be hard to resist.

 

* Courts stepping in because rare species are being harmed? Weaken their protections.

* Too much water being used by farms and cities south of the delta? Make them conserve.

* An inefficient system lets huge amounts of water flow into the sea in wet years? Build more dams to capture and store it.

 

A closer look reveals that each approach has obstacles.

Farmers and other major water users sometimes question the intrinsic value of a fish, whether it is a prized wild salmon or the lowly minnowlike delta smelt. They talk about balancing the needs of wildlife with those of humans.

 

To Zeke Grader, the two are the same.

 

Grader is executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations. His members have sat out this year's salmon season, not by choice, but because federal fisheries managers banned salmon fishing off California this year after record low numbers returned to spawn last fall in the Sacramento River.

Some boats that fished for salmon switched to albacore. Others doubled down on crab. Neither is a good alternative.

 

"They'd rather be fishing for salmon," Grader said. "That's been the anchor fishery for our fleet all along the coast of California."

 

Diners who want to order wild salmon are paying a high price. So are taxpayers in general. In the farm bill passed by Congress early this year, they ponied up $170 million in disaster assistance for those affected by the ban.

 

Exactly why salmon populations have collapsed is open to debate. But Grader is convinced that it has to do with the recent rise in water exports from the delta. Flows of fresh water through the delta, he said, are needed to help salmon find their way from their Sacramento River spawning grounds to the ocean and back.

"That fresh water going out to the ocean was the key thing for maintaining the estuary," he said. "If you start reducing the amount of water to that estuary, you're killing it."

 

The delta smelt is less glamorous than the salmon. But it is officially listed as a threatened species. It appears to be just as sensitive to increased pumping. And its sorry state has led to court-ordered cuts in water exports.

 

In a series of rulings late last year in cases brought by environmental advocates, a Fresno federal judge required state and federal water project operators to take several steps to protect the smelt. U.S. District Judge Oliver W. Wanger set restrictions on flows in two channels, Old River and Middle River, during months when the pumps tend to pull smelt into their intakes.

 

Next month, in a second case resulting from an environmental lawsuit, Wanger will hear evidence about water project operations and their effects on two Chinook salmon runs and one type of steelhead.

 

Some urge conservation

 

One way to live with reduced pumping is to use less water. Some environmental advocates argue that California's cities and farms could do much more there. In fact, more water could be gleaned from conservation than what is currently pumped from the delta, says Barry Nelson, a senior policy analyst for the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group.

 

"We call it the virtual river," he said.

 

In recent reports, the Oakland-based Pacific Institute has estimated how much could be conserved. One conclusion: Urban areas could cut use by 30%, saving 2.3 million acre-feet annually. That's about half what the two big projects have pumped in an average year over the past two decades.

 

"The savings that are available through water conservation and efficiency are as great as some of the water supply projects, and they can be achieved with much lower economic and environmental costs," said Heather Cooley, a senior research associate at the institute.

 

Most of the institute's work focuses on things like requiring more efficient plumbing fixtures, and using tiered pricing to penalize the biggest water users. A second report will make recommendations for farm water users.

 

"Those who are wasting water should be sent a very strong price signal," Cooley said.

 

Some of the institute's proposals represent major changes. Lawn sizes could be limited. Homeowners could be forced to replace inefficient plumbing when they sell. To the extent that such measures aren't widely adopted, the institute's estimates may be high.

 

Similarly, some farmers question how much room there is for further conservation in their operations.

 

Westlands grower John Diener has spent nearly a million dollars in the past five years on systems that use less water. He scoffs at the suggestion that he and his fellow farmers could do more.

 

"If that were the case, they would already have done it," he said. "It's not in our economic interest to waste water."

 

One large local irrigation supplier, the Israeli firm Netafim, says it has supplied Westlands growers with micro-irrigation and drip systems for 160,000 acres this decade.

 

In an even more drastic move, Westlands has bought out growers on about 100,000 acres and shifted their water to other land. But having shaky water supplies makes that increasingly difficult.

 

"At some point, it's unaffordable to retire land," Westlands grower Mark Borba said. "It requires investors who purchase a bond, and they look at the collateral and say that is not a good investment."

 

Retiring land from farming also harms small towns that rise and fall with the farm economy. And Birmingham says retiring farmland does not even cut delta water exports if the saved water is used elsewhere, as in Westlands.

 

Others want new dams

 

Among water users, talk about the delta often turns to increasing the water supply, or at least increasing the reliability of existing supplies. Often, that means new dams.

 

When it issued its 2000 report, the CalFed program identified a dozen dam sites. Eight years later, Schwarzenegger and Sen. Dianne Feinstein are promoting a $9.3 billion state water bond, of which $3 billion would go to storage and $2 billion to improving efficiency.

 

If recent history is any guide, new dams will face many obstacles. Since completion of the 2.4 million acre-feet New Melones Dam in 1979 on the Stanislaus River, the only new dams built in California have been smaller, with reservoirs one-third that size or less.

 

As a result, the water bond faces uncertain prospects despite its bipartisan backers. Since its introduction in July, it has made no progress toward the November ballot, as the Legislature has struggled to pass a state budget.

 

The long-maligned Peripheral Canal would face similar hurdles.

 

Once politically radioactive -- Prop. 9 was opposed by more than 90% of voters in some Northern California counties and by more than 70% even in the central San Joaquin Valley -- the canal has gained traction in recent months as a possible solution.

 

Advocates say it would help fish by separating the pumps from the delta and help water users by creating a direct connection between the pumps and Northern California's rivers. But estimates of its costs range as high as $20 billion, and suspicions linger that it would open the door to further pumping increases without any lasting benefit to the delta's fish or their habitat.

 

Canal backers such as Birmingham are optimistic anyway. Last month, the Public Policy Institute of California, a nonprofit center based in San Francisco, issued a report endorsing a Peripheral Canal. Among other things, the report gauged the canal's cost to be in the same range as expected damages from a catastrophic failure of delta levees.

 

Birmingham and other water users embraced the report enthusiastically.

 

"The handwriting is on the wall," he said. "If we are going to conserve fish in the delta, improve the delta ecology and sustain the economy of California, we're going to have to completely change the way we convey water from north of the delta to south of the delta."

 

Birmingham said that water users would even be willing to pay for a Peripheral Canal themselves.

 

Environmental advocates are skeptical of that. In any case, they say any delta fix must deal first with the crash in fish populations and other ecological damage.

 

"What we've said about a Peripheral Canal is the same thing we've said about more surface storage," Nelson said. "Show us a proposal and we'll look at it carefully."

After the Public Policy Institute report, five congressional Democrats from Northern California -- George Miller, Ellen Tauscher, Doris Matsui, Mike Thompson and Jerry McNerney -- quickly issued a joint statement expressing doubts about the Peripheral Canal's proposed resurrection.

 

On the other side, the Delta Vision task force's latest draft recommendations say a Peripheral Canal-like "isolated facility" is "the linchpin to managing Delta water supply and ecosystem functions."

 

Tom Graff, senior counsel for the Environmental Defense Fund, was an opponent of the 1982 Peripheral Canal vote. His group still says fisheries must be taken care of first. But he says the institute's report, in particular, has "actually moved the ball somewhat in the direction of a canal."

 

It's not the first time observers of California's water wars have sensed change. Breakthroughs are forever just around the corner. CalFed was the great hope of the previous decade. Delta Vision is the great hope for this decade.

 

Will the second succeed where the first and its predecessors failed? What will it take for the warring sides to reach consensus, rescue the delta's ecology, save its beleaguered levees and stabilize supplies for water users?

 

"That's the great unanswered question," Nelson said. "Is California up to addressing what is clearly the greatest water management challenge of the last half-century in the absence of a disaster? Or is it going to take a catastrophe?" #

http://www.fresnobee.com/263/story/817658.html

 

No comments:

Blog Archive