Faced with a judge's threat to shut down the state's water export pumps in the South Delta, a key State Senate Committee on April 11 passed Senator Joe Simitian's Delta bill, SB 26, that would set a deadline for the Department of Water Resources to pick one of five water transfer options put forward recently by a group of scientists.
The bill, entitled, the “Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, Clean Drinking Water, Supply Security and Environmental Improvement Act of 2008,” passed through the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Water, chaired by Darrell Steinberg, by a vote of 8 to 0. The bill will be re-referred to the Committee on Environmental Quality.
Steinberg said that the legislation, depending upon its outcome, “would either become an historic or a forgotten moment.”
Environmental and fishery groups were relieved that the peripheral canal was not the only option for solving Delta problems included in the bill, an improvement over a previous version of the legislation. However, fishing groups criticized the bill for relying on the flawed methodology of a Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) report addressing future scenarios for the West Coast's largest and most important estuary.
The California Delta is in its biggest crisis ever as the POD (Pelagic Organism Decline) team of state and federal scientists continues to document a dramatic decline of four open water species - Delta smelt, juvenile striped bass, longfin smelt and threadfin shad. The Delta smelt population has crashed from 800,000 Delta fish in 2001 to only 35,000 now, a consequence of the over 1,000,000 acre feet of water increase in Delta water exports that has taken place since 2001.
“The Delta is going to hell in a hand basket,” said Simitian. “A precious resource is at risk. Twenty-three million Californians are understandably concerned about the security and quality of their water. And Northern Californians continue to worry about how much of 'their water,' as they think of it, will be shipped to other parts of the state.”
Simitian explained how he changed his mind on including funding for the peripheral canal in his bill.
“I believed when I introduced the bill that an alternative conveyance facility was the only way to solve the three issues of successful Delta policy: (1) begin environmental restoration of the fisheries and eco-system of the Delta (2) secure from various risks, for 23 million California residents, farmers and businesses, the freshwater that they depend on to live and work; and (3) improve significantly the water quality we deliver to them.”
However, in February the PPIC released a “remarkable study that changed my thought process,” contended Simitian. “It added several alternatives I had not considered and provided provocative analysis based on impeccable science that led me to conclude we had more work to do deciding on a solution.”
Together with Senators Mike Machado, Don Perata and Steinberg, Simitian crafted the version of the bill that passed through the committee.
Simitian said the bill would set a deadline for January 1, 2009 for the State Department of Water Resources to pick one of five options proposed by the PPIC. Three of these options provide for versions of the Peripheral Canal, while the other two calls for reducing water pumping and building dams near the Delta.
Contra Costa Water District was a key supporter of the bill. “The District supports early implementation of these 'no regrets' projects which mirror the District's Staged Conveyance Actions for restoring the Delta. These actions are necessary to Delta sustainability and provide the platform for implementation of any recommendations from the Delta Vision process.”
Senator Mike Machado said the bill would address both ecosystem and water supply needs. “The bill gives us the opportunity to put ecosystem and restoration on the same plane as water supply,” he stated. “This bill provides an opportunity to overcome the inertia and to find a solution. The inaction of the stakeholders can no longer be tolerated.”
Barry Nelson from Natural Resources Defense Council, Ann Hayden of Environmental Defense, Mindy McIntire of the Planning and Conservation League and others spoke in support of the bill. The American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees also supported the legislation.
McIntire said she had several concerns about the bill, including the rapidly approaching timelines. She also said that in addition to the alternatives listed in the bill, a study of how much water is needed in the Delta to save the ecosystem and fishery should be included.
Gary Adams, president of the California Striped Bass Association, was concerned that the people most impacted by the Delta food chain crash - recreational anglers and Delta residents - would not be listened to in the process for the implementation of this bill, just as they have been marginalized in the Governor's controversial “Delta Vision” process.
“As a Delta fisherman, I have seen water developers continue to take more and more water in the name of profits," he stated. “I am concerned that the people from the Delta, the East Bay, the West Bay and South Bay and those most impacted by Delta water exports haven't been engaged in this process. The Delta is a heritage that we don't want to lose. We want parity and equality in sharing the resources of the Delta.”
Bill Jennings, executive director of Watershed Protectors, a project of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance. (CSPA, characterized the amended Simitian Bill as “a political compromise that bought one year of time.”
“We are concerned that to select an alternative without a serious analysis of what the Delta really needs, any decision will be likely to be flawed,” he said. “The PPIC study that the legislation is based on isn't worth a damn. What it does is put up a series of straw men and none of them are any good.”
“We are really concerned about the time frame,” he added. “The amended legislation defused a bill that wasn't going anywhere and initiated a process of choosing from options, none of which are feasible. Frankly, to save the Delta we're going to have to wean Southern California from Delta water. Before we do anything, we need a scientific accurate assessment of what the Delta needs to survive as an estuary and what are the options needed to make Southern California more self sufficient.”
In adopting SB 27, the Legislature expects the Blue Ribbon Task Force to focus most of its attention on exploring and evaluating the five options that the PPIC found most promising: two versions of an isolated conveyance system, two options with reduced exports, and one option featuring an “armored,” but not isolated conveyance system.
The Task Force will then report to the Delta Vision Committee and Governor on which of the five options, or hybrid of options, it believes best meets the requirements of existing law and the Governor's Executive Order.
The bill will also:
- Declare the intent of the Legislature to develop and pass a legislative package to begin implementing a program for sustainable management of the Delta in 2008.
- Require the Resources Secretary, by January 1, 2008, to develop and begin implementing a series of actions on behalf of the Delta, including investing in essential emergency preparedness and identifying critical levees that must be strengthened immediately.
Whether the passage of SB 27 through Committee will be an historic or forgotten moment, as Steinberg stated, depends on whether the Governor and Legislature are serious about restoring the Delta ecosystem by coming up with a scientific analysis of how much water the Delta really needs to sustain its endangered fish populations.
DWR & DFG Directors Face Grilling By Senators
During the same Resources Committee meeting, the Senators for the second time grilled DFG Director Ryan Broderick and Lester Snow, director of the Department of Water Resources (DWR), about their progress in obtaining an “incidental take permit” for endangered Delta smelt and salmon, as ordered by an Oakland Superior Court Judge in March.
Snow said that DWR has a “three part strategy” for CESA Compliance, including requesting a “consistency determination” rather than an actual “take permit” for killing endangered smelt and salmon; engaging in federal reconsultation; and expediting the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan.
However, Mike Jackson of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance said DWR must take all four actions outlined by the Pelagic Organism Decline (POD) team to save Delta smelt and several runs of king salmon. He said that DWR has implemented only first action, to stop the take of Delta smelt this winter by reducing pumping to 5,000 cfs, and has refused to act on the other measures.
The second step is to reduce reverse flows to zero in Old and Middle rivers. This will require another 500,000 acre-feet for the estuary.
The third step is to not put the South Delta barriers in until June 1, adding another 100,000 acre-feet to the Delta. Instead, DWR is planning to put the barriers in during late April.
The fourth action is to increase inflows into Suisun Bay from June 1 to December 1, requiring another 500,000 acre-feet of water.
Michael Lozeau, lawyer for CSPA, said the incidental take permit would be the preferable path over the “consistency determination.”
“The incidental take permit won't take years - it could be done in a month if the agency wanted to, since the EIR has already been done,” said Lozeau. “One of the four steps recommended by the POD Team, one has already been implemented - now the others need to be done. These are real measures designed to put 1.6 million acre-feet back in the Delta. We are hoping the decisions are made by biologists and scientists, rather than politicians.”
