Peripheral Canal Issue Emerges As Crucial in Post-Budget California
David M. Greenwald
California Progress Report
07/28/2009
With the passage of the budget last week, the issue of the peripheral canal figures to become one of the hottest issues in California. In it is the nexus of the perennial water battles along with environmental protection.
As Steve Evans, Conservation Director of Friends of the River, a statewide river conservation organization recently wrote on the California Progress Report:
“The original Peripheral Canal was rejected by voters in a statewide referendum in 1982. Large state and federal pumps continue to take about 40% of the fresh water from the Delta for export south. These “through Delta” exports have more than tripled over the last 50 years, reversing flows in Delta channels, degrading water quality, and driving Delta fisheries towards extinction. Many believe that the canal will simply facilitate increased water exports to powerful agribusiness interests, which already use 80% of the developed water in the state.”
A recent Op-Ed by Restore the Delta that appeared in the Capitol Weekly suggests:
"There needs to be some honest answers about the impacts of potential projects on the Delta. The region is home to more than 500,000 Californians and is a key source for agriculture, fishing, hunting and other related economic activities; it is more than a debate on the economic value of corporate agriculture vs. Delta fish. It is also the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas, but it is an ecosystem in danger of collapse. Any changes to the Delta could mean increased exposure to pollutants in the waters, increased costs for water and water treatment, reduced farm production, greater loss of commercial fishing and a higher risk of flooding."
Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Restore the Delta’s campaign director spoke at the rally in early July.
“The Delta is on the brink of environmental collapse as the result of a failed water system that does nothing more than move water from north to south. The legislature’s answer is to fund a project that will cost Californians billions of dollars in new bonds and impose millions of dollars of new fees at the same time cutting public safety, health and education services to all Californians. We want real solutions, programs and projects that will capture, recycle, and treat water, programs that are cost effective and environmentally sound, programs that will stop the insanity of moving water from north to south through or around the Delta.”
The California Progress Report received a statement Monday from Senator Lois Wolk, who represents the 5th Senate District including several of the five delta counties.
"We need real solutions for the Delta, not just a narrow focus on expensive new plumbing that may or may not help the Delta and the Delta communities recover from this crisis," she said.
She continued:
“The Delta is the heart of California's water system. It provides water to Southern California and the Bay Area and is a vital habitat for salmon, sturgeon and countless waterfowl. But it is far more than that. It is home to 500,000 people, 27 cities, 5 counties, two ports, historic communities older than most California cities, and a multibillion dollar economy including commercial fisheries and thriving agriculture."
Unfortunately, the debate over a peripheral canal has diverted attention and energy from a discussion of the overall issues of the Delta.
"Delta communities are rightly concerned that a canal the equivalent of a 100 lane freeway and the length of the Panama Canal will be built through the heart of prime Delta farmland without their approval or any concern about the impacts on Delta communities. There are no assurances to the Delta Communities that once the Sacramento River, the largest river in California, is diverted, that the Delta itself will survive. For many in the Legislature, the Delta remains a blank slate even though it is a stone's throw from the Capitol."
Like her counterpart in the Senate, Assemblywoman Mariko Yamada, who represents Yolo and Solano Counties, told the Progress Report in a phone interview that she was very concerned not only about the impact on the five delta counties but the exclusion of those stakeholders in the discussion process.
"I think it’s still premature to agree that a peripheral canal is the issue particularly for our local community, especially the five delta counties that have been alternately excluded from the discussions, invited to the discussions, and sometimes have had their comments discounted anyway."
She continued:
"I don’t think anything should go forward without strong inclusion of the viewpoints of the five delta counties and the state representatives that actually represent the delta."
She went on to compare the discussion to the recent TANC powerline discussions which involved the proposal of renewable energy however, the process was imposed by a non-elected statewide body. The process was flawed where local concerns were ignored by statewide process.
"Yolo is not a county that should be taken lightly or just viewed as expendable in the discussion. We have very real economic interests as well as agricultural and community interests. Just because there are fewer people living in Yolo County should not discount our importance or significance in the discussion."
Many believe the impact to the surrounding areas would be devastating.
Said Assemblywoman Yamada:
"Land values will certainly change as will agricultural production if there was a peripheral canal that was built through our area. I believe it would change the communities forever and I don’t think that is something that would be disregarded. I think we have a strong tradition of very strong agricultural and open space roots and Yolo shouldn’t be taken for granted."
Steve Evans, wrote on the California Progress Report Monday:
"There are serious questions as to whether the Peripheral Canal will benefit the Delta’s ecosystem, fisheries, and water quality. The Public Policy Institute of California determined that there is only a 50% likelihood that the Sacramento River salmon population, which is the mainstay of the commercial salmon fishing industry in California and southern Oregon, will remain viable with a Peripheral Canal. The same report found only a 40% likelihood that the Delta smelt would remain viable with a canal.
A recent scientific evaluation of the draft Bay-Delta Conservation Plan, which is closely tied to the canal proposal, found that the benefits of Delta habitat restoration may be off-set by the negative impacts of the Peripheral Canal diversion on Sacramento River salmon. The same report indicated that the canal would do little to improve south Delta water quality or the survival of San Joaquin River salmon population."
For both Assemblywoman Yamada and Senator Wolk, a key question is one of governance.
"The key questions about the Delta are those of governance," said Senator Wolk. "Who decides? And according to which criteria? And what assurances can be provided? And how much water actually is needed to protect a strong and healthy Delta? Until I am convinced that these decisions are made transparently, with the Delta communities at the table and according to good science and not politics, then no bulldozer should move dirt.”
Assemblywoman Yamada pointed out that a recent Delata Blue Vision Task Force made 12 recommendations and nearly all of them have been adopted except for the governance issue. "I think that’s because the governance discussion is the most difficult. I’m not sure we can come to an agreement without agreeing upon how the delta as a place is going to be governed and how the interests are all going to be balanced," Yamada said.
