May 24, 2013
Release immediate

(The following is a statement by Dan Nelson, Executive Director of the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority, on today’s filing for a writ of mandate concerning the Delta Plan.)

WATER AUTHORITY FILES FOR WRIT;
DISAGREES WITH DELTA STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL

“The San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority, along with Westlands Water District, filed a petition today for writ of mandate asserting that the Delta Plan is inconsistent with the 2009 Delta Reform Act legislation and that the programmatic environmental impact report is inadequate.

“The Delta Plan exceeds the authority granted by the Legislature when it passed the Delta Reform Act in 2009. Instead of serving the role as a facilitator or collaborator with over 200 other State agencies with a policy role touching the Delta, the Delta Stewardship Council has made itself the 201st regulatory agency, which creates obstacles rather than pathways to achieving the coequal goals of providing a more reliable water supply for California and protecting, restoring and enhancing the Delta ecosystem.

“We appreciate the efforts by the Council to incorporate public input into the Delta Plan but we have a fundamental disagreement over the authority the Council has assigned itself over California’s water supply.

“The Council has clearly over-reached its authority and has inappropriately enacted regulatory hurdles that will have the opposite effect of fulfilling the Legislature’s co-equal goals.”

###

From News Line, a daily compilation of farm water news distributed to CFWC members and others upon request. To receive News Line, click here.

Peaceful Delta in danger of plunder

Coalition response…The Delta has undergone a slow but continual change dating back hundreds of years. The Swamp and Overflow Land Act of 1850 spurred substantial changes that created the islands found in the Delta. Cities began to pop up around and in the Delta. Each change resulted in benefits that ultimately favored California, but that have undeniably created a Delta that is vastly different from its natural state. History is poised to repeat itself with the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP).

The Legislature’s 2009 mandate for co-equal goals includes both improved water supply reliability AND ecosystem restoration. Fixing the host of problems confronting the Delta will take a lot of work and may cause temporary inconveniences. That’s a necessary part of returning the Delta to its potential as a vibrant and productive ecosystem and serving the water supply needs of 25 million Californians and thousands of farmers. Doing nothing means that the Delta will continue to collapse, which is unacceptable for water users and true advocates for the environment.

From News Line, a daily compilation of farm water news distributed to CFWC members and others upon request. To receive News Line, click here.

Supervisors fear Delta water grab 

Coalition response…People incorrectly view the Bay Delta Conservation Plan’s two tunnels as depleting the amount of water in the Sacramento River and the Delta. The water that will flow through the tunnels is that supply that is already legally contracted for by water users south of the Delta.The amount of water that will flow through the tunnels will be limited by the actual day-by-day conditions and flows of the Sacramento River. Studies have concluded that water diversions will likely be in the range of average exports over the past 20 years. When flows are high more water can be moved through the tunnels. When flows are lower less water will be moved…or none at all under dry conditions. Learn more at www.farmwater.org/exportthrottle.pdf.

Supervisor Ruhstaller should understand that of the nearly 4,000 farmers in the San Joaquin Valley receiving water that flows through the Delta, most are family farmers. According to USDA statistics, nearly 96% of all farms in California are owned by families, individuals or partnerships and that percentage is likely representative for the San Joaquin Valley’s southern and Westside that he attempts to vilify.

From News Line, a daily compilation of farm water news distributed to CFWC members and others upon request. To receive News Line, click here.

Finding Common Ground in the Delta

Coalition response…The Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) was commissioned with two objectives, creating a reliable water supply and restoring the Delta ecosystem. Years of scientific study have developed the present-day version of BDCP to accomplish those two goals. Recommendations that seek to insert other tasks into the BDCP process should be done in a way that doesn’t overstep other processes where they may already be underway.

Water managers in California recognize that a diverse suite of challenges demand a robust toolkit of solutions. BDCP implementation will not hamper efforts to develop new solutions to these challenges, but will help to improve supply reliability and improve the Delta ecosystem. Local agencies will continue to complete local water projects to meet local and regional needs, as they do now, after BDCP is implemented. We will continue to update, refine and implement the State Water Plan (Bulletin 160) to meet broader challenges. All of these separate activities are essential to moving forward.

Successfully preparing for California’s future water needs is critical, and will come through our ongoing efforts to give the challenges that exist and arise appropriate attention. Attempting to shoehorn them into the BDCP process gives none the consideration they are due.

From News Line, a daily compilation of farm water news distributed to CFWC members and others upon request. To receive News Line, click here.

Skullduggery In the Water Pipes: Newspaper Condemns California’s Plot to Solve State’s Water Problems

Coalition response…It’s refreshing to see some deep thought and consideration of the full effects of California’s water supply crisis as opposed to the steady drumbeat of opposition to the Bay Delta Conservation Plan. There are real consequences to not taking the bold actions led by Governor Jerry Brown. This article by Henry Miller strips away the phony arguments against BDCP and shows it for what it is – a solution for California that restores environmental resources and provides reliable water supplies for millions of Californians.

From News Line, a daily compilation of farm water news distributed to CFWC members and others upon request. To receive News Line, click here.

Letter: Gov. Brown should consider alternatives to tunnels

Coalition response…Installing “state-of-the-art fish screens” at the south Delta pumps would not benefit fish, as claimed by the author, but would increase their risk and exposure to predator fish. Fish are currently pulled to the pumps along a channel that has become heavily populated with predators. BDCP’s proposed tunnels and screens would divert water from the north Delta. Instead of trapping the fish at the end of a channel like in the south Delta, fish would continue their journey along the Sacramento River toward the ocean. The letter-writer’s suggestion is a death sentence for fish.

BDCP provides the best choice to provide a supply of water to public water agencies that already have legal contracts for a certain amount of water. That supply becomes reliable under BDCP for 25 million Californians and thousands of farmers who are growing food for a world market. Reducing the delivery to only 3 MAF per year falls short of the existing contracts and would create higher water rates to urban users and force farmers to idle thousands of acres that would result in an increased reliance on imported food. Also, no criteria exists from the State Water Resources Control Board to support the author’s position of reduced exports.

From News Line, a daily compilation of farm water news distributed to CFWC members and others upon request. To receive News Line, click here.

Letter: Delta community oppose Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) 

Coalition response…Claims that the BDCP’s proposed tunnels will “drain the Delta” are without fact and ignores studies already conducted by scientists and researchers who have worked for year in developing BDCP. The amount of water that will flow through the tunnels will be limited by the actual day-by-day conditions and flows of the Sacramento River. Studies have concluded that water diversions will likely be in the range of average exports over the past 20 years. When flows are high more water can be moved through the tunnels. When flows are lower less water will be moved…or none at all under dry conditions. Learn more at www.farmwater.org/exportthrottle.pdf.

Restoration of the Delta’s ecosystem is also one of the goals of BDCP, which includes protection for fish species. For the past 20 years State and federal fish agencies have attempted to protect and restore imperiled fish species through regulating water supplies that has taken water away from 25 million Californians and thousands of farmers. The result has been money spent, water lost and socio-economic upheaval in rural and disadvantaged agricultural communities. Little if any improvement for these species has been accomplished.

If California is going to secure a reliable water future that includes a restored Delta ecosystem, then BDCP must move forward to reality.

From News Line, a daily compilation of farm water news distributed to CFWC members and others upon request. To receive News Line, click here.

Letter: Tunnel project ignores 40 years of scientific understanding

Coalition response…Over the past seven years the Bay Delta Conservation Plan has evolved using the largest body of scientific evidence for any project of its kind in California – more than 18,000 pages. That information is available for review at  www.baydeltaconservationplan.com. The letter-writer’s criticism of the so-called “insatiable thirst” by agriculture is simply wrong. Between 1967 and 2000 the volume of farm production rose 89 percent while applied water remained almost flat, according to data from the Department of Water Resources and the National Agricultural Statistics Service. And more improvements have occurred since then as well. Between 2003 and 2010, San Joaquin Valley farmers invested more than $2.1 billion upgrading the irrigation systems on 1.8 million acres, enhancing their ability to efficiently grow food for much of California, the U.S. and consumers abroad.  How is that a bad thing?

Individuals and organizations too often use the term of “subsidized water” without fully understanding or explaining its meaning or benefits. The only “subsidy” that exists today is the result of action by Congress in 1935 when it waived the interest costs on building the Central Valley Project. That investment has returned billions more in new tax revenue from the farming operations and related businesses that depend on CVP water.  Find out more about the economic benefits farm water brings to the economy at www.moneygoeswherewaterflows.org.

From News Line, a daily compilation of farm water news distributed to CFWC members and others upon request. To receive News Line, click here.

Sierra Club urges governor to rethink position on Delta tunnels

Coalition response…Despite the Sierra Club’s opposition to the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, Governor Jerry Brown is on the right track to help solve some of California’s biggest water supply and environmental challenges. The Club claims to be concerned about the long term water supply needs of 25 million Californians (not to mention thousands of food-producing farmers) but at the same time it ignores the reality of today’s broken water system.

The Bay Delta Conservation Plan has been developed to benefit all of California through a reliable water supply and a restored Delta ecosystem. Years of scientific research have resulted in more than 18,000 pages of documentation that demonstrates that the co-equal goals within the BDCP is the right way to go – for water users and for the environment.

In the end the Sierra Club asks the Governor to “fiercely protect and fight for the public trust of surface and groundwater resources, which belong to all Californians.” Publicly the Sierra Club claims that water resources belong to all Californians. The problem with their plan is that it prevents millions of us from having much access.

From News Line, a daily compilation of farm water news distributed to CFWC members and others upon request. To receive News Line, click here.

Letter: Don’t take our water away
Letter: Water wars are beginning

Coalition response…Water transfers are not allowed to take place without a rigorous review of potential impacts on area-of-origin water users, groundwater, environmental resources and more. These regulations require that no negative impacts may result from proposed transfers. Individuals and organizations that insist any transfer will deplete local water supplies should be aware that safeguards are already in place to address their concerns. Public participation in California water policy is important. Communication with local irrigation and water districts is an important first step because locally elected boards have the responsibility to oversee the decisions that affect their constituents. Short-term water transfers have proven time and time again to provide benefits to both buyers and sellers by moving water from areas of abundance to areas of need and infusing outside capital into local areas to upgrade and maintain infrastructure without raising local taxes or water costs.