A new Delta water plan rolls out

July 25, 2012

A controversial conveyance project designed to transport more fresh water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta has changed form but it remains the bane of conservation groups and a number of major agricultural interests.

The Delta provides water for the State Water Project, which is planned to supply several San Luis Obispo County areas.

The federal-state plan, called the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, is being unveiled today in Sacramento. It already has been criticized by interests fearful that current water supplies will be compromised. What was once a plan for an overland canal — known as the Peripheral Canal — the idea now is to transport water around the estuary in two huge underground tunnels.

Consumer, environmental, sport and commercial fishing operators and farm bureau will protest the plan, along with lawmakers from both parties.

The plan would include two 35-mile-long tunnels from the Sacramento River moving water to pumps south of Tracy. The idea is to prevent removal of water directly from the Delta, which often compromises both water quality and the health of Delta fisheries.


Loading...

7 Comments

  1. Jorge Estrada says:

    MaryMalone, Do not beleive for one second that I support State Water for Santa Margarita. The County of San Luis Obispo has been using process, lengthy and as a funnel to direct what little remianing
    public opinion to their desired result.

    This is how it works: The Advisory Committees, “Free Staff”, respectfully serve and provide direction to their respective County Supervisor. The Paid Staff continue their mission by disqualifyng the will of the people until the remaining misinformed Free Staff supports one of their incremental steps toward the desired result.

    We know that the State of California is in dire need for more paying customers to support the State Water network. We also know that the County of San Luis Obispo is the local Government, recruting agency, to meet this directive. It is just that simple and certainly the people will be heard and hopefully not after the fact.

    It is no wonder that the available grants are only to support recruits who will pay bill and some.

    (3) 3 Total Votes - 3 up - 0 down
  2. srichison says:

    California state government can’t do anything but spend money with no results to show for it. This is a prime example. Folks, the peripheral canal cconcept is over three decades old, and still there is nothing to show for it except wasted money. Anything left up to this state, whether it be water delivery or water conservation, is a money sucking black hole.

    (4) 4 Total Votes - 4 up - 0 down
  3. MaryMalone says:

    The reason water supply in the central and southern-california regions is at risk is, in large part, secondary to the ridiculously unsecure, dirt-and-crap embankment levee system.

    Many experts have repeatedly said that the water supply in central and southern California is only an earthquake–or tsunami–away from failing. The levees are already compromised, in absurd disrepair, riddled with vermin, etc.

    (“The Unrelilability of California’s Water Supply,” http://tinyurl.com/7xd3okj)

    Building tunnels to transport the water leaves us with a multi-gazillion-dollar project that will be as at risk to earthquakes and tsunamis as is the current Delta “system.”

    I agree with Snooki. California’s residents have not really been pressed to conserve water. In many locales, it is ridiculously underpriced, providing no incentive for water conservation.

    Water conservation and other forms of sustainable water use need to be maxed out first. It makes zero sense to spend the money for a “solution” that is no better than what we have now, when the water being shipped south from the Delta region will continue to be used for Eloi-endorsed vanity lawns, swimming pools, and other water-wasting elements.

    (-4) 8 Total Votes - 2 up - 6 down
  4. Jorge Estrada says:

    While they are protesting in Sacramento, Santa Margarita is in line with baited breath for some of that water. At the Board of Supervisors meeting yesterday, Jim Patterson commented on the findings of the CSA 23 Advisory meeting,” in full attendance and their unanimous support for grant money to construct connections for State Water”. Within the written correspondence signed by the Chair of the CSA 23 Advisory Committee, Supervisor Patterson’s source letter of support, the substandard construction of Santa Margarita’s main well was discussed.

    To stay on topic and consider how this Delta Project may affect us, Shandon, Garden Farms and Santa Margarita are being discussed together for grant eligibility. Now that Santa Margarita is behind State Water, per Supervisor Jim Patterson’s assessment, drought reliability thence emergency water and now a substandard well may become a vanishing concern. As soon as Garden Farms is on board with Shandon, all three communities can work together and share with Sacramento’s concern, expense and tomorrow.

    (1) 1 Total Votes - 1 up - 0 down
    • MaryMalone says:

      Any approach to providing water to California’s residents that involves the State Water Project is an unsecure approach because the SWP is already overcommitted to its current contractees. In fact, the SWP last year said flat-out that, in the future, it will only be able to deliver 60% of the water already contracted to its current contractees.

      (1) 7 Total Votes - 4 up - 3 down
  5. snooky156 says:

    The reason so many people oppose this project is because it’s a bad idea. If there’s any money that should be spent, it should be spent on conservation, water re-use, and water recycling. With this approach, you reduce water pollution and create new water supply.

    (4) 12 Total Votes - 8 up - 4 down
  6. Citizen says:

    “Officials say the $23.7 billion proposal includes over 100,000 acres of floodplains and tidal marsh habitat restoration.

    Tunnel construction itself would cost about $14 billion and would be paid by water users. Officials say taxpayers would bear the $10 billion cost of habitat restoration, but a water bond that could provide some money for restoration was moved to November 2014” AP

    (2) 4 Total Votes - 3 up - 1 down

Comments are closed.