Delta Water
Summit Elicits Many Questions
Part 1
 |
Big Crowd Attends Summit |
By Patrick Cavanaugh, Editor
And Laurie Greene, Associate Editor
A serious and vocal crowd of
about 700 people representing farmers, farmworkers, others who derive their
income from farming and Central Valley citizens who wanted to know more about
Delta and water availability, packed the Satellite Student Union today, at
California State University Fresno for the Delta Water Summit.
 |
Mario Santoyo |
The Delta Water Summit,
organized by Mario Santoyo, Executive Director of the Latino Water Coalition,
brought invited local and national elected officials, and representatives of
California Water Agencies to answer questions from moderators and the public.
Here are some highlights of the three-hour summit.
The first panel, moderate by
Ray Appleton, talk show host of KMJ, focused on the roles of water agencies
regarding the challenges and expectations of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan
(BDCP).
 |
John Coleman |
John Coleman,
Vice President, Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA), said everyone
in the room would agree that the water system in California is failing and we
need to take responsibility for BDCP. And hopefully, the Water Bond to help
fund BDCP will be on the ballot in 2014 such that we can fix the broken system
so future generations will benefit.
Tom Birmingham,
General Manager, Westlands Water District, spoke about the stressors in the
Delta that are being blamed on farmers south of the Delta. Birmingham said, “I
do not want to suggest that the operation of existing water projects are not affecting
the species in the Delta. But there are numerous factors that are affecting the
abundance of those species.”
 |
Tom Birmingham |
Birmingham noted that a few
years ago, the Public Policy Institute of California issued a report stating:
If you were to shut the two major water projects down entirely, quit diverting
water upstream, quit pumping water out of the Delta, there is still more than a
50 percent chance that the species in the Delta which are currently at risk,
would still go extinct.
“To suggest that what we have
done over the course of the last 30 years in trying to protect these species is
working, is absolutely nuts, as the species have continued to decline,” said
Birmingham. “And the whole purpose of the BDCP is to take a different approach.
Rather than focusing on species-by-species restrictions or regulations, some of
which conflict with one another. The purpose of the BDCP is to take a more
holistic approach, take an ecosystem approach, to try something different in
protecting the species. All the studies that have been done to date suggest
that if we are going to save species in the Delta, and if we are going to
preserve the economy of California, we have got to do this project,” he said.
 |
Brent Walthall |
Brent Walthall,
Assistant General Manager of the Kern County Water Agency, based in Bakersfield,
spoke about the stressors in the Delta and how the BDCP may help to fix these.
“When the BDCP first started, it looked only at the flow of the water and how
the operations of the state and federal projects worked,” Walthall said. “But
there are a lot of stressors in the Delta, and we do not handle them well—or at
all. And the reason is that the regulatory agencies are charged with enforcing
the Endangered Species Act (ESA) on a project-by-project basis.”
“The regulatory agencies do
not get to look at the ecosystem as a whole and decide what is wrong. They only
get to look at the permits for a specific project and decide how to operate
that one project, whether it’s a Federal Project, or a State Water Project,”
Walthall said. “One of the unique aspects of the BDCP is that it can look at
all the other stressors, and again, there are a lot of them. The conservation
measures in the BDCP have 22 suggestions. Only one focuses on pumping; the
other 21 address all the other stressors.”
“Biologists think these
stressors are all significant,” Wathall continued, “but we do not have a high
level of understanding; however, we are learning that they are quite important.
For example, one important stressor is predation of non-native fish on native
species. As a particularly impactful example, the non-native bass species are
predators on the Delta Smelt and the out-migrating salmon after spawning.
Apparently salmon is the favorite food of the bass species. And we have seen on
the San Joaquin River side of the Delta, that as much as 90 percent of the
salmon travelling on their way to the ocean are eaten before they get there,
and we have done nothing to address this.”
“Neither the state nor the
federal water projects have ever even come close to that kind of percentage,”
said Wathall. “Our percentages are often only 12 to 15 percent.”
“If we can identify these
other stressors, we can go a long way to solving the environmental problem and
free up the water system to operate more as it was designed to do,” Wathall
said.
 |
Ron Jacobsma |
On the question of how the
BDCP would impact additional storage south of the Delta, Ron Jacobsma, General Manager, Friant Water Authority, noted that
one of the projects that he and others have been following closely for more
than a decade, is the Temperance Flat Reservoir, which would constructed behind
Friant Dam and upriver on the San Joaquin. This would allow us to take advantage
of the flood flows we periodically get. And when they come, they come big. In
2010/2011, we had close to one million acre-feet of floodwaters released over
the Friant Dam into the San Joaquin River, and we could have really used some
of that water. In the last two years we have been at 40 percent of adequate
supply.
Jacobsma said, “The Friant
Water Authority manages 1.8 million acre-feet with a 520,000 acre-foot-reservoir
(Millerton Lake), and we are looking at how we can pull additional yields from
that project. If you build a million-plus acre-foot-reservoir, the yield is
about 150,000 acre-feet. That’s a key water supply because that’s essentially
what we commit to environment through our restoration program downriver.”
“But the $2-3 billion cost of
Temperance Flat water diverted for agricultural use does not work too well by
itself,” Jacobsma continued. “But if we could get the Delta reliability back,
the situation would change. Moving vast amounts of wet-year water and running
out of storage south of the Delta, in the case of Temperance Flat, would be
more feasible. In this way, we could integrate that storage facility through
ground water. Exchanges which could potentially double the yield offer greater
flexibility and provide water quality benefits to urban agencies, suddenly make
the whole big monetary gulp for a little sip of benefits works a lot better. You
must take advantage of the wet year flows.”
Plus there is the benefit to
PG&E, to investing in the hydroelectric potential of the dam that could be
produced cheaply.
Appleton then asked Jacobsma
if the Temperance Flat would ever get built.
Jacobsma replied, “What we
need to assess immediately, and the Bureau of Reclamation is on track to do so
a year from now, is determine if the construction of Temperance Flat is even
feasible. That will signal whether the project can be built. Then we have to
figure out what the BDCP looks like. Both of these projects realistically, with
litigation and other issues, are most likely 10-15 years out. But if we do not
start taking steps now, then they never will happen.”
John Coleman
with ACWA noted that the BDCP is an evolving process and his agency wants it to
be successful. “And increased storage is a very important part of the BDCP. But
what would be the value of adding the additional storage?”
“If you were to look at the
last 20 years, including wet years, we have not been able to take advantage of
the existing storage,” Coleman said.
“We could build a reservoir and flood the Sacramento Valley, and we could build
all sorts of dams in the San Joaquin Valley for surface storage. But if you
look at the history of the last two decades, there have been many wet years
when the San Luis Reservoir did not fill. Unless we have the ability to move
water from the Sacramento River system, across the Delta, and to the pumps,
there is no additional value of storage south of the Delta. With the BDCP, new
storage will be incredibly important. In November and December of 2012, there
was a lot of water in the system, but we could not pump it because of
restrictions imposed by the biological opinion for the protection of the Delta
Smelt.
What do Next Year?
In the minds of most people
at the Summit was what will happen next year.
Federal water districts such
as Westlands, San Luis, Panoche and many other water service contractors south
of the Delta have sustained a lot of damage from reduced water allocations. These
districts span from Tracy all the way to Kettleman City, and they are all under
the pressure of possible zero water allocations.
In terms of what to do next
year if adequate rain does not happen, Birmingham predicted that the allocation
could be zero, even if there is average rainfall across California. “It’s very
likely that the final allocation may be very low, anywhere from zero to 10
percent, maybe 15 percent, which would be a repeat of what we saw in 2009,”
Birmingham said. “Other than praying for heavy precipitation and snowfall,
particularly in the San Joaquin River watershed, so that we can offset restrictions
and biological opinions, I just do not know what can be done.
Over the course of time, we
have utilized all the mechanisms available, so that today, there is very little
flexibility concerning how we can get water to farmers on the West Side of the
San Joaquin Valley.
Public Comments:
 |
Manual Cunha, with Charlie Waters |
In the audience, Charlie Waters, with FFA Farm Labor
Services Inc., asked the big question:
“At some point, we must make a realistic decision. Will it be man or
fish? We can both exist, but we need farming to survive, and we need the water
to farm,” Waters noted.
Waters then commented on the sewage flowing into the Delta from Sacramento and
Stockton. “Their excuse in not cleaning up is that it’s too expensive. Come on
now, we need to get tough. We need that water for farming and everything else.”
 |
Phil Larson |
Phil Larson, Fresno County Board of Supervisor,
District One, commented, “We need to go to the top to deal with the biological
opinion. In March, I went to Washington, D.C. and visited with U.S. Fish and
Wildlife, and they stated to our California Association of Wine Grape Growers
group that they were ‘tweaking the Endangered Species Act so it will be better
for you in California’,” Larson said. “And I told them that the biggest
stressor we have in California is the ESA, and problem is when you start
tweaking it in D.C., it can become more of a problem. We all need to work with
our legislators to explain that to them.”
We'll post more coverage on the Summit over the next two days.
Labels: Brent Walthall, Charlie Waters, Delta Water Summit, John Coleman, Latino Water Coalition, Mario Santoyo, Phil Larson, Ron Jacobsma, Tom Birmingham