The Peripheral Canal II, storage, and the Delta – the solution is in our Sites

April 7, 3:24 PMCalifornia Infrastructure Policy ExaminerJeff Burgess

Previous Next

5 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the California Infrastructure Policy Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

Delta locals are right to be concerned. Their way of life will likely change as the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) is enacted. The Delta ecosystem is so large, so impactful to the entire state, and so damaged by decades of mismanagement that it’s going to take radical, extreme changes to restore – to the extent possible – the habitat.

But Delta locals won’t agree. Their plan is simple, yet completely implausible: self-sufficiency. And it’s best delineated – from their perspective – by a local lawyer and landowner Tom Zuckerman. His idea: communities south of the Delta can be water self-sufficient, and that the best possible course of action is to turn off the pumps that feed the State Water Project and the Central Valley Project.

Talk about a non-starter.

Conservation had to be part of the solution. Both the Governor and water contractors are advancing conservation as a key tenant in the solution to California’s water crisis. However, to go from conservation to regional self-sufficiency is simply too narrow-minded.

We’re all Californians, and California’s water is a statewide resource – regardless of where we as individuals live. In fact, water is a regional and nationwide resource. As an analogy, how would we Northern Californians feel if Oregon and Washington stopped sending cheap electricity from Northwest hydropower projects to us? Would those same folks who were barking “it’s our water” at BDCP scoping meetings applaud our Northwest neighbors if they flipped the electrical export switch to OFF? Would those folks enjoy life by candlelight – embracing energy self-sufficiency?

But should Delta landowners stand by without injecting thoughtful, meaningful commentary in the BDCP process. No way – as I said earlier, they have a lot at stake. Delta locals, and all Northern Californians, should simply ask for a whole solution to Delta ecosystem renewal, which includes more surface storage. Specifically, the Sites Reservoir.

The location for Sites Reservoir sits in an ideal spot for surface storage that supports Delta ecosystem restoration. It’s upstream from the Delta, pulling water from - and resupplying - the Sacramento River. And it’s off-stream. It would be filled and drained via new and existing conveyance options. This provides a unique benefit – the Sites Reservoir will be fish friendly.

Delta locals should insist that the Peripheral Canal II only be built if Sites is also built. They should also tie maximum quantities conveyed via the canal with maximum available output from Sites. And all Northern Californians should insist that water users south of the Delta pay their fair share for Sites and the canal. (Similar to the Southern California lawmakers who insisted that Bay Area bridge users pay for seismic improvements via increased tolls.) As long as the science supports the Peripheral Canal II as the best option to protect both existing water rights statewide, as well as habitat restoration, Delta locals are powerless to reject it – especially when the other so-called option is fanciful concepts like self-sufficiency.