PALO ALTO, Calif. July 16, 2009 - State Assembly Member Jared Huffman of San Rafael, and State Senator Joe Simitian of Palo Alto are the peripheral canal's most ardent advocates. An earlier proposal for a peripheral canal, as you may remember, was soundly rejected by voters 25 years ago as an expensive boondoggle.
The Peripheral Canal
Huffman and Simitian's proposed canal would bypass the Delta by taking water out of the river just below Sacramento, rather than south of the estuaries near Tracy. The peripheral canal would then deliver the water 50 miles downstream to the existing California Aqueduct, where it would be pumped south to the Westland's Irrigation District in the Central Valley and to the municipal water districts in the Los Angeles basin. The price tag for the canal? Up to $20 billion!
The Delta's Health?
Obviously, the peripheral canal would result in less fresh water flowing through the Sacramento Delta, its estuaries, and into the San Francisco Bay. A good question is: what would this do to the already weak health of the Delta and the Bay? By what stretch of imagination could diverting fresh water around the Delta possibly restore its health? Could it be that science is not on Mr. Simitian and Mr. Huffman's side?
What Do the Scientists Say?
Two recently released studies by the federal government cast doubts on the Huffman/Simitian canal plans. This year both the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service issued their Biological Opinions on the California Aqueduct's impact on fish such as the Delta Smelt, Salmon, Steelhead, and Sturgeon. Both agencies conclude that Delta pumping needs to be cut back considerably to allow more fresh water to flow through the Delta. These reports, based upon the newest and best science available, say the Delta's ecosystem is on the verge of collapse and warn that a peripheral canal may only further damage the Delta's already fragile health. So, why are Huffman and Simitian pushing for the canal?
Water for 23 million people?
Huffman and Simitian claim that their peripheral canal would keep 23 million people in Southern California from losing their water supply. The truth is that only about 33% of Southern California's water comes from the Delta; the rest comes from the Owens Valley, the Colorado River and groundwater (wells). Even during the current drought, and even with the Delta pumps idle due to the concerns for the Delta Smelt, these Southern California water districts still have adequate supplies of water. If the Huffman/Simitian Peripheral Canal is not needed to assure a reliable water supply to 23 million people, then who really wants the canal?
The Westlands Irrigation District
During normal water years, up to half of the water pumped from the Delta is not delivered to people's taps in Southern California, but is either lost to evaporation or is delivered to the Westlands Irrigation District. The Westlands Irrigation District encompasses around 1,000 square miles surrounding Highway 5 on the arid west side of the San Joaquin Valley, an area previously thought to be useless for agriculture due to the high level of salts and selenium in the soil and aquifer. With the advent of cheap water from the Delta, large agribusness operators began using the Delta's water to flush salts and selenium from the soil so they could plant thirsty crops such as cotton, almonds, pistachios and, more recently, cattle fodder (an extremely water intensive crop). The Westlands Irrigation District did not pay for the California Aqueduct, but it turns out that they use up to half of its water.
Westland's Drought Worries
Now, with the drought cutting back on their water deliveries, these large agribusiness are mounting a huge lobbying campaign to get a peripheral canal built - a canal that will allow them to pump more water out of the Delta. It is these large corporate agribusinesses who really want the peripheral canal, and, apparently, Assembly Member Huffman and Senator Simitian are listening.
Who Do Huffman and Simitian Represent?
Why would legislators representing the San Francisco Bay Area be concerned with a canal to deliver water to big agribusiness in the Central Valley? Shouldn't they be more interested in the health of the Delta and the San Francisco Bay? When asked why he is pushing the Peripheral Canal to the detriment of the Delta and the Bay, Mr. Simitian recently replied: it is because "I represent all of California."
I, for one, voted for him to represent his district and the Bay Area, not Westland's agribusiness.
Change the Debate!
Tell Assembly Member Huffman and Senator Simitian that the health of the Delta and the Bay, not the desires of big agribusiness, should be their top priority. Tell them that the debate should be about how the Delta can be restored, and how its farmers, its ecosystem and its fisheries can be protected from the damage caused by excessive and unnecessary pumping. Tell them that the peripheral canal is still an expensive boondoggle - a mistake California can't afford.
Joe Gray, a Palo Alto resident in Senator Simitian's district, thinks restoring the Delta is of utmost importance.
By submitting a comment you consent to our rules. Please use your real first and last name, not a nickname or alias. Thank you.
