For Immediate Release: July 17, 2008
Restore the Delta Contact: Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla PO Box
691088 Phone: 209-479-2053 Stockton, CA 95269 Email: Barbara
[at] Restorethedelta.org http://www.restorethedelta.org
BAD ASSUMPTIONS LEAD TO FAULTY ANSWERS FOR THE DELTA:
RESTORE THE DELTA QUESTIONS PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE REPORT
CALLING FOR A PERIPHERAL CANAL
Stockton, California -- Restore the Delta, a Delta-based
coalition including Delta farmers, environmentalists, everyday
citizens, fishermen, business leaders, the faith community, and
recreation enthusiasts, is calling into questions many of the
findings in the Public Policy Institute’s Navigating the
Delta, a report calling for a peripheral canal.
First, longtime Delta advocate, Tom Zuckerman, notes that the
report’s conclusion that Delta islands with highways were
worth saving, while others are not worth maintaining, is an
unrealistic conclusion. “How can one maintain any semblance of
land form, so as to protect highway structures, with an ocean
essentially in the middle of a few islands? For that matter,
without the semblance of land forms in the Delta, how would
water and gas lines, the railroad, and shipping channels remain
protected?”
Central Delta Water Agency’s Dante Nomellini further
explains that the inter-relationship between Delta islands
extends to seepage, wind-wave generation, and fishery and
wildlife habitat. “One cannot simply flood islands without
adversely affecting the ecosystem and infrastructure on the
surrounding islands,” says Nomellini.
Second, Restore the Delta Board Press President Bill Loyko
questions how constructing a peripheral canal could possibly
solve water needs throughout the state. “A peripheral canal,
first and foremost will not make more water. The present problem
with California’s water system is that it is short 5 million
acre-feet of water annually to meet current state needs.
Rerouting water will not solve that problem.”
Loyko also asserts that the report’s call for building a
peripheral without limits in size is merely the means by which
to take away the Delta’s last major fresh water source, and
thereby would worsen Delta water quality.
Third, Restore the Delta’s Campaign Director, Barbara
Barrigan-Parrilla, adds that the report’s analysis of water
quality is also faulty. “Their analysis assumes that water
flowing into and out of the Delta remains unchanged when the
point of diversion is changed. But everyone who lives, works,
and recreates in the Delta knows that with less fresh water
flowing through the Delta, more salt water will intrude into
local waterways.”
In fact, the report makes a highly inaccurate assumption that
water quality would improve for farmers near the San Joaquin
River. Barrigan-Parrilla says that the report’s authors have
not engaged in any conversations with local Delta experts, South
Delta farmers – some of whom have lived on the land for ninety
years.
Barrigan-Parrilla also adds that such changes in water
quality to the Delta will result in economic chaos for the
region. “Neither the PPIC Report authors nor officials with
the State have done a full-scale economic analysis of how a
change in water quality with the operation of a peripheral canal
would impact farming, recreation, or fisheries. It is estimated
that Delta farming alone contributes $2 billion per year to our
local economy, and recreation like boating and fishing another
$750 million. If the Delta is made into a salty inland sea the
economic impacts will be devastating to those living in the
surrounding five counties of the Delta.”
Last, Restore the Delta Board Member, Betsy Reifsnider, notes
problems with the report’s conclusions regarding governance
for the Delta and how these conclusions mirror problems with the
Delta Vision Strategic Draft Plan. Reifsnider explains, “The
PPIC Report concludes that consensus regarding Delta management
cannot be reached. While that statement may be true on the
surface, it unfortunately is a polite way of saying that local
Delta experts should be left out of governance decisions.”
Reifsnider also adds that the Delta Vision process is calling
for a governance council for the Delta comprised solely of
governor appointees. “Where do Delta locals have the
opportunity to assist with governing the Delta?” asks
Reifsnider. “After all, who knows the Delta best?”
All contributors are available for interviews.
##End##
PRESS RELEASE from the Public Policy Institute:
Peripheral Canal Is Best Strategy To Save Delta Ecosystem,
Ensure Reliable Water Supply
State Leaders Urged to Chart Sustainable Future for Ailing
Region
SAN FRANCISCO, California, July 17, 2008 -- Building a
peripheral canal to carry water around the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta is the most promising strategy to balance two
critical policy goals: reviving a threatened ecosystem and
ensuring a high-quality water supply for California’s
residents. That is the central conclusion of a report released
today by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC).
Under current policy, water is drawn from the Sacramento
River and sent south through the Delta to enormous pumps that
deliver water to millions of households in the Bay Area and
Southern California and millions of acres of Central Valley
farmland. This approach, which disrupts the natural water flow,
has threatened native fish and made the Delta attractive to
invasive species. Furthermore, it is unsustainable. Projected
sea level rise, crumbling ancient levees, larger floods, and
high earthquake potential will inevitably result in a
dramatically different Delta environment. This environment will
have saltier water, which will be much more costly to treat for
drinking and ultimately unusable for irrigation, the report
says.
Although it would be best for fish populations if California
stopped using the Delta as a water source altogether, this would
be an extremely costly strategy, according to the report,
authored by a multidisciplinary team including Ellen Hanak, PPIC
associate director and senior fellow, and Jay Lund, William
Fleenor, William Bennett, Richard Howitt, Jeffrey Mount, and
Peter Moyle from the University of California, Davis.
The PPIC-UC Davis team concludes that a peripheral canal is
not only more promising than the temporary and ultimately
unsustainable “dual conveyance” option – which combines
the current approach with a canal – but is also the best
available strategy to balance two equally important objectives.
“Coupling a peripheral canal – the least expensive option
– with investment in the Delta ecosystem can promote both
environmental sustainability and a reliable water supply,”
Hanak says.
The new report, Comparing Futures for the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta, builds on the findings of a 2007 PPIC study by
the same team, which concluded that the need for a new Delta
strategy is urgent. The new report was funded in part by Stephen
D. Bechtel Jr. and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation.
Among its recommendations:
Plan to allow some Delta islands to flood permanently. The
state should invest in the levees that protect high-value land,
ecosystem goals, and critical infrastructure – and allow
lower-value islands to return to aquatic habitat.
Begin the transition from the current Delta management
system. The current system is harming the native fish now, as
federal court rulings have found. Over time, it will hurt the
state’s economy. Natural forces will impose change on the
current system, and planning for change now will make
Californians less susceptible to the potentially much larger
cost of earthquake, floods, or levee failures.
Develop a new framework for governing and regulating the
Delta. With the proper safeguards, a peripheral canal can be
economically and environmentally beneficial. It is a more
cost-effective strategy than dual conveyance, which, because it
relies on continued pumping through the Delta, is an interim
solution. “Choosing a water strategy is just the first
step,” UC Davis researcher Lund says. “The technical,
financial, and regulatory decisions necessary to plan for a new
Delta are enormous. The governor and legislature need to be
involved in setting up a new framework to manage the
challenge.”
ABOUT PPIC
The Public Policy Institute of California is a private,
nonprofit organization dedicated to informing and improving
public policy in California through independent, objective,
nonpartisan research on major economic, social, and political
issues. The institute was established in 1994 with an endowment
from William R. Hewlett. PPIC does not take or support positions
on any ballot measure or on any local, state, or federal
legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any
political parties or candidates for public office.