As opposition to Governor Jerry Brown's plan to build two massive tunnels under the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta increases every day, Brown administration officials continue to mount a full court press for the project's completion.
Dr. Jerry Meral, Brown's point man for the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the peripheral tunnels, recently said, "the Delta cannot be saved," in spite of administration claims that one of the co-equal goals of the plan is "ecosystem restoration."
Then in an op-ed piece for the Stockton Record, Meral now claims, "No additional water withdrawal from the Delta is being sought under the application for this permit." (http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20130519/A_OPINION06/305190304/-1/NEWSMAP)
Restore the Delta (RTD) responded to Meral's latest statement by asking, "So why then should rate payers from Southern California and tax payers throughout the state be asked to pick up the tab for a $50 billion project that will not make more water for Southern California or save the Delta?"
That is a very good question. How can the Brown administration possibly ask the taxpayers and rate payers to pay for a $50 billion pork barrel boondoggle, putting Californians in debt for generations to come, when the project makes absolutely no sense?
Restore the Delta emphasized, "There is a better solution to California's water challenges than to build Peripheral Tunnels that won't create one drop of new water and will not save the Delta." Restore the Delta's plan is here: http://www.restorethedelta.org...
Of course, we know that the real purpose of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, under the guise of the co-equal goals of "ecosystem restoration" and water supply "reliability," is to create the infrastructure to export more Northern California water for corporate agribusiness to continue irrigating toxic land on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley and for the oil industry to expand the environmentally destructive practice of fracking.
As I asked Meral, deputy secretary at the California Natural Resources Agency, at a BDCP meeting on March 20, "Can you give one example from U.S. or world history in which the construction of a diversion canal or tunnel has led to taking less rather than more water out of an ecosystem?"
Neither Meral or any Brown administration official has been able to answer this question.
Meral made his controversial comments, "BDCP is not about, and has never been about saving the Delta. The Delta cannot be saved," while speaking with Tom Stokely of the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) in a private conversation after a meeting with Northern California Indian Tribes on Monday, April 15.
"I was flabbergasted because that's not what we've been told by politicians and state officials," said Stokely after the conversation. "I was surprised at his candor because I've always known that BDCP is not about restoring the Delta."
"We did not put the statement out for publicity gain or just to try to embarrass somebody," said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, RTD Executive Director, who witnessed Meral make the comment. "The reason we let this statement out was to show the true intent of the tunnels project," which she said is to increase pumping Delta water south.
Both Stokely and Barrigan-Parrilla said Meral had been speaking about his concern that a "mega-flood" could inundate the Central Valley someday, as it did in 1861-62, when Meral made his statement.
A spokesman for the Natural Resources Agency told the LA Times the remarks were "taken out of context" and that there are no plans calling for Meral's resignation. Congressman George Miller and four other leading Democratic Representatives called for Meral's resignation after he made his controversial remarks. (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/political/la-me-pc-jerry-brown-water-jerry-meral-delta-water-plan-resignation-20130425,0,7348556.story)
It is important to understand that Delta advocates and supporters of Central Valley salmon and Delta fish restoration aren't backers of "doing nothing," as Natural Resources Secretary John Laird suggests is the "alternative" to the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to build the peripheral tunnels in his recent letter in the Sacramento Bee (http://www.sacbee.com/2013/05/17/5417541/managing-to-scientific-uncertainty.html)
The Brown administration needs to halt the BDCP process and instead adopt the following proactive measures:
First, install state-of-the-art fish screens at the state and federal pumping facilities in the South Delta to avoid the deaths of millions of fish including protected salmon and steelhead at the pumps every year.
Second, reduce water exports from the Delta to no more than 3 million acre feet in all years, in keeping with the flow criteria of the State Water Resources Board.
Third, adopt the series of creative recommendations outlined in the Environmental Water Caucus reduced water exports alternative, including an aggressive statewide water conservation program and the retirement of toxic farmlands. (http://www.ewccalifornia.org/reports/REDUCEDEXPORTSPLAN.pdf)
The Brown administration needs to abandon it's tired Nineteenth Century solution - the Bay Delta Conservation Plan - to solving Twenty-First Century ecosystem and water supply problems.
Caleen Sisk, Chief of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, summed up the danger that the peripheral tunnels pose to California's fish, people and rivers.
"The common people will pay for the peripheral tunnels and a few people will make millions," emphasized Sisk. "It will turn a once pristine water way into a sewer pipe. It will be all bad for the fish, the ocean and the people of California."
Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Restore the Delta, will voice her strong opposition to Governor Jerry Brown's plan to build two Peripheral Tunnels under the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta on Tuesday, May 14, at the Senate Natural Resources & Water Committee hearing at the State Capitol in Sacramento.
"We oppose the rush to build a project that would exterminate salmon runs, destroy sustainable family farms and saddle taxpayers with tens of billions in debt, mainly to benefit a small number of huge corporate agribusinesses on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley," said Barrigan-Parrilla. "Governor Brown's Peripheral Tunnel proposal is fatally flawed. It's a bad investment.The total cost is unknown; the financing unsecured, and the only certainty is water customers will pay billions and billions in increased rates."
"There's a better solution than to drain the Delta, burden taxpayers with tens of billions, and extinguish native salmon to mainly benefit a small number of huge corporate mega-farms that are unsustainable," she explained. "This plan would increase water rates for Southern Californians, who would not get any increase in water but would subsidize San Joaquin farmers, who would get more water. The taxpayers of the south pay the debt for the water facilities, while much of the water is virtually donated to the agribusiness giants of Kern."
Senators Lois Wolk, Chair of the Senate Select Committee on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, and Fran Pavley, Chair of the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Water, will convene the joint hearing Tuesday. This is the second of two Senate hearings on the BDCP.
Those participating in the event include the following individuals:
Roger Patterson, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
David Guy, Northern California Water Association
Greg Cartrell, Contra Costa Water District
Jason Peltier, Wetlands Water District
Don Nottoli, County of Sacramento
Doug Obegi, Natural Resources Defense Council
Brent Walthall, Kern County Water Agency
The hearing will begin at 9:30 a.m. at the State Capitol, Committee Room 112.
A broad coalition of fishermen, environmentalists, Indian Tribes, family farmers, Delta residents and elected officials opposes the construction of the 35 mile long tunnels because they will hasten the extinction of Central Valley Chinook salmon, Delta smelt and other fish species.
Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, exposed the peripheral tunnel plan for the scam that it is. "The common people will pay for the project and a few people will make millions. It will turn a once pristine water way into a sewer pipe. It will be all bad for the fish, the ocean and the people of California," Sisk said.
Restore the Delta is a 10,000-member grassroots organization committed to making the Sacramento- San Joaquin Delta fishable, swimmable, drinkable, and farmable to benefit all of California. Restore the Delta works to improve water quality so that fisheries and farming can thrive together again in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. For information about Restore the Delta, go to http://www.restorethedelta.org
As the campaign against the peripheral tunnels builds momentum, the Brown and Obama administrations on May 8 set a formal deadline of October 1 for the release of the draft Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) and accompanying environmental documents for public review and comment.
The centerpiece of the proposal is two massive tunnels, 35 miles long and 40 feet in diameter, that will divert water from the Sacramento River to corporate agribusiness interests on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. A coalition of fishing groups, Indian Tribes, environmentalists, family farmers and Delta residents oppose the construction of the peripheral tunnels because they say the project will hasten the extinction of Central Valley Chinook salmon, Delta smelt and other fish species.
A joint statement from the two administrations claimed the BDCP will "enable the state to make significant progress toward achieving the co-equal goals of securing California's water supply and restoring the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta ecosystem."
"One calamitous storm or natural disaster-driven by climate change-could jeopardize the entire Delta, destroy its ecosystem and cut off water to 25 million Californians," said Governor Jerry Brown. "This agreement with our federal partners moves us another step closer to being more prepared for an uncertain future in California."
The Brown administration said the completion of the proposed plan and accompanying Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) is the "culmination of more than six years of user-funded water planning and study." After considering public comment, the state and federal agencies will complete the review process and determine "the most appropriate ecosystem conservation and water conveyance plan for adoption and permitting."
"It's important that we continue to take an open and transparent approach as we evaluate this proposal to strengthen California's water security and restore the health of the Delta," claimed U.S. Interior Secretary Sally Jewell.
"This is an aggressive deadline to issue the environmental analyses for public review and comment that will require a great deal of important work from both our state partners and the Administration. But with California's water system at constant risk of failure, and the continuing impacts to imperiled fish, we can't afford the dangers or costs of inaction," Jewell said.
On July 25, 2012, Governor Brown and former Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced their renewed commitment to the fast-tracking of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan in a press conference in Sacramento as fishermen, environmentalists, tribal members and Delta residents held a protest rally at the State Capitol protesting the plan.
"In the past two months, several revised and updated chapters of the BDCP have been made public. This week, state and federal agencies will provide a preliminary, consultant draft of the EIR/EIS in an unprecedented commitment to transparency," the statement concluded.
According to the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA), Brown made a brief appearance at the 2013 ACWA Spring Conference & Exhibition this week, where he briefly discussed BDCP and told attendees, "I'm going to do everything humanly possible to get it done. We're going to get it done with your help."
Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Restore the Delta, responded to the state-federal announcement by stating, "The governor's new Oct. 1 deadline is an attempt to thread the needle between pressure from the water-takers, who are threatening to stop paying for the BDCP, and the delay he faces because the science stubbornly still shows his tunnels would kill the Delta."
The campaign by Delta advocates to stop the construction of twin peripheral tunnels under the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta received a big boost Tuesday when Sierra Club California called on Governor Jerry Brown to abandon his "out-of-step position" on the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas.
"You and your administration are relying too heavily on an old-fashioned approach to resolving California's water demand challenges at a time when more updated ideas and alternatives are needed," the organization said in a letter to the Governor delivered on Monday. "Your solution is to build something big before you leave office. Yet, building something big and old-fashioned isn't going to ensure-especially during a time of climate disruption-that the people of California and the environment will be guaranteed the reliable and essential water supply needed at a time it is most critical."
Kathryn Phillips, the group's director, signed the letter on behalf of its more than 380,000 members in the state. She said the letter culminates a month of controversy surrounding the Brown Administration's proposal to develop two giant tunnels, and massive accompanying infrastructure, to draw water from the Sacramento River before it arrives in the Delta.
Based on recently released chapters of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP), the tunnel proposal "will be disastrous for the environment, the cultural resources and the economy in the Delta," the letter says. "Whereas the Delta Reform Act speaks to dual goals of ecosystem restoration and reliability of Delta supplies, in the context of programs for long-term reliability statewide, the documentation released for the BDCP seems intent on maintaining or increasing high exports out of the Delta to benefit the State Water Project and Central Valley Project contractors at the expense of the environment."
The campaign by Delta advocates to stop the construction of twin peripheral tunnels under the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta received a big boost today when Sierra Club California called on Governor Jerry Brown to abandon his "out-of-step position" on the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas.
"You and your administration are relying too heavily on an old-fashioned approach to resolving California's water demand challenges at a time when more updated ideas and alternatives are needed," the organization said in a letter to the Governor delivered on Monday. "Your solution is to build something big before you leave office. Yet, building something big and old-fashioned isn't going to ensure-especially during a time of climate disruption-that the people of California and the environment will be guaranteed the reliable and essential water supply needed at a time it is most critical."
Kathryn Phillips, the group's director, signed the letter on behalf of its more than 380,000 members in the state. She said the letter culminates a month of controversy surrounding the Brown Administration's proposal to develop two giant tunnels, and massive accompanying infrastructure, to draw water from the Sacramento River before it arrives in the Delta.
Based on recently released chapters of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP), the tunnel proposal "will be disastrous for the environment, the cultural resources and the economy in the Delta," the letter says. "Whereas the Delta Reform Act speaks to dual goals of ecosystem restoration and reliability of Delta supplies, in the context of programs for long-term reliability statewide, the documentation released for the BDCP seems intent on maintaining or increasing high exports out of the Delta to benefit the State Water Project and Central Valley Project contractors at the expense of the environment."
The letter notes that giant water engineering projects developed decades ago - including the damming of the Tuolumne River at Hetch-Hetchy Valley in the 1920's, the diversion of the San Joaquin River at Friant Dam shortly after World War II, and construction of the New Melones Dam in the 1970s - "have helped delay development of a sustainable water policy in our current era."
"It is critical that the current debate about the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta system not lead us to repeat history's mistakes," the letter states.
Finally, the letter calls on the Governor to provide leadership on water policy that invests in commonsense conservation and infrastructure improvements that aren't driven by a few big water user agencies.
"California needs 21st-century leadership on water policy that fully considers a wide range of alternatives that address how we can reduce water loss from existing infrastructure, preserve water quality, improve conservation across the state and across sectors of the economy, and restore watersheds to help California meet its essential public health, economic, and environmental goals. We are asking you for a commitment to fiercely protect and fight for the public trust of surface and groundwater resources, which belong to all Californians," the letter says.
"Rather than rushing to a tunnel solution, we urge you to reconsider your position on the Delta and explore alternative plans to lead California in a bolder, more enlightened and comprehensive direction on water supply policy," the letter concludes.
Sierra Club California is the legislative and regulatory advocacy arm of the Sierra Club's 13 chapters and more than 380,000 members and champions in California.
A broad coalition of environmental groups, Indian Tribes, fishing groups, family farmers, Delta residents and elected officials opposes the construction of the peripheral tunnels because it would likely lead to the extinction of Central Valley salmon, Delta smelt and other fish populations.
The Sierra Club letter follows the controversy over recent comments by Jerry Meral, deputy secretary at the California Natural Resources Agency, that "BDCP is not about, and has never been about saving the Delta. The Delta cannot be saved," as reported in Restore the Delta's "Delta Flows" newsletter (http://www.restorethedelta.org/or-is-it-the-point/)
Meral made his comments while speaking with Tom Stokely of the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) in a private conversation after a meeting with Northern California Indian Tribes on Monday, April 15.
"I was flabbergasted because that's not what we've been told by politicians and state officials," said Stokely after the conversation. "I was surprised at his candor because I've always known that BDCP is not about restoring the Delta."
"It's therefore ironic that the Brown administration is calling this a Bay Delta Conservation Plan," emphasized Stokely. "You can keep the same acronym, but in reality it's the Bay Delta CONVEYANCE Plan. It is and always has been about moving water, not saving the Delta."
"We did not put the statement out for publicity gain or just to try to embarrass somebody," said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Restore the Delta Executive Director, who witnessed Meral make the comment. "The reason we let this statement out was to show the true intent of the tunnels project," which she said is to increase pumping Delta water south."
In a May 3 letter in the Sacramento Bee, Barrigan-Parrilla noted, in response to the Bee's May 1 editorial "Flimsy justification to call for a resignation": "Restore the Delta did not call for Natural Resources Agency Deputy Secretary Jerry Meral's ouster. It is the other Jerry who worries us the most. There is mounting evidence that the Brown administration is trying to force science and all water stakeholders to submit to their predetermined decision to build the Delta tunnel."
On April 22, Earth Day 2013, Congressman Jerry McNerney (D-Stockton) requested the Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development of U.S. House Appropriations Committee to take action to ensure that a cost-per-taxpayer analysis be conducted on any plan related to the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the peripheral tunnels.
He also wrote to the Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies of the U.S. House Appropriations Committee to request that language be included in this year's appropriations bill preventing the Department of the Interior from evaluating any permit related to the BDCP before a comprehensive analysis is conducted of how to improve the state's water supply and preserve the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
"I will use all of the tools at my disposal to help ensure that any plan moving forward related to the BDCP is based on comprehensive analysis and accurate science," Congressman McNerney. "As it stands, the current plan includes no input from the farmers, families and small business owners who stand to see their livelihoods destroyed, and we cannot let that happen. These people must have their voices included in the process."
Congressman McNerney suggested the inclusion of the following language in this year's Energy and Water Development and Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations bills:
No federal agency shall issue a permit or assist in the planning of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan until the pro rata cost of such plan for taxpayers who file income tax returns in California is determined and a report issued to the House and Senate on such costs.
The Department of Interior shall not evaluate any permit application in relation to the Bay Delta Conservation Plan unless the plan includes a comprehensive analysis of how to improve and expand water storage, water reuse, and water recycling efforts in order to reduce water exports from the San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.
Estimates for BDCP place the project's cost anywhere from $12-20 billion, according to McNerney. To date, the state of California has not identified the cost to taxpayers. Furthermore, there has yet to be a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis on the proposed plan. The federal government conducts cost-benefit analyses on a wide range of projects and environmental rules, and the BDCP should be held to the same standards and oversight.
"No plan should be moving forward without the input of all parties that stand to be affected, and the Department of Interior should be assisting in that process. To decimate one of the state's most robust water resources without comprehensive input, scientific study, and a thorough examination of the potential cost of such a project is foolhardy and a disservice to the taxpayers from across California who will foot the bill," said Congressman McNerney.
Natural Resources Secretary John Laird and Governor Jerry Brown have constantly portrayed the BDCP as a visionary effort based on "science" to accomplish the "co-equal goals" of "ecosystem restoration" and "water supply reliability." However, a Brown administration official recently admitted that the Bay Delta Conservation Plan has nothing to do with saving the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the estuary that salmon, steehead, sturgeon, Delta smelt, striped bass and a host of other species depend on for survival.
While speaking with Tom Stokely of the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) at a meeting with Northern California's Native American Tribes on Monday, April 15, Natural Resources Agency Deputy Director Jerry Meral said, "BDCP is not about, and has never been about saving the Delta. The Delta cannot be saved."
"I was flabbergasted because that's not what we've been told by politicians and state officials," said Stokely after the meeting.
"Now if Governor Brown and State officials would just stop pretending it's a habitat plan to save fish when speaking with the press," according to Restore the Delta's "Delta Flows" newsletter (http://www.restorethedelta.org/or-is-it-the-point/)
"Let the Delta speak and the way to save it will be clear, because if you believe it can't be saved... the largest Delta, the most salmon runs, the critical fresh water to salt water life will change EVERYTHING in the DELTA, including some unknown changes to HUMANS!" said Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe. "The change will be harmful, more harmful than the claims of not being able to save the DELTA!"
Recreational anglers, commercial fishermen, Indian tribal leaders, family farmers, environmentalists, Delta residents and many elected officials strongly oppose the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the peripheral tunnels because they say it will lead to the extinction of Central Valley salmon, steelhead and other fish species.
Natural Resources Secretary John Laird and Governor Jerry Brown have constantly portrayed the BDCP as a visionary effort based on "science" to accomplish the "co-equal goals" of "ecosystem restoration" and "water supply reliability."
"Science has and will continue to drive a holistic resolution securing our water supply and substantially restoring the Delta's lost habitat," said Laird on March 28. (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/28/1197717/-More-Bay-Delta-Conservation-Plan-Documents-Released)
However, a Brown administration official recently admitted that the Bay Delta Conservation Plan has nothing to do with saving the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the estuary that salmon, steehead, sturgeon, Delta smelt, striped bass and a host of other species depend on for survival.
While speaking with Tom Stokely of the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) at a meeting with Northern California's Native American Tribes on Monday, April 15, Natural Resources Agency Deputy Director Jerry Meral said, "BDCP is not about, and has never been about saving the Delta. The Delta cannot be saved."
"I was flabbergasted because that's not what we've been told by politicians and state officials," said Stokely after the meeting.
"Now if Governor Brown and State officials would just stop pretending it's a habitat plan to save fish when speaking with the press," according to Restore the Delta's "Delta Flows" newsletter (http://www.restorethedelta.org/or-is-it-the-point/)
Zeke Grader, executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, commented, "It is indeed ironic that the BDCP, a supposed habitat conservation plan/natural communities conservation plan developed pursuant, respectively, to the federal and state Endangered Species Act, is not about saving the Delta or its fish. It is rather a giant water grab by Westside San Joaquin agribusiness and SoCal land speculators. Meral has just admitted what we've been saying all along - that the BDCP is a trojan horse for a massive heist of California's water."
"Let the Delta speak and the way to save it will be clear, because if you believe it can't be saved... the largest Delta, the most salmon runs, the critical fresh water to salt water life will change EVERYTHING in the DELTA, including some unknown changes to HUMANS!" said Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe. "The change will be harmful, more harmful than the claims of not being able to save the DELTA!"
Political science, not natural science, drives BDCP
Meanwhile, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) have released new "red flag" documents in response to the administrative draft of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan that indicate that the prognosis for fish survival under the BDCP is not good, in contrast with Secretary Laird false claim that the BDCP process is driven by "science."
These documents identify issues with BDCP that would make the fisheries agencies unwilling to issue the necessary "take" permits for a habitat conservation plan under the Endangered Species Act.
"For example, the NMFS response identifies a potential for increased salmon egg morality upstream resulting from release operations at Keswisk Reservoir at Shasta required by BDCP. Juvenile salmon in the Sacramento River would also be at risk under some scenarios," according to Restore the Delta (RTD).
"The likely extinction of winter and spring run Chinook salmon is an inevitable consequence of shifting water exports to the Spring months, which is what BDCP wants to do. Reducing flows in the upper Sacramento River in Summer and Fall of dry years creates problems that are not going to go away," RTD stated.
As for habitat in the Delta offsetting the loss of fresh water for fish, the USFWS called the prospects for fish such as Delta smelt and longfin smelt "uncertain."
"Since the point of a habitat conservation plan is to make things better for threatened species, not worse, you'd think a problem like this would be a game-changer. And it would, if the game weren't rigged. It would be just like BDCP planners to tweak the models to eliminate or disguise the obvious problems that keep arising when they look for ways to get lots of export water without harming fish," RTD said.
As Chief Caleen Sisk said, "The common people will pay for the tunnels and a few people will make millions. It will turn a once pristine waterway into a sewer pipe. It will be bad for the fish, the ocean and the people of California."
The Bay Delta Conservation Plan may be be based on "science," but it's political science, not natural science, that drives the process. The only real goal of the BDCP is to export massive amounts of water to corporate agribusiness, Southern California water agencies and the oil industry, which is now expanding fracking operations in Kern County and coastal areas.
The Brown administration's terrible environmental record
The rush to build the peripheral canal or tunnel is not the only abysmal Schwarzenegger administration policy that the Governor Jerry Brown administration has continued and expanded.
Brown and Natural Resources Secretary John Laird continued the privately-funded Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative started by Governor Schwarzenegger in 2004. The conflicts of interest, failure to comprehensively protect the ocean, shadowy private funding, incomplete and terminally flawed science and violation of the Yurok Tribe's traditional harvesting rights have made the MLPA Initiative to create so-called "marine proected areas into one of the most sickening examples of corporate greenwashing in California history.
In a huge conflict of interest, Catherine Reheis-Boyd, President of the Western States Petroleum Association, chaired the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative Blue Ribbon Task Force to create so-called "marine protected areas" in Southern California. Reheis-Boyd, the oil industry's lead lobbyist for fracking, offshore oil drilling, the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline and the evisceration of environmental laws, also served on the MLPA task forces for the North Coast, North Central Coast and Central Coast.
The Brown administration also authorized the export of record water amounts of water from the Delta in 2011 - 6,520,000 acre-feet, 217,000 acre feet more than the previous record of 6,303,000 acre feet set in 2005 under the Schwarzenegger administration.
Brown also presided over the "salvage" of a record 9 million Sacramento splittail and over 2 million other fish including Central Valley salmon, steelhead, striped bass, largemouth bass, threadfin shad, white catfish and sturgeon in 2011. (http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/05/07/carnage-in-the-pumps/)
Other environmental policies of the Schwarzenegger administration that Brown and Laird have continued include engineering the collapse of six Delta fish populations by pumping massive quantities of water out of the Delta; presiding over the annual stranding of endangered coho salmon on the Scott and Shasta rivers; clear cutting forests in the Sierra Nevada; supporting legislation weakening the California Environmental Water Quality Act (CEQA); and embracing the corruption and conflicts of interests that infest California environmental processes and government bodies ranging from the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to the regional water boards.
Sacramento - The Bureau of Reclamation and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) on April 10 announced the release of the Record of Decision for the Nimbus Hatchery Fish Passage Project.
Under the selected alternative, the CDFW will recommend to the California Fish and Game Commission a year-round closure of fishing from Nimbus Dam to the UGSS gaging station cable just downstream of the Hatchery. This closure includes Nimbus Basin, a popular spot where anglers have for decades pursued Chinook salmon, steelhead, shad and other fish species on the American River, a major tributary of the Sacramento River that flows through the heart of the Sacramento metropolitan area.
"Reclamation and CDFW have selected Alternative 1C, which will extend the fish ladder from the hatchery to the Nimbus Dam stilling basin and use the basin itself to hold and divert fish into the ladder and will permanently remove the diversion weir," according to a joint news release from the two agencies. "The selected action was identified as the proposed alternative in the Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report, which was released on Aug. 11, 2011."
Reclamation is the lead federal agency for the Project under the National Environmental Policy Act, and CDFW is the lead state agency under the California Environmental Quality Act. The CDFW filed the Notice of Determination with the Office of Planning and Research and prepared the "Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Nimbus Hatchery Fish Passage Project," which may be viewed at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/ccao/ha...
"Per the Findings, CDFW intends to recommend to the California Fish and Game Commission year-round closure of fishing in the area that extends from Nimbus Dam to the Fair Oaks United State Geological Survey's gaging station cable just downstream of the Hatchery," the release stated. The CDFW issued a Notice of Determination on Oct. 31, 2012, which may be viewed at http://www.ceqanet.ca.gov/NODd...
The Nimbus Fish Hatchery is located along the lower American River, one-quarter mile downstream from Nimbus Dam in Rancho Cordova. Reclamation built the hatchery in 1955 to mitigate for the loss of spawning habitat for Chinook salmon and steelhead trout by the construction of Nimbus Dam; the CDFW operates and maintains the hatchery.
"The existing fish weir, which guides adult salmon to enter the fish ladder, is aging, susceptible to damage from high flows and requires annual flow reductions for operation and maintenance activities," according to the agencies.
The ROD may be viewed at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/ne... If you encounter problems accessing the document online, please e-mail mppublicaffairs [at] usbr.gov or call 916-978-5100 (TTY 916-978-5608).
The ROD may be also viewed at Reclamation's Central California Area Office, 7794 Folsom Dam Road, Folsom, CA 95630; Reclamation's Regional Office, 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, CA 95825; or at CDFW's Regional Office, 1701 Nimbus Road, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670.
For additional information or for a CD or paper copy of the ROD, please contact Patti Clinton, Reclamation, Central California Area Office, at 916-989-7173 (TTY 916-989-7285) or pclinton [at] usbr.gov, or Joe Johnson, CDFW, at 916-358-2943 or joseph.johnson [at] wildlife.ca.gov, or visit the Project website at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/ccao/ha...
The Record of Decision was released as the Brown and Obama administrations are fast-tracking the construction of the peripheral tunnels through the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP). Delta advocates fear the construction of the tunnels to divert water to corporate agribusiness, oil companies and Southern California water agencies will lead to the extinction of Central Valley Chinook salmon and steelhead, including the salmon and steelhead runs on the American River.
The salmon fishery on Central Valley rivers including the American collapsed to record low levels in 2008 and 2009, due to a combination of record water exports out of the California Delta, declining water quality and poor ocean conditions. Although the fall Chinook salmon runs have increased over the past couple of years, the number of fish still falls far short of the nearly 1 million fish mandated under the doubling goals of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act of 1992. (http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/11/23/salmon-on-the-brink
Bay Delta Conservation Plan: Brown's Deadly Corporate Pipeline
The Brown administration has constantly touted the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the peripheral tunnels as a visionary, ambitious project to accomplish the "co-equal goals" of "ecosystem restoration" and "water supply reliability," while tunnel opponents say the project will actually lead to the death of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.
In an effort to dramatize the impact of the tunnels on the Delta, a coalition of environmentalists, fishermen and family farmers opposed to Governor Jerry Brown's plan to build the twin tunnels held a "Death of the Delta" funeral and press conference before a public meeting of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan began at the Woodlake Inn in Sacramento on April 4.
The centerpiece of the Restore the Delta event was a coffin emblazoned with names of the victims of the project if Brown's plan's goes through. They included "NorCal Water Supply," "SF Bay Water Quality," "Delta Smelt," Salmon," "Orcas," "Port of Stockton," "Port of Sacramento," Family Farms," "Pacific Flyway," "Rural Landscape" and a list of Delta towns and cities.
The coffin, which will be filled with statements from Californians about what they will lose if the tunnels are built, will go on tour at a series of events across the state, including showings of Restore the Delta's documentary film "Over Troubled Waters." For the film showing schedule, go to: http://www.restorethedelta.org/
Delta advocates fear the construction of the tunnels will lead to the extinction of Central Valley chinook salmon, steelhead, Delta smelt and other imperiled fish species that have declined dramatically, due to massive water exports to corporate agribusiness, the oil industry and Southern California water agencies.
Bill Jennings, executive director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA), described the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to build the peripheral tunnels as "a desperate scheme to perpetuate an unsustainable status quo that enriches a few powerful water brokers at the expense of reliable water supplies, Delta communities and healthy fisheries."
"It refuses to evaluate reasonable alternatives that would restore the Delta ecosystem while ensuring southern California water security at far lower cost," said Jennings. "BDCP is a classic shell game to benefit special interests and, if implemented, would represent a death sentence for one of the world's great estuaries."
Legal rights to divert Central Valley water exceed actual water five-fold
Jennings said the BDCP ignores the facts that the legal rights to divert Central Valley water exceed actual water five-fold - that's 153.9 million acre feet of consumptive rights to divert 30 MAF of average unimpaired flows.
"That's why it rejects a water availability analysis - because the majority of northern California water rights are senior to export rights," he said. "At its heart, BDCP is a backdoor attack on 150 years of Califronia water rights law."
Jennings also said BDCP ignores the fact the State Water Resources Board has already concluded that Delta outflows must be significantly increased in order to protect the public trust resources of the Delta.
"It rejected an analysis of how much water the estuary needs in order to survive as a functioning ecosystem - because increased outflow translates to reduced exports," he said.
Jennings concluded, "You can't restore an estuary hemorrhaging from lack of flow by stealing more fresh water from it. You can't restore a polluted water body by further depriving it of clean water to dilute wastes."
Tunnel sacrifices family farmers at "altar of greed"
Clarksburg farmer Steve Heringer said his farm would be "sacrificed at the altar of greed" under the governor's tunnels plan.
"My family has grown tomatoes, corn, forage and grape crops in the Delta for six generations, and we plan to do so for many more," said Heringer. "The State intends to ruin my family's land to benefit mega-farms growing permanent crops on arid lands. That makes no sense."
Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta, summed up the destructive impact of the tunnels when she stated, "The Peripheral Tunnels will kill the Delta, SF Bay/Delta fisheries and Delta farms. We call upon the governor to abandon this flawed project that was rejected by California voters in 1982."
In contrast with the false claims of agribusiness Astroturf groups that the west side corporate growers "feed America," she said two-thirds of Delta water exports go to support only 0.3-0.4% of the California economy (GDP) on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. Less than a third goes to areas representing two-thirds of the state's population and economy.
"Why would the State choose to sacrifice sustainable family farms on prime farmland in the Delta in order to send subsidized water to grow subsidized crops on the impaired soils of west side plantations, whose owners live in Pacific Heights and Beverly Hills?" asked Barrigan-Parrilla. "The 'tunnels' represent nothing more than simply a transfer of good quality water around the Delta. They also represent the largest transfer of wealth in our history."
"BDCP is rigging a cost-benefit analysis of the proposal by refusing to include alternatives, and excluding some costs that would fall on water ratepayers. How much will rates need to increase if this project moves forward?" Barrigan-Parrilla said.
You can't restore a river by removing water
"We cannot find one river system that's ever been restored by having its water removed from it," concluded Barrigan-Parrilla.
Barrigan-Parrilla's last statement expresses similar sentiments to two questions I asked Jerry Meral, the Deputy Director of the Natural Resources Agency, at the BDCP public meeting in Sacramento on March 20.
First, can you give me one example in U.S. or world history where the construction of a diversion canal or tunnel has led to taking less water, rather than more water, out of an ecosystem?
Second, can you give me one example in U.S. or world history where the construction of a diversion canal or tunnel has led to the restoration of an ecosystem?
Meral and his advisers couldn't answer these questions because they know that the construction of the tunnels will ultimately lead to more water being taken out of an ecosystem, not less, and result in the ultimate destruction of the ecosystem.
The Brown administration's terrible environmental record
The rush to build the peripheral canal or tunnel is not the only abysmal Schwarzenegger administration policy that the Brown administration has continued and expanded.
Brown and Natural Resources Secretary John Laird continued the privately-funded Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative started by Governor Schwarzenegger in 2004. The Natural Resources Agency and Department of Fish and Wildlife have issued press release after press release failing to mention the conflicts of interest, failure to comprehensively protect the ocean, shadowy private funding and incomplete and terminally flawed science that have made the MLPA Initiative to create so-called "marine proected areas into one of the most sickening examples of corporate greenwashing in California history.
The Brown administration also authorized the export of record water amounts of water from the Delta under the Brown administration in 2011 - 6,520,000 acre-feet, 217,000 acre feet more than the previous record of 6,303,000 acre feet set in 2005 under the Schwarzenegger administration.
Brown also presided over the "salvage" of a record 9 million Sacramento splittail and over 2 million other fish including Central Valley salmon, steelhead, striped bass, largemouth bass, threadfin shad, white catfish and sturgeon in 2011. (http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/05/07/carnage-in-the-pumps/)
Other environmental policies of the Schwarzenegger administration that Brown and Laird have continued include engineering the collapse of six Delta fish populations by pumping massive quantities of water out of the Delta; presiding over the annual stranding of endangered coho salmon on the Scott and Shasta rivers; clear cutting forests in the Sierra Nevada; supporting legislation weakening the California Environmental Water Quality Act (CEQA); and embracing the corruption and conflicts of interests that infest California environmental processes and government bodies ranging from the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to the regional water boards.
Coffin will be delivered to Jerry Meral, tunnel point man
I have a long and personal relationship with the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas.
I was first introduced to the Delta by my late father, Alfred, who first took me fishing in Miner Slough for catfish and striped bass when I was 10 years old in 1964. As a civil engineer for Cal Trans, he wanted to check up on some bridges in the Delta that he had designed. I caught three catfish, while he landed one striped bass in our first 30 minutes of fishing.
The Delta was a magical world that I hadn't known before existed. I was amazed by the winding sloughs, the wide variety of crops ranging from pears, to grapes to broccoli and the impeccable fishery. The striped bass fishery at that time was at its historical height, with the DFG estimating a population of around 3 million fish.
Since then I have fished many hundreds of hours on the Delta for stripers, catfish, black bass, crappie and sturgeon, having many memorable days while fishing from boat and bank on the estuary. The epic striper population of the mid-sixties is long gone, due to water exports to corporate agribusiness and southern California, although there was a rebound of stripers from 1995 to 2002, when the fishery reached over an estimated 1.5 million. At the same time, the same water exports that hammered the striped bass also resulted in precipitous declines of Chinook salmon, steelhead, Delta smelt, Sacramento splittail, green sturgeon and other fish speices.
Meanwhile, I became involved in the battle to save the fishery with United Anglers of California for over 20 years. I worked closely with Hal Bonslett, the late publisher of the Fish Sniffer magazine, on the board of that organization. When a brave group of state and federal fishery scientists revealed in 2005 that pelagic fish species - Delta smelt, longfin smelt, threadfin shad and striped bass - had declined to record low population levels - fishermen and environmentalists began organizing a campaign to stop the campaign.
Gary Adams of the California Striped Bass Association and I began a series of conversations about the need to form a coalition that would unite all of the people, including recreational anglers, commercial fishermen, family farmers, grassroots environmentalists, Indian Tribes and Delta residents, seeking to restore the Delta under one banner. Other folks began to agree with us. As a result, a group of people from diverse backgrounds ended up meeting in an office in Stockton in 2006 to form the group "Restore the Delta."
Since then Restore the Delta has done a lot of great work, including producing a documentary movie, Over Troubled Waters, filling up legislative hearings with opponents of the peripheral tunnels, staging protests and rallies at the State Capitol and coordinating an intensive media campaign against the tunnels.
However, as one who has had a long history as a creative cultural activist and writer, one thing I have seen missing in the campaign against the tunnels by Restore the Delta and other organizations is the use of creative, fun events that other activists have employed successfully in the environmental, anti-globalization and indigenous rights movements.
Today I'm very happy to say that Restore the Delta and other opponents of Gov. Jerry Brown's rush to build peripheral tunnels that would drain the Delta and doom salmon and other Pacific fisheries will do something different and present California Natural Resources Agency Deputy Director Jerry Meral, the Administration's point man for the project, with a coffin on Thursday at a public meeting on the tunnels plan.
Opponents will hold a news conference outside the meeting, and then deliver the coffin to the Brown Administration, which is now fast-tracking the construction of the tunnels through the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP). I strongly urge everybody to attend this great event!
"The proposed Peripheral Tunnels will kill the Delta, the fisheries and the Delta farms," said Delta water expert Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta. "The coffin will be painted with Delta place names and values that would be lost."
"Restore the Delta opposes a project that would exterminate salmon runs, destroy sustainable family farms and saddle taxpayers with tens of billions in debt, mainly to benefit a small number of huge corporate agribusinesses on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley," said Barrigan-Parrilla said.
The event will feature Restore the Delta Executive Director Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla; Bill Jennings, Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance; Steve Heringer, Delta farmer and vintner; and other opponents of Jerry Brown's plan to drain the Delta.
The press conference will take place at 12:00 pm, Thursday, April 4, 2013, Red Lion Woodlake Conference Center, 500 Leisure Lane, Sacramento
Restore the Delta is a 10,000-member grassroots organization committed to making the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta fishable, swimmable, drinkable, and farmable to benefit all of California. Restore the Delta works to improve water quality so that fisheries and farming can thrive together again in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. http://www.restorethedelta.org
For more information, contact: Contact: Steve Hopcraft 916/457-5546; steve [at] hopcraft.comTwitter: @shopcraft; or Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla 209/479-2053 barbara [at] restorethedelta.org; Twitter: @RestoretheDelta
Secretary for Natural Resources John Laird used the release of the latest Sierra Nevada snow survey on March 28 to campaign for the construction of the peripheral tunnels through the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, just as he has done every spring since being appointed by Governor Jerry Brown.
Snow surveyors reported Thursday that water content in California's snowpack is only 52 percent of normal, with the spring melt season already under way, according to the Department of Water Resources. After a record dry January and February in much of the state, DWR has decreased its water delivery estimate from 40 to 35 percent of requested amounts from the State Water Project (SWP). (http://www.water.ca.gov/news/newsreleases/2013/032813snowservey.pdf)
"With today's snow survey, the table has been set for yet another very dry year," gushed Laird, who presided over record water exports and a record fish kill at the Delta pumps in 2011. "Add to that pumping restrictions imposed this winter because of vulnerable smelt and salmon populations, and it is clear that the security of California's water supply is threatened."
"The realities of nature point to the urgent need to continue work on the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, the Brown administration's effort to secure the water supply for 25 million Californians and reverse over a century of environmental degradation in the Delta," Laird claimed. "Advancing this large-scale public investment will provide long-term security for our economy and environment."
Without a hint of irony, Laird said, "We also ask that every Californian do their part by conserving water every day. Take a shorter shower, be mindful of how long your sprinklers run, and fix that leaky faucet!"
While asking Californians to "fix that leaky faucet," Laird failed to acknowledge the millions of acre feet of water that the peripheral tunnels will waste on irrigating drainage-impaired corporate agribusiness operations on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley and on fracking for oil and natural gas in Kern County and coastal areas.
Laird and Governor Jerry Brown are fast tracking the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to drain the Delta in spite of massive opposition by fishermen, family farmers, tribal leaders, grassroots enviromentalists, elected officials and the vast majority of Californians. The peripheral tunnel plan is proceeding forward without any approval by the voters because the Brown administration knows that the project would be overwhelming defeated by the voters just like the peripheral canal was in 1982.
The tunnel plan is simply a corporate water grab by agribusiness, oil companies and Southern California water agencies. The "habitat restoration" in the plan is added as an afterthought by state officials to green wash the destruction of the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas.
The construction of the North Delta intakes for the tunnels will spread the carnage of Central Valley Chinook salmon, steelhead and other fish species north to the Sacramento River while the massive fish kills at the state and federal water pumping facilities will continue.
How can we trust the state and federal governments to construct state-of-the-art fish screens on the new intakes, as they have claimed they will do, when they have failed to install them, as required under the CalFed process, at the existing pumps in the South Delta?
And how can we possibly trust an administration that presided over record exports and massive fish kills at the Delta pumps to suddenly transform itself into a "green" administration that cares about fish, the Delta and the public trust?
Between 2000 and 2011, more than 130,000,000 fish were "salvaged" in the massive state and federal pumps diverting water south, according to a white paper written by Bill Jennings, Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA). Considering that recent studies point out that 5 to 10 times more fish are lost than salvaged, the actual number of fish lost could be 1.3 billion or higher. (http://www.restorethedelta.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/CSPA-BDCP-Fish-Screens-Revised.pdf)
Record water amounts of water were exported from the Delta under the Brown administration in 2011 - 6,520,000 acre-feet, 217,000 acre feet more than the previous record of 6,303,000 acre feet set in 2005 under the Schwarzenegger administration. The massive diversion of water resulted in the record "salvage" of nearly 9 million splittail, a fish formerly listed under the Endangered Species Act and delisted during a political scandal under the Bush administration, and over 2 million other fish. (http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/05/07/carnage-in-the-pumps)
As Laird advises us to "take a shorter shower, be mindful of how long your sprinklers run, and fix that leaky faucet," he and Governor Jerry Brown are fast-tracking a pork barrel boondoggle that will deliver millions of acre feet of water to corporate agribusiness, southern California water agencies and oil and gas companies while pushing Central Valley chinook salmon, steelhead and Delta fish populations over the abyss of extinction.
While Laird and other state officials are promoting the threat of "drought" as justification to build the peripheral tunnels just as Schwarzenegger administration officials did every spring from 2008 to 2010, most key storage reservoirs are above or near historic levels for the date despite the dwindling snowpack.
"Thanks to November and December storms, Lake Oroville in Butte County, the State Water Project's principal storage reservoir, is at 108 percent of its average level for the date (83 percent of its 3.5 million acre-foot capacity)," according to DWR. "Shasta Lake north of Redding, the federal Central Valley Project's largest reservoir with a capacity of 4.5 million acre-feet, is at 102 percent of its normal storage level for the date (82 percent of capacity)."
It must be understood that the peripheral canal or twin tunnels won't create any new water - they will only take more water from senior water rights holders on the Delta, Sacramento Valley and Trinity River, at a tremendous cost to fish, fishermen, Indian Tribes and family farmers.
"If I took a cup of snow from Washington, DC back home with me and dumped it in the Delta, it would create more new water than the peripheral canal," Congressman John Garamendi (D-Walnut Grove) recently quipped on his facebook page.
Rather than promoting a tunnel project that could cost Californians up $60 billion while driving salmon and other fish to extinction, Laird should take a hard look at the "Reduced Exports Plan," an alternative plan to the tunnels developed by the Environmental Water Caucus. This plan demonstrates how water supply reliability can be improved while reducing exports from the Bay Delta Estuary. This plan includes a unique combination of actions that will open the discussion for alternatives to the currently failed policies that continuously attempt to use water as though it were a limitless resource. (http://www.ewccalifornia.org/reports/REDUCEDEXPORTSPLAN.pdf)
During the contentious public Bay Delta Conservation Plan public meeting held in West Sacramento on March 20, Natural Resources Agency Deputy Director Jerry Meral twice evaded a question by Burt Wilson of Public Water News Service about water being used for fracking of oil and natural gas wells in California. (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2013/03/22/18734066.php)
However, in a post on the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) website the same day, Richard Stapler, Communications Director of the California Natural Resources Agency, claimed that only 8 acre feet of water is used every year for hydraulic fracturing in California, in an apparent attempt to minimize the amount of water used for fracking. (http://baydeltaconservationplan.com/blog/blog/13-03-20/Oil_Water.aspx_)
Opponents of the peripheral tunnels fear that the water diverted from the Sacramento San Joaquin Delta would be used for hydraulic fracturing in Monterey Shale deposits on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley and in coastal areas.
"With apologies to all the sci-fi fans out there, I have to say I deplore the term 'fracking,'" said Stapler. "It's shorthand for an important process called hydraulic fracturing used in the oil extraction business. The process uses water and a small mix of chemicals to fracture and prop open rock formations thousands of feet under the earth's surface to allow for pumping of crude oil."
"So, it's helpful to know that only 8 acre feet of water is used every year in California for hydraulic fracturing. That's enough water for 32 average families for a year. For additional context, the average amount of water we move through the Delta in a typical year is 4.8 million acre feet (though it varies by year)," he stated.
He cited information from the Department of Conservation's Division of Oil, Gas, & Geothermal Resources as the justification for his figure.
"As for the total amount used, the best source of information currently is the voluntary reporting to the FracFocus site," according to Stapler. "The site lists 728 hydraulically fractured wells in California. There's a PDF document attached to each of those wells that includes, among other things, the amount of water used to fracture the well."
"We did a random sample of 30 of those wells and came up with 2,621,272 gallons (8 acre feet) used - an average of 87,375 gallons per well. That may or may not be representative, but at least it gives you some idea. The range was from about 10,000 gallons to just over 200,000 gallons," Stapler continued.
Stapler contrasted the amount of water he said is used by fracking operations in the eastern U.S. and California.
"In the eastern U.S., hydraulic fracturing tends to use significantly more water than in California," Stapler contended. "That's because the most efficient way to get at natural gas trapped in shale is to drill horizontally for thousands of feet and then fracture stimulate the reservoir along the horizontal section using up to 13 million gallons of water. At least at present, most California wells are drilled vertically, with any fracture interval being much smaller."
Yet in a footnote at the bottom, Stapler states, "For reference, you could multiply the average of 87,375 gallons with every injection well in the state (about 25,000) and still come up with a relatively small amount of water -- 6,721 acre feet, or water for about 27,000 average families for a year."
Stapler hasn't yet responded to my email inquiry over the enormous discrepancy in the water he claims is used for fracking per year- 8 acre feet of water in one section of his article and 6,721 acre feet in another!
Fracking opponents say amount of water used is much higher
Lynn Krug from the Stop Fracking California facebook page (www.facebook.com/StopFrackingCalifornia) and other fracking opponents say the water used by companies to extract natural gas and oil through fracking in California is much greater than Stapler or the oil industry claim it is.
"Each individual drilling of a well can use 1,000,000 to 5,000,000 gallons of water," she said. "Each platform can have multiple drilled 'wells' in a 4 mile diameter, a 2 mile radius from the well platform. Each well can be fracked multiple times."
She said the use and allocation of water is "dire to California," given the shortages now and in a potential drought, for fresh water to Delta aquatic life, agriculture, drinking water and fire protection.
She also pointed out that not only will fracking operations need lots of water, but they will dispose of toxic fluid waste, furthering endangering water supplies and the environment.
"The disposal of the toxic fluid waste is a further endangerment to contamination of existing fresh water, human safety, and agriculture," Krug stated. "Fracking is an insecure process as repeatedly proven by the national reporting of failures. California's own drilling history is lax by the failure to monitor these sites and makes it appear that the process is safe - it is not."
Burt Wilson, a staunch opponent of the Delta tunnels and fracking, responded to Stapler's blog post, "There is no way to prove what Stapler is talking about, but in many cases the wells can't get the water yet! That's why the need for the tunnels! With the tunnels in, they can frack 'til their heart's content."
Describing the information voluntarily provided by the oil industry on water for fracking as "propaganda," Wilson stated, "It is misleading as hell. I asked Occidental Oil--who plan 154 to create fracking jobs soon--where they get their water and they refused to tell me."
"Stapler wants a person to believe that the 'new' fracking water is already being used, but it's not. Fresh water is still the staple and the tunnels will certainly supply it when the real fracking kicks in after the tunnels are built--if ever," said Wilson.
So what is the actual amount of water now used for fracking in Califonia right now - 8 acre feet of water, 6,721 acre feet, or much, much more as fracking opponents contend?
Kern County oil industry uses vast quantities of water
One thing is for certain - oil companies use big quantities in their current oil drilling operations in Kern County, although the amount specifically used in fracking operations is hard to pinpoint. Much of this water this comes through the State Water Project's California Aqueduct and the Central Valley Water Project's Delta Mendota Canal, spurring increasing conflicts between local farmers and oil companies over available water.
"What's resoundingly clear, however, is that it takes more water than ever just to sustain Kern County's ebbing oil production," according to Jeremy Miller's 2011 investigative piece, "The Colonization of Kern County," in Orion Magazine (http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/6047/)
"At the height of California oil production in 1985, oil companies in Kern County pumped 1.1 billion barrels of water underground to extract 256 million barrels of oil-a ratio of roughly four and a half barrels of water for every barrel of oil," according to Miller. "In 2008, Kern producers injected nearly 1.3 billion barrels of water to extract 162 million barrels of oil-a ratio of nearly eight barrels of water for every barrel of oil produced."
Miller's investigation has yielded some alarming data on how much water has been used by the oil industry in Kern County and statewide since the 1960s.
"In the time since steamflooding was pioneered here in the fields of Kern County in the 1960s, oil companies statewide have pumped roughly 2.8 trillion gallons of fresh water-or, in the parlance of agriculture, nearly 9 million acre-feet-underground in pursuit of the region's tarry oil," said Miller. "Essentially, enough water has been injected into the oil fields here over the last forty years to create a lake one foot deep covering more than thirteen thousand square miles-nearly twice the surface area of Lake Ontario."
Miller also said he was surprised to learn from local water authorities that a "good deal of the water for steamflooding comes from the same source that supplies the region's farms: the Central Valley and State Water Projects," although he said exact information on the amount of water used from the projects for oil drilling operations is not required by the state or federal governments.
"Oil companies call the fresh water they buy from outside sources 'makeup water," wrote Miller. "It's difficult to gauge exactly how much of this makeup water comes from the State Water Project, since oil companies are not required to disclose the sources of their water, and no state agency tracks the fate of State Water Project water after it has been sent down the pipe."
As more information becomes available, I will report on the water used now, as well as the water that could potentially be used in the future, as the oil industry increases fracking operations in California.
Delta advocates and anti-fracking activists oppose the construction of Governor Jerry Brown's peripheral tunnels because the project will likely lead to the extinction of Central Valley Chinook salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt and other fish species, according to agency and independent scientists. They believe that the "dual conveyance" proposed under the Bay Delta Conservation Plan will make an already horrific ecosystem collapse even worse.
Between 2000 and 2011, more than 130,000,000 fish were "salvaged" in the massive state and federal pumps diverting water to corporate agribusiness and southern California, according to a white paper written by Bill Jennings, Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA). Considering that recent studies point out that 5 to 10 times more fish are lost than salvaged, the actual number of fish lost could be 1.3 billion or higher. (http://www.restorethedelta.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/CSPA-BDCP-Fish-Screens-Revised.pdf)
Three legislators introduce legislation to stop fracking
In other fracking news, three California assembly members have introduced bills to halt hydraulic fracturing in the state and mandate review of the threats the practice poses to the environment and public health.
Reflecting growing concern about fracking's threat to the environment and public health, Richard Bloom (D-Santa Monica), Holly Mitchell (D-Culver City) and Adrin Nazarian (D-East San Fernando Valley) have put forward three pieces of legislation - A.B. 1301, A.B. 1323 and A.B. 649 - that would halt fracking in California until the state determines whether and under what conditions fracking can be done without threatening human health and the environment.
The Center for Biological Diversity, Food & Water Watch, Environment California and Clean Water Action are supporting moves to halt fracking in California.
"We applaud these legislators for their leadership in working to protect Californians from a dangerous fracking boom that could be devastating for the state," said Brian Nowicki of the Center for Biological Diversity. "State regulators have shrugged off fracking's dangers, so it's up to lawmakers to stop oil companies from polluting our air, contaminating our water and undermining our fight against climate change."
"Given that fracking is inherently unsafe and poses a direct threat to our communities, we welcome legislation that provides for a comprehensive statewide moratorium," said Food & Water Watch Pacific Region Director Kristin Lynch.
The groups said fracking has been tied to water and air pollution in other states, and it releases huge quantities of methane, a dangerously potent greenhouse gas. More than 600 wells in at least nine California counties were fracked in 2011 alone, and oil companies are gearing up to frack oil deposits in the Monterey Shale, a geological formation that lies beneath some of the state's most productive farmland and important wildlife habitat.
Tuesday, March 20 was a busy day for Delta advocates including Restore the Delta (RTD), a coalition opposed to the Brown administration's rush to construct massive peripheral tunnels to divert millions of acre-feet of water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to corporate agribusiness, oil companies and Southern California developers.
Representatives of the group, along with fishermen, environmentalists, and other Delta advocates, testified at a public meeting in West Sacramento to discuss the first three chapters of the revised Bay Delta Conservation Plan proposal and at a State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) meeting in Sacramento hearing regarding San Joaquin River flows. While the water board was meeting a few blocks away the California Water Commission (CWC) spent Wednesday morning conducting a "workshop" on "Strategies for Future State Investments in Public Benefits of Water Projects."
Restore the Delta criticized the revised BDCP proposal as still being "fatally flawed" - and blasted the water board for presiding over years of water quality violations on the San Joaquin River and failing to increase river flows sufficiently to restore salmon and steelhead.
Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Restore the Delta, told the water board public hearing in the morning, "The BDCP will simply fail to restore the estuary. The proposed plan for the San Joaquin also fails to rectify years of water quality violations in the San Joaquin River and South Delta."
"The plan fails to balance the public trust. And it fails to protect all parties equally dependent on the health of the San Joaquin River, by giving priority status and protection to upstream users - all at the expense of water users on the lower San Joaquin River, Delta farmers, Delta residents, and Delta fisheries," she said.
"The San Joaquin River plan does, however, ensure that water exporters do not have to give up one drop of water for river and Delta restoration," Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla continued. "And it sets a dangerous precedent for how flow standards for the Sacramento River will be set if the twin tunnels are constructed and brought into operation."
She also criticized language in the BDCP Administrative draft, in the water facilities and operations section.
"The language does nothing to reassure us that this project will be operated any differently than the pumps are at Tracy in the present," she noted. "An adaptive management process for which a standard for cannot be set because agreement cannot be reached on the importance of spring and fall outflows is not a plan."
Barrigan-Parrilla also zeroed in on the enormous cost of the canal at a time when the state is in economic crisis.
"Asking the public through higher water rates and/or taxes to pay for theses tunnels, probably the first or second most costly public works project in the history of California, without understanding in advance how they will be operated, is incomprehensible. We are told to trust the regulating agencies. Well we are all learning today how well that is working out for the San Joaquin River."
When Brown he says the tunnels will cost $14 billion, he is not giving the full cost of project. The cost will exceed $60 billion by the time financing, cost overruns, mitigation, operations and maintenance are counted. Californians will spend billions with not a drop more of water delivered to our cities and no benefits to the environment.
An economic analysis released on August 7, 2012 by Food and Water Watch and C-WIN (the California Water Impact Network) reveals that Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) customers could be on the line for $2,003 to $9,182 per customer.
Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, said the Tribe fully supports the Restore the Delta position on the the peripheral tunnels and San Joaquin River flows.
"California people must know the true effects of the Two Water Plans that will destroy the waterways and make it irreversible," Chief Sisk said. "The filtering systems are already failing and no one is advocating for cleaning up high mountain streams, rivers, or installing adequate piping or replacing old polluting piping or rebuilding sewage plants.....all this is too expensive! It is cheaper to keep channeling contaminated water for profit."
The meetings took place as the Brown administration appears dead set on driving Central Valley salmon and Delta fish populations over the abyss of extinction.
Between 2000 and 2011, more than 130,000,000 fish were "salvaged" in the massive state and federal pumps diverting water to corporate agribusiness and southern California, according to a white paper written by Bill Jennings, Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA). Considering that recent studies point out that 5 to 10 times more fish are lost than salvaged, the actual number of fish lost could be 1.3 billion or higher. (http://www.restorethedelta.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/CSPA-BDCP-Fish-Screens-Revised.pdf)
The carnage in the pumps has impacted 42 species, including Sacramento River Chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail, green sturgeon, striped bass, largemouth bass American shad and threadfin shad.
Record water amounts of water were exported from the Delta under the Brown administration in 2011 - 6,520,000 acre-feet, 217,000 acre feet more than the previous record of 6,303,000 acre feet set in 2005 under the Schwarzenegger administration. The massive diversion of water resulted in the record "salvage" of nearly 9 million splittail, a fish formerly listed under the Endangered Species Act and delisted during a political scandal under the Bush administration, and over 2 million other fish.
While fall-run Chinook salmon numbers have improved from the collapse of 2008-2009, allowing recreational and commercial fishing to resume on the California and Southern Oregon coast, the species is still in big trouble. The Central Valley Project Improvement Act of 1992 set a goal of doubling Chinook salmon and other anadromous fish species by 2002. (http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/05/07/carnage-in-the-pump
The salmon population now stands at only 20 percent of the population goal required by federal law. There was a steady decline of fish from 2003 to 2010, including a record low of 7 percent. The closest we got to meeting the salmon doubling goal was in 2002, when the index peaked at 64.33 percent of the doubling goal.
Rather than improving the dismal state of California fish populations, the construction of the peripheral tunnels would likely lead to the extinction of Central Valley salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt and other species, according to agency and independent scientists. (http://www.bay.org/assets/BDCP%20EA%20Briefing%20Paper%2022912.pdf)
As Chief Sisk said, "The common people will pay for the tunnels and a few people will make millions. It will turn a once pristine waterway into a sewer pipe. It will be bad for the fish, the ocean and the people of California."
"The Winnemem Wintu Tribe supports No Tunnels - No Shasta Dam Raise! There should be billions of dollars spent for cleaning up the rivers, not diverting them," she concluded.
Missed in the mainstream media coverage of the release of the revised Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) documents on March 14 was the alarming role the peripheral tunnels could play in increased fracking in California.
Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is the controversial, environmentally destructive process of injecting millions of gallons of water, sand and toxic chemicals underground at high pressure in order to release and extract oil or gas, according to Food and Water Watch.
The oil industry, represented by Catherine Reheis-Boyd, President of the Western States Petroleum Association and the former chair of the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative Blue Ribbon Task Force to create so-called "marine protected areas" in Southern California, is now pushing for increasing fracking for oil and natural gas in shale deposits in Kern County and coastal areas.
However, Adam Scow, the California Campaigns Director of Food and Water Watch, hasn't missed the connection between fracking and Governor Brown's plan to build the tunnels - and urges Californians to speak out against the corporate water grab.
"Governor Brown has proposed building two massive $50 billion water tunnels to divert the Sacramento River to corporate interests in the Central Valley," said Scow. "Most of the water will go to large agribusiness and oil companies while taxpayers will be stuck with the bill."
"The Westlands Water District and Kern County Water Agency import water for the biggest agribusinesses and oil fields in the Central Valley," explained Scow. "Now they've gotten Governor Brown to approve a massive tunnels project to bring them even more water, which they will sell for an enormous profit. Even worse, much of this water will go to oil companies who will pollute our groundwater with fracking. Help put a stop to this corporate water grab by asking Governor Brown to protect our state's precious water."
Scow emphasized that most Californians would see no benefit from this massive water project, but we will be left with the $50 billion price tag. Local water projects to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure and expand stormwater and rainwater systems would provide local jobs and better water security for much less.
"It's absurd that Governor Brown wants to make us taxpayers pay to redirect the Sacramento River so that oil companies and huge agribusinesses can make even more profits," said Scow. "Not only would we spend billions on a wasteful project that serves only to pad the pockets of corporate interests, we would be helping oil and gas companies contaminate our already precious water with fracking. Stand up and tell Governor Brown that we won't pay the water bill for agribusinesses and oil companies."
Burt Wilson, Editor and Publisher of Public Water News Service (bwilson5404 [at] sbcglobal.net), also contends that the "hidden agenda" of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to build twin tunnels is to provide water for the environmentally destructive process of fracking in California. (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/02/26/1189970/-The-BDCP-s-Hidden-Agenda-Water-for-Fracking)
Wilson said the "hidden scenario" goes like this: "Gov. Brown wants twin tunnels in the Delta. He won't allow a public vote on a water bond, so six water agencies, headed by the Westlands Water District and the Metropolitan Water District have formed a business consortium called the State and Federal Water Contractors Association (SFWCA). These six will be the primary funders of the $14-16 billion revenue stream needed to build and initially operate the twin tunnels."
"Is the SFWCA doing this as a service to the people of California? Of course not. Like all financiers, they expect to make a huge profit. Why else invest $14-billion?" asked Wilson.
Wilson said the SFWCA will "make its money back through handling water transfers from northern California reservoirs, water banks and aquifers--or any way they can get it--to sell at auction the the highest bidder, in this case the oil/gas companies inflated prices to the oil companies who will pay any price to get it."
"Currently in Greely, CO, the water agencies are selling water to farmers for $30 an acre foot while oil companies are paying $3,300.00 an acre foot!" noted Wilson. "Given that water transfers from northern California total about 1,200,000 acre feet a year, the SFWCA, at that rate, would earn almost $4-billion a year! Not a bad return on investment!"
"And here's how they'll do it: let's say some northern California water bank wants to sell 500 acre feet of water," he explained. "That water is then released into the Sacramento River north of the Capital City. At the same time, one or all three of the twin tunnel intakes on the Sacramento River near Hood will suck 500 acre feet out of the river and into the twin tunnels to be pumped south to the SFWCA."
"Note that no 'additional' water has been taken out of the Delta and the transfer is consistent with the State Water Code which mandates that we 'reduce reliance on the Delta,'" said Wilson.
The increasing power of Big Oil and MLPA Initiative green washing
The drive by the oil and natural gas industry to frack California is highlighted by recent disturbing developments that reveal the enormous power of Big Oil in the state.
In yet one more example of the revolving door between government and huge corporations that defines politics in California now, State Senator Michael Rubio (D-Bakersfield) on February 22 suddenly announced his resignation from office in order to take a "government affairs" position at Chevron.
Rubio went to work for Chevron just two months after alleged "marine protected areas," overseen by the President of the Western States Petroleum Association, a coastal real estate developer, a marina corporation executive and other corporate interests, went into effect on California's North Coast.
These "marine protected areas," created under the privately funded Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative, fail to protect the ocean from fracking, oil drilling, pollution, wind and wave energy projects, military testing and all human impacts other than fishing and gathering.
In a big scandal largely ignored by the mainstream media, Catherine Reheis-Boyd, the President of the Western States Petroleum Association, not only chaired the Marine Life Protection Act Blue Ribbon Task Force to create so-called "marine protected areas" on the South Coast, but also served on the task forces to create "marine reserves" on the North Coast, North Central Coast and South Coast.
"It's clear that government and petroleum officials want to 'frack' in the very same areas Reheis-Boyd was appointed to oversee as a 'guardian' of marine habitat protection for the MLPA 'Initiative,'" said David Gurney, independent journalist and co-chair of the Ocean Protection Coalition, in his report on the opening of new lease-sales for fracking. (http://noyonews.net/?p=8215)
"What's becoming obvious is that Reheis-Boyd's expedient presence on the 'Blue Ribbon Task Force' for the MLPAI was a ploy for the oil industry to make sure no restrictions applied against drilling or fracking in or around so-called marine protected areas," Gurney emphasized.
The current push by the oil industry to expand fracking in California, build the Keystone XL Pipeline and eviscerate environmental laws is only possible because state officials and MLPA Initiative advocates greenwashed the key role Reheis-Boyd and the oil industry played in creating marine protected areas that don't protect the ocean.
Reheis-Boyd apparently used her role as a state marine "protection" official to increase her network of influence in California politics to the point where the Western States Petroleum Association has become the most powerful corporate lobby in California. (http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/site/lawsuit-filed-against-fracking-oil-lobbyist-says-its-safe)
Oil and gas companies spend more than $100 million a year to buy access to lawmakers in Washington and Sacramento, according to Stop Fooling California (http://www.stopfoolingca.org), an online and social media public education and awareness campaign that highlights oil companies' efforts to mislead and confuse Californians. The Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) alone has spent more than $16 million lobbying in Sacramento since 2009.
Now many of the same MLPA Initiative advocates who embraced Reheis-Boyd in her role as a "marine guardian" are supporting the fast-tracking of the most environmentally destructive project in California history under the Bay Delta Conservation Plan.
As the oil industry expands its role in California politics and environmental processes, you can bet that they are going to use every avenue they can to get more water for fracking, including taking Delta water through the planned twin tunnels.
"Why should we spend $50 billion to help the oil industry frack our state?" asked Scow.
The Brown administration today released the first four of 12 chapters of the controversial Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the peripheral tunnels, drawing strong criticism from Delta advocates that the plan is "fatally flawed."
State officials claim the plan will serve the co-equal goals of "ecosystem restoration" and "water supply reliability," while plan opponents say the construction of the twin tunnels is a "death sentence" for the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas.
According to a news release from the California Natural Resources Agency, "The comprehensive plan is the Brown administration's proposal for new water intakes and tunnels and habitat restoration to reverse the decline of native fish populations in the Delta and provide reliable water deliveries for two-thirds of California's population and much of the state's agricultural economy. The plan has been developed over the last seven years, with substantial technical advice and input from federal agencies."
On July 25, 2012, Governor Brown and Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar announced revisions to the plan, including a 40 percent reduction in the capacity of proposed new water diversion intakes along the Sacramento River. On the same day, a coalition of family farmers, Indian Tribes, Delta residents, commercial fishermen, recreational anglers, conservationists, environmental justice advocates and elected officials held a rally at the State Capitol to oppose the plan to build the peripheral tunnels.
"The full plan will be released in three stages over the coming weeks and accompanied by public meetings in West Sacramento to allow interested citizens to learn about the plan," the agency stated. "The full plan and an accompanying Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report will be released for formal public comment later this year."
The agency said newly-released documents "describe in detail the more than 200 specific biological goals and objectives that will guide implementation of the plan over coming decades so that it achieves the dual goals of healthier, more resilient populations of native fish and wildlife while at the same time improving water supply reliability. Progress toward achieving biological goals and objectives, which range from the growth rates of individual fish, to overall increases in a species' population, will be assessed through sustained monitoring and research, and assured by adaptive management of the underlying conservation measures."
The agency said the tunnels would "secure water deliveries" against potential disasters, such as a flood or earthquake.
"The newly-released chapters also detail the proposed operation of a new system of pumping plants and tunnels to carry water from the Delta. A new water project diversion point on the Sacramento River near Sacramento and 35 miles of underground tunnels would secure water deliveries against catastrophe; at any time, a flood or earthquake could inundate the below-sea-level islands in the interior Delta and draw salt water toward the existing south Delta pumping plants, which would have to be shut down to avoid contamination," the agency said.
"We are making real progress," claimed California Department of Water Resources Director Mark Cowin. "Getting to this point has been a long, complicated journey, but we have worked through some truly difficult issues. We are now closer than ever to finally safeguarding a water supply critical to California's future and restoring vitality and resiliency to the Delta ecosystem."
Delta advocates weren't impressed by the release of the draft Bay Delta Conservation Plan documents.
Restore the Delta (RTD), a coalition opposed to the Brown Administration's rush to construct massive Peripheral Tunnels to take millions of acre-feet of water from the Delta, said the revised BDCP proposal for Peripheral Tunnels to export Sacramento/San Joaquin/San Francisco Bay Delta water, mainly to benefit unsustainable mega-farms on the west side of the Central Valley, is still "fatally flawed."
Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Restore the Delta said, "In its rush to build a project that would exterminate salmon runs, destroy sustainable family farms and saddle taxpayers with tens of billions in debt, mainly to benefit a small number of huge corporate agribusinesses on the west side of the Central Valley, the Administration has yet to complete a valid cost-benefit analysis of its Tunnels and seriously examine alternative solutions."
She said BDCP is rigging a cost-benefit analysis of the proposal by refusing to include alternatives, and excluding some costs that would fall on water ratepayers. How much will rates need to increase if this project moves forward?
"This project will still cost billions upon billions of dollars to give ever-increasing amounts of taxpayer and ratepayer subsidized water to corporate agriculture and real estate developers to make millions upon millions in profits. California will not go dry without these tunnels. There are no guarantees that southern California residents will even receive more water," said Barrigan-Parrilla. "The proposal takes a build it now, figure it out later approach. But after billions are spent building new tunnels, the pressure would be overwhelming to maximize water exports no matter the consequences on Delta communities and fisheries."
Two-thirds of Delta water exports go to support 0.3-0.4% of the California economy (GDP) on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. Less than a third goes to areas representing two-thirds of the state's population and economy, according to Barrigan-Parrilla.
"Why would anyone choose to sacrifice family farms on prime farmland in the Delta in order to send subsidized water to grow subsidized crops on the impaired soils of west side plantations, whose owners live in Pacific Heights and Beverly Hills?" asked Barrigan-Parrilla. "Why would we use two and a half times the water to grow an almond in the west side of the Valley than is required to grow an almond in Butte County? The 'tunnels' represent more than simply a transfer of good quality water around the Delta. They also represent the largest transfer of private wealth in our history."
"The administration's proposal continues to fail to incorporate what's now the overwhelming scientific consensus that fish in the Estuary need more fresh water," said Bill Jennings, executive director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance. "Even though the number of intakes has been reduced from 5 to 3, the total amount of water that can be pumped from the Delta is virtually the same. Decisions on how much water would be pumped would be made only after tens of billions of dollars are spent on the intakes and tunnels. Pressure would be unstoppable to over-pump the Delta."
Jennings added, "BDCP is a recipe for ecological disaster. California is in a water crisis because the State has over-promised, over-allocated, wasted and inequitably distributed scarce water resources. The Delta is in a biological meltdown because the estuary has been deprived of more than half of its historical water flow; its hydrograph has been turned on its head and its waterways used as sewers.
"This project threatens the collapse of Delta and longfin smelt; American and threadfin shad; splittail; Fall, late-Fall, Winter and Spring runs of salmon; steelhead, green and white sturgeon, striped and largemouth bass; as well as the lower tropic levels that comprise the food chain. BDCP is predicated on taking more water from or around the estuary," he explained.
"And taking more water from it cannot restore an ecosystem that is hemorrhaging because of a lack of flow. The National Research Council, the Independent Science Board, NGO scientists and the fishery agencies agree that the project would hasten extinction rather than restoring species. Faced with overwhelming criticism, BDCP went back to the drawing boards and came forth with the desperate idea of building it now and figuring out how to operate it later. As presently outlined, BDCP is not a path to restoration - it's a death sentence for one of the world's great estuaries," Jennings emphasized
The earlier draft outlined 19 Conservation Measures. The first Conservation Measure (CM1) was Water Facilities and Operation.
"We will be interested to see how operating peripheral tunnels to take large amounts of fresh water can possibly be framed as a conservation measure when Delta habitat has been transformed into a place hostile to native species by reductions in flows of fresh water," according to RTD.
RTD questions how independent the science will be. Even the Delta Independent Science Board told the Delta Stewardship Council that it is concerned that the BDCP "favors combat science" and would likely "yield further fragmentation in Delta science and decision-making."
RTD also noted that BDCP is still not considering any alternatives for meeting the coequal goals except the peripheral tunnels, although there are several that could be evaluated.
"We still don't expect BDCP's consulting economist, Dr. David Sunding, to be given the latitude to do a really comprehensive cost-benefit analysis," RTD added. "We wonder about how this process can move forward to the EIR/EIS stage when the Department of Water Resources has not been able to collect geotechnical data necessary to design the tunnels under the Delta."
"The common people will pay for the tunnels and a few people will make millions," summed up Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, who is fighting to stop the raising of Shasta Dam and the construction of the peripheral tunnels. "It will turn a once pristine waterway into a sewer pipe. It will be bad for the fish, the ocean and the people of California."
Millions of fish would continue to be killed in the state and federal water export pumps if the peripheral tunnels proposed under the Bay Delta Conservation Plan were built, according to a groundbreaking new white paper released by the California Sportfishing Alliance (CSPA) and Restore the Delta (RTD) on March 7.
The paper also dispelled the notion promulgated by the state and federal governments that the problem of massive fish kills would be solved by installing some some "magic" new fish screens on the proposed North Delta Intakes.
Restore the Delta is a 10,000-member grassroots organization committed to making the Sacramento- San Joaquin Delta fishable, swimmable, drinkable, and farmable to benefit all of California. Restore the Delta works to improve water quality so that fisheries and farming can thrive together again in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
Beginning Thursday, March 14, the California Natural Resources Agency plans to release a preliminary draft of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the peripheral tunnels.
A public review draft plan and formal comment period will be announced later this year.
"The preliminary draft chapters will be available for viewing on the day of the release on the BDCP website," according to an announcement on the BDCP website. "The release will occur in three stages and each release will be followed by a public meeting."
BDCP proponents claim the project would meet the co-equal goals of "ecosystem restoration" and "water supply reliability." On the other hand, a broad coalition of fishermen, family farmers, Indian Tribes, environmentalists and elected officials opposes the construction of the twin tunnels because of the big threat they pose to Central Valley chinook salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, green and white sturgeon and a host of other fish species.
Millions of fish would continue to be killed in the state and federal water export pumps if the peripheral tunnels proposed under the Bay Delta Conservation Plan were built, according to a groundbreaking new white paper released by the California Sportfishing Alliance (CSPA) and Restore the Delta (RTD) on March 7.
The paper also dispelled the notion promulgated by the state and federal governments that the problem of massive fish kills would be solved by installing some some "magic" new fish screens on the proposed North Delta Intakes. (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/07/1192455/-Peripheral-tunnels-could-increase-fish-kills-from-water-exports)
"Proponents of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) and its peripheral tunnels suggest that only by diverting water from the Sacramento River can the Delta be restored because of immense fishery losses at the South Delta export pumps," said CSPA Executive Director Bill Jennings, who wrote the white paper. "This is simply incorrect! Fish losses could even increase with the addition of a North Delta diversion point."
STAGE 1
March 14 BDCP release:
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Existing Ecological Conditions
Chapter 3: Conservation Strategy
Chapter 4: Covered Activities and Associated Federal Actions
March 20 Public Meeting on Chapters 1-4
Ramada Inn, West Sacramento, 1:30-4:30 p.m.
STAGE 2
March 27 BDCP release:
Chapter 5: Effects Analysis
Chapter 6: Plan Implementation
Chapter 7: Implementation Structure
April 4 Public Meeting on Chapters 5-7
STAGE 3
Week of April 22 release:
Chapter 8: Implementation Costs and Funding Sources
Chapter 9: Alternatives to Take
Chapter 10: Integration of Independent Science into BDCP
Chapter 11: List of Preparers
Chapter 12: Glossary
Week of April 29 Public Meeting on Chapters 8-12
Millions of fish would continue to be killed if the Peripheral Tunnels proposed by the Brown administration were built, according to a groundbreaking new white paper released by the California Sportfishing Alliance (CSPA) and Restore the Delta (RTD) on Thursday, March 7.
The paper also dispelled the notion promulgated by the state and federal governments that the problem of massive fish kills would be solved by installing some some "magic" new fish screens on the proposed North Delta Intakes.
"Proponents of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) and its peripheral tunnels suggest that only by diverting water from the Sacramento River can the Delta be restored because of immense fishery losses at the South Delta export pumps," said CSPA Executive Director Bill Jennings, who wrote the white paper. "This is simply incorrect! Fish losses could even increase with the addition of a North Delta diversion point."
Jennings began the white paper, using extensive references to state and federal government data, emphasizing how lethal water exports from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta are to Central Valley chinook salmon, steelhead, Delta smelt, striped bass, threadfin shad and other fish species.
"Between 2000 and 2011, more than 130 million fish have been 'salvaged' at the State and Federal Project water export facilities in the South Delta," according to the report. "Actual losses are far higher. For example, recent estimates indicate that 5-10 times more fish are lost than are salvaged, largely due to the high predation losses in and around water project facilities."
Additionally, the fish screens are unable to physically screen eggs and larval life stages of the fish from diversion pumps. "The losses of eggs and larval stages of fish, as well as the enormous losses of zooplankton and phytoplankton the comprise the base of the aquatic food chain, go publicallly unacknowledged and uncounted," the report said.
Diversions from the South Delta will remain essential under the proposed conveyance facilities.
"Exports from the South Delta pumps will remain a significant percentage of total water exports," the report noted. "BDCP currently estimates that 50% of State and Federal Project exports would come from the existing South Delta diversion facilities in average water years and as much as 75-84% in dry and critical water years."
"In fact, BDCP modeling suggests that exports and fish entrainment from South Delta diversions could potentially increase in certain water year types and for critical life stages of certain species. The BDCP itself estimates the project could increase the killing of steelhead, Winter and Fall-run Chinook salmon, Longfin smelt and Sacramento splittail," the white paper said.
The report noted that the South Delta export fish screens are ineffective and obsolete - and new South Delta fish screens are both needed and feasible.
"The present South Delta fish screens are based upon 1950s technology, and massive fish losses have been documented for more than 30 years," stated Jennings. "Only about 11-18% of salmon or steelhead entrained in Clifton Court Forebay survive."
Finally, the report said proposed fish screens on the Sacramento River are problematic, using unproven technology.
"Contrary to assurances of BDCP proponents, it is uncertain whether the fish screens for the proposed new North Delta diversion will actually work," the report said. " The proposed screens are experimental and have never been employed anywhere else. Some 22 studies are required to determine if the proposed screen design concept will work, will be protective, or if the screens can be legally permitted."
"Half of these studies are proposed post-construction. Waiting until after construction and the expenditure of billions of dollars to see if these experimental new concept fish screens will work makes no sense. Construction of North Delta diversions should not be initiated until it can be established that the proposed experimental fish screens are feasible, protective and legally permittable pursuant to the Endangered Species Act," the report stated.
Jennings concluded, "The history of the Delta tells us that past agency assurances that projects to divert water from the estuary would be beneficial or benign were grievously wrong: virtually all of them exacerbated conditions to the point where Delta fisheries are on life support. The harsh reality is that no estuary in the world has survived the diversion of more than half its water flow and the extreme modification of its hydrograph (i.e., peak flows shifted from winter to summer). Speculative promises of mitigation and accountability can no longer be sufficient to justify the construction of major water projects."
Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of RTD, said, ""The Peripheral Tunnels could increase, not decrease, the massive fish kills from water exports. For decades, they have failed to provide effective fish screens at the existing pumps."
"Why would anyone believe that new, untested fish screens at a second diversion point will be any better? The Peripheral Tunnels are the death knell for our salmon fisheries, and deny San Francisco Bay of the freshwater flows to sustain Pacific fisheries," she said.
The Brown administration continues to push the peripheral tunnel plan as the solution to achieving the "co-equal goals" of ecosystem restoration and water supply. However, Jennings said that regardless of what happens with BDCP, the state and federal governments and water contractors must agree to update these obsolete fish screens in the Delta.
"There shouldn't be any construction of North Delta facilities until the state and federal governments know that the screens meet certain standards," said Jennings. "If they can conjure up magic and build protective fish screens in the North Delta, they need to show us how. We can no longer rely on their promises of accountability, given their history."
I haven't received a reply yet from the California Department of Wildlife regarding their response to the white paper.
The complete White Paper, "BDCP and Fish Population Losses at the Pumps," is posted to RTD's web site: http://www.restorethedelta.org/
For more information about the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, go to: http://calsport.org
The release of the white paper takes place as Governor Jerry Brown and Natural Resources Secretary John Laird continue and expand many of the most environmentally destructive policies of the Schwarzenegger administration. Besides fast-tracking the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to build the fish-killing peripheral tunnels, they presided over record water exports to corporate agribusiness and Southern California in 2011 and authorized a record "salvage" of 9 million Sacramento splittail and over 2 million other fish including Central Valley salmon, steelhead, striped bass and threadfin shad the same year. (http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/05/07/carnage-in-the-pumps/)
Their list of environmental "accomplishments" includes overseeing the decline of Delta smelt and five other fish species in 2012, presiding over the annual stranding of endangered coho salmon on the Scott and Shasta rivers, clear cutting forests in the Sierra Nevada, and embracing the corruption and conflicts of interests that infest California environmental processes and government bodies ranging from the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to the regional water boards.
The Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the peripheral tunnels not only threatens the Chinook salmon, steelhead and other fish species of the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers, but also the fish and communities of the Trinity River, the largest tributary of the Klamath River.
"The project will harm Trinity County and Trinity River interests by drawing down Trinity Lake even more," said Tom Stokely of Mt. Shasta, a former Trinity County natural resources planner now with the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN, online at http://www.c-win.org). "There is absolutely no protection for Trinity River interests from this project. Water export amounts and fishery protection flows are being put off until after the project is constructed, a ʻplumbing before policyʼ decision to misinform the public about the true costs and benefits."
"Cost estimates are significantly underestimated," stated Stokely. "While Peripheral Tunnel proponents claim that the beneficiaries of the project will pay for it, they are planning on substantial subsidies from state and federal taxpayers amounting to billions more borrowed dollars. There are much more cost effective, job-producing and locally-based ways of providing water supply reliability including recycling, conservation, stormwater capture and groundwater desalination."
You can find out more about the threat posed to the Trinity River and the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta by the tunnels at a showing of a documentary film and slide show in Weaverville, California in April. Safe Alternatives for our Forest Environment (SAFE, online at http://www.safealt.org/) is sponsoring "Over Troubled Waters", a documentary about the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta that will premiere at the Weaverville Fire Hall, 125 Bremer Street on Tuesday April 2 at 6:30 p.m. Admission is free.
Stokely will give a slide show with a question and answer period to discuss the implications of Governor Brownʼs "Peripheral Tunnels" project on Trinity County and all of California.
The documentary, "Over Troubled Waters," by Restore the Delta (http://www.restorethedelta.org/) and the C-WIN slideshow are part of a statewide public education effort to stop the building of Peripheral Tunnels. In this visually rich documentary, Ed Begley Jr. narrates the story of how the people of the Delta are fighting to protect the region they love and to encourage saner, sustainable water policies for all the people of California
Larry Glass, President of Safe Alternatives for our Forest Environment (S.A.F.E.), emphasizes, "Trinity County is a major and uncompensated source of much of this water and so Trinity should have significant say about how much water should be taken and and how that water should be used. These considerations must be important parts of this effort and the overall education of the California public before decisions are made to borrow billions for questionable projects such as the Peripheral Tunnels."
On July 25, 2012, Governor Brown and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced a controversial plan to drill two 30ʼ-40ʼ diameter tunnels 150 feet for 35 miles under Californiaʼs Delta to siphon northern California water to San Joaquin Valley agribusiness and Southern California cities, according to Stokely. Previous plans to build a "Peripheral Canal" were defeated by two thirds of California voters in 1982 during Brownʼs first tenure as governor of California."
Kayla Carpenter, a Hoopa Valley Tribe member who is pursuing her PHD in linguistics at U.C. Berkeley, attended a rally with members of the Winnemem Wintu and Pit River Tribes and other Delta advocates at the State Capitol to protest the BDCP on the same day that Governor Brown and Secretary Salazar unveiled their "water conveyance" plan. Carpenter emphasized that "the peripheral tunnels plan is tied up with Trinity River water going south."
"The Trinity is pumped into the Sacramento via Whiskeytown Reservoir and we already have to fight hard to get water that we should be getting by law for fish," said Carpenter. "A bigger tunnel to suck California dry isn't going to help our fish."
The peripheral canal or twin tunnels won't create any new water - they will only take more water from the Delta and Trinity River. "If I took a cup of snow from Washington, DC back home with me and dumped it in the Delta, it would create more new water than the peripheral canal," quipped Congressman John Garamendi (D-Walnut Grove).
The peripheral tunnels will likely lead to the extinction of Central Valley salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt and other imperiled fish species. For more information, you can read the briefing paper by the Bay Institute and Defenders of Wildlife: http://www.bay.org/assets/BDCP...
Safe Alternatives for our Forest Environment (SAFE) is dedicated to promoting healthy ecosystems through education, community involvement, organizing, demonstrations, activism and legal remedies. For more information, go to: http://www.safealt.org/
The California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) promotes the equitable and environmental use of California's water, including instream uses, through research, planning, public education, and litigation. For more information, go to: http://www.c-win.org
Restore the Delta (RTD), a coalition opposed to the Brown administration's plan to build the massive peripheral tunnels, on February 28 announced that it opposes using state bond funds to mitigate environmental damage to Central Valley salmon, Delta fish populations and Delta farms from the proposed tunnels.
"To do so would take funds from public education and safety to service bond debt," according to a statement from RTD. "Any state funds should instead promote regional water self-sufficiency."
Ironically, the announcement took place as Brown administration officials, the same ones promoting the most costly and environmentally destructive public works project in California history, were meeting with scientists and Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative advocates in Monterey to review the key findings regarding the ecological and economic impacts of controversial "marine protected areas" that went into effect on the Central Coast in September 2007.
Because of the widespread unpopularity of the water bond among voters, the proposed $11.14 billion measure was first delayed from the November 2010 to November 2012 ballot and then last year delayed again until November 2014.
"With almost $93 billion in long-term indebtedness, the State of California cannot afford the proposed $11.14 billion water bond," said Restore the Delta's Policy Analyst Jane Wagner-Tyack. "The California State Treasurer's Office estimates that the debt service on the bond will top $24 billion and obligate taxpayers until 2051. Earmarking those bond funds for specific projects as the current bond does ties legislators' hands if priorities change."
"At least $2 billion from previous water bonds is still unspent on the projects voters intended them for: Delta levees, flood management, and regional multi-benefit projects. The majority of water system spending in California is already local, and any additional state resources should go toward the kind of regional self-sufficiency projects that will reduce reliance on the Delta and lead to water independence for all the taxpayers and ratepayers of California," stated Wagner-Tyack.
"And bond funds certainly should not go to mitigate environmental damage resulting from a massive infrastructure project like the Peripheral Tunnels," said Wagner-Tyack. "These tunnels will cause more environmental problems than they can even begin to solve, and will drain the water from productive regions to benefit a few large corporate farms on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley that contribute less than .3% to the state's GDP."
"Costs for debt service come off the top of the state's General Fund, so every dollar spent paying down debt is a dollar not available for education, health care, and other programs," she concluded.
Brown and Natural Resources Secretary John Laird are fast-tracking the construction of the peripheral tunnels amidst increasing speculation that the water to be diverted by the canal will not only be used by corporate agribusiness and southern California developers, but by the oil industry to frack for oil and natural gas.
The oil industry, represented by Catherine Reheis-Boyd, President of the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) and former Chair of the Marine Life Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative Task Force to create marine protected areas on the South Coast, is pushing for increased "fracking" in California, particularly in Monterey Shale deposits in coastal areas and on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley.
Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is the controversial, environmentally destructive process of injecting millions of gallons of water, sand and toxic chemicals underground at high pressure in order to release and extract oil or gas, according to Food and Water Watch. (http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/blog_categories/gas-fracking/factsheet/)
Burt Wilson, Editor and Publisher of Public Water News Service (bwilson5404 [at] sbcglobal.net), believes that the "hidden agenda" of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to build the twin tunnels is to provide water for fracking in California. (http://www.alternet.org/fracking/will-plans-massive-tunnels-pipe-northern-california-water-south-mean-boon-fracking)
Background on Brown administration environmental policies:
Governor Jerry Brown and Natural Resources Secretary John Laird have continued and expanded the most environmentally destructive policies of the Schwarzenegger administration. They have fast-tracked the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to build the fish-killing peripheral tunnels, presided over record water exports to corporate agribusiness and Southern California in 2011, and authorized a record "salvage" of 9 million Sacramento splittail and over 2 million other fish including Central Valley salmon, steelhead, striped bass and threadfin shad the same year.
Their list of environmental "accomplishments" includes overseeing the decline of Delta smelt and five other fish species in 2012, presiding over the annual stranding of endangered coho salmon on the Scott and Shasta rivers, clear cutting forests in the Sierra Nevada, and embracing the corruption and conflicts of interests that infest California environmental processes and government bodies ranging from the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to the regional water boards. (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/09/1177724/-Cold-Dead-Fish-Awards-2012-Go-To-Jerry-Brown-Secretary-John-Laird)
The oil industry, represented by Catherine Reheis-Boyd, President of the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) and former Chair of the Marine Life Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative Task Force for the South Coast, is pushing for increased "fracking" in California.
Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is the controversial, environmentally destructive process of injecting millions of gallons of water, sand and toxic chemicals underground at high pressure in order to release and extract oil or gas, according to Food and Water Watch. (http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/blog_categories/gas-fracking/factsheet/)
The question is: Where will the industry get the water for fracking on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley and coastal areas, including Monterey County where large Monterey Shale deposits are located?
Burt Wilson, Editor and Publisher of Public Water News Service (bwilson5404 [at] sbcglobal.net), believes he has the answer. He contends that the "hidden agenda" of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to build twin tunnels is to provide water for the environmentally destructive process of fracking in California.
Wilson definitely knows what he is talking about. He was was on the media staff of the "No on 9" campaign against the peripheral canal in 1982. They won by a 2/3 vote statewide and stopped the canal.
Unfortunately, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, at the urging of corporate agribusiness interests, began his campaign build the peripheral canal in 2007. Brown has continued and fast-tracked the Republican governor's plan, opting to go for twin tunnels under the Delta than a single peripheral canal.
"As the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) nears completion, some unusual elements of the project have been revealed piecemeal and when they are all put together the total effect is that there is a hidden agenda going on that is far from what has been revealed on the surface," said Wilson.
He cited the example at one public meeting last year when Dr. Jerry Meral, the titular head of the BDCP announced, "We will not take any additional water from the Delta," a meeting that I also covered.
"I could hardly believe what I heard. I jumped up and said, 'Oh good, then we can cancel the twin tunnels.' Everyone laughed, but Dr. Meral's statement continued to stick in my mind. It didn't make sense," recalled Wilson.
Then, a month later Wilson found himself watching a Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) meeting where northern California water managers were discussing the sale of water transfers and exchanges from one place to the other.
Curt Aikens, manager of the Yuba City Water Agency, declared, "Yes, the twin tunnels will make it easier to effect water exchanges from northern to southern water markets."
Steve Hirsch, another northern California water manager, explained "how 2/3 of water banked in Northern California went out to the ocean. There was no way to get it to the Metropolitan Water District," according to Wilson.
Interior official refuses to answer question about fracking
Ms. Letty Belin from the Department of the Interior appeared at the next BDCP public meeting and Wilson asked her, "Do you think Delta water should be sent south to be used for fracking?"
She hesitated a moment and then replied, "I am not going to answer that question at this time" and then broke into a rambling talk about some other subject," according to Wilson.
"I took that to be a 'yes,'" emphasized Wilson.
Wilson said the "hidden scenario" goes like this: "Gov. Brown wants twin tunnels in the Delta. He won't allow a public vote on a water bond, so six water agencies, headed by the Westlands Water District and the Metropolitan Water District have formed a business consortium called the State and Federal Water Contractors Association (SFWCA). These six will be the primary funders of the $14-16 billion revenue stream needed to build and initially operate the twin tunnels."
"Is the SFWCA doing this as a service to the people of California? Of course not. Like all financiers, they expect to make a huge profit. Why else invest $14-billion?" asked Wilson.
Wilson said the SFWCA will "make its money back through handling water transfers from northern California reservoirs, water banks and aquifers--or any way they can get it--to sell at auction the the highest bidder, in this case the oil/gas companies inflated prices to the oil companies who will pay any price to get it."
"Currently in Greely, CO, the water agencies are selling water to farmers for $30 an acre foot while oil companies are paying $3,300.00 an acre foot!" noted Wilson. "Given that water transfers from northern California total about 1,200,000 acre feet a year, the SFWCA, at that rate, would earn almost $4-billion a year! Not a bad return on investment!"
"And here's how they'll do it: let's say some northern California water bank wants to sell 500 acre feet of water," he explained. "That water is then released into the Sacramento River north of the Capital City. At the same time, one or all three of the twin tunnel intakes on the Sacramento River near Hood will suck 500 acre feet out of the river and into the twin tunnels to be pumped south to the SFWCA."
"Note that no 'additional' water has been taken out of the Delta and the transfer is consistent with the State Water Code which mandates that we "reduce reliance on the Delta."
Wilson concluded, "All the parameters of this operation are currently falling into place. The fix is in, in my opinion. By taking the vote for such a project away from the people, Gov. Brown is doing a huge disservice to the People of California."
I applaud Wilson for asking the tough questions that need to be asked - and agree that water for fracking could be the "hidden agenda" of the BCDP. It makes sense that the water to be exported from the Delta through the tunnels will be used for a variety of purposes, irrigating drainage impaired land on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley, urban and industrial development in Southern California and increased fracking.
Oil industry wields tremendous power in California
The drive by the oil and natural gas industry to frack California is highlighted by recent developments that reveal the enormous power of Big Oil in the state.
In yet one more example of the revolving door between government and huge corporations that defines politics in California now, State Senator Michael Rubio (D-Bakersfield) on February 22 suddenly announced his resignation from office in order to take a "government affairs" position at Chevron.
Rubio went to work for Chevron just two months after alleged "marine protected areas," overseen by the President of the Western States Petroleum Association, a coastal real estate developer, a marina corporation executive and other corporate interests, went into effect on California's North Coast.
These "marine protected areas," created under the privately funded Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative, fail to protect the ocean from fracking, oil drilling, pollution, wind and wave energy projects, military testing and all human impacts other than fishing and gathering.
In a big scandal largely ignored by the mainstream media, Catherine Reheis-Boyd, the President of the Western States Petroleum Association, chaired the Marine Life Protection Act Blue Ribbon Task Force to create so-called "marine protected areas" on the South Coast that went into effect on January 1, 2012. She also served on the task forces to create "marine reserves" on the North Coast, North Central Coast and South Coast.
"It's clear that government and petroleum officials want to 'frack' in the very same areas Reheis-Boyd was appointed to oversee as a 'guardian' of marine habitat protection for the MLPA 'Initiative,'" said David Gurney, independent journalist and co-chair of the Ocean Protection Coalition, in his report on the opening of new lease-sales for fracking. (http://noyonews.net/?p=8215)
"What's becoming obvious is that Reheis-Boyd's expedient presence on the 'Blue Ribbon Task Force' for the MLPAI was a ploy for the oil industry to make sure no restrictions applied against drilling or fracking in or around so-called marine protected areas," Gurney emphasized.
The current push by the oil industry to expand fracking in California, build the Keystone XL Pipeline and eviscerate environmental laws is only possible because state officials and MLPA Initiative advocates greenwashed the key role Reheis-Boyd and the oil industry played in creating marine protected areas that don't protect the ocean.
Reheis-Boyd apparently used her role as a state marine "protection" official to increase her network of influence in California politics to the point where the Western States Petroleum Association has become the most powerful corporate lobby in California. (http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/site/lawsuit-filed-against-fracking-oil-lobbyist-says-its-safe)
As the oil industry expands its role in California politics and environmental processes, you can bet that they are going to use every avenue they can to get more water for fracking, including taking Delta water through the planned twin tunnels.
Restore the Delta (RTD) opposes both Governor Jerry Brown's plan to build two peripheral tunnels and a separate proposal to build a single peripheral tunnel backed by several environmental NGOs, business groups and water agencies, according to RTD's executive director Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla.
"We oppose the rush to build a project that would exterminate salmon runs, destroy sustainable family farms and saddle taxpayers with tens of billions in debt, mainly to benefit a small number of huge corporate agribusinesses on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley," said Barrigan-Parrilla.
She said Governor Brown's Peripheral Tunnel proposal is "fatally flawed."
"It's a bad investment," said Barrigan-Parrilla. "The total cost is unknown; the financing unsecured, and the only certainty is water customers will pay billions and billions in increased rates. There's a better solution than to drain the Delta, burden taxpayers with tens of billions, and extinguish native salmon to mainly benefit a small number of huge corporate mega-farms that are unsustainable."
She said this plan would increase water rates for Southern Californians, who would not get any increase in water but would subsidize San Joaquin farmers, who would get more water. The taxpayers of the south pay the debt for the water facilities, while much of the water is virtually donated to the agribusiness giants of Kern.
"Two-thirds of the water taken from the Delta will go to land-rich mega-farmers and billionaires in Westlands, Kern and Semitropic Water Districts, many of whom will water cotton, almonds and other permanent, water-intensive crops, planted on arid land. Large portions of these crops are for export to India and China. The billionaires will sell some of the water to desert developers," Barrigan-Parrilla noted.
While opposing the Governor's twin tunnel proposal, Barrigan-Parrilla said a single Peripheral Tunnel would still harm the Delta, and wouldn't be cost-effective for the water-takers. The single tunnel proposal was released part of portfolio-based" alternative to be considered under the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP). http://switchboard.nrdc.org/bl...
"The question with the portfolio-based alternative to the BDCP is, 'Why would water contractors pay for a tunnel that would deliver less water?' Their agencies cannot afford it," she noted.
"There is already doubt that they can afford to pay for the currently proposed tunnels, which would deliver between 4.5 and 6 million acre feet of water," stated Barrigan-Parilla. "If the existing pumps at Tracy remain in use, and a 3000 cfs tunnel is added at Hood, the total export capacity from the Delta would remain at 6 million acre feet."
"You cannot restore the Delta by taking that much water out of it," she concluded.
Kate Poole of NRDC responded to Barrigan-Parrilla's question, "Why would water contractors pay for a tunnel that would deliver less water?'" by saying, "This question misses the mark for at least three reasons." For her complete response, go to: http://switchboard.nrdc.org/bl...
"No tunnel is best," said Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe. "Clean up the water programs are needed for all the contaminated rivers in California! Where are those billions of dollars programs?"
I agree with Barrigan-Parrilla and Chief Sisk that both the twin tunnel and single tunnel proposal concepts are flawed, even though the single tunnel would apparently be less destructive than the two tunnels.
Both will take water from the Sacramento River in the North Delta, preventing that water from flowing through the Delta as it should to sustain Central Valley salmon and Delta fish populations. How can we trust the state and federal governments and the state water contractors to install state of the art fish screens to stop massive fish kills at these new pumping facilities when state of the art fish screens have never been installed at the existing South Delta water export facilities, as mandated under the CalFed process?
Six Delta fish populations - Delta smelt, longfin smelt, threadfin shad, American shad, striped bass and Sacramento splittail - continue to plummet, as revealed by the results of the Department of Fish and Wildlife's fall midwater trawl survey.
The problem is that the very concept of a peripheral tunnel or canal, regardless of whether it is a single or twin facility, is an outdated Nineteenth Century solution to a Twenty-First Century problem. The solution to solving both ecosystem restoration and water supply needs is using creative alternatives, such as those embodied in the Environmental Water Caucus alternative to the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to build the peripheral tunnels. We don't need a single tunnel or twin tunnels when we have other alternatives.
The caucus provided a series of recommendations on water, "California Water Solutions Now," that included an aggressive statewide water conservation program that can reduce water use by 8 million acre feet annually and the retirement of toxic farmlands that use almost 4 million acre feet of water per year. They paired their recommendations with a reduction of Delta pumping that will help restore the Bay-Delta ecology and fisheries.
I'll end with a question that has never been answered by Delta tunnel and canal proponents: Can anybody point to a single example where a diversion tunnel, canal or other facility in a river system or estuary has led to restoration of an ecosystem rather than its destruction?
