Tracy Press

A Delta advocate argues against a plan that would direct fresh water around, rather than through, area waterways.

There has been much talk recently about a Delta conveyance system to transfer water from the Sacramento River to the federal and state pumps northwest of Tracy so water can be transferred to interests in other parts of the state. Let’s call it what it is: the revival of the Peripheral Canal.

Voters defeated the Peripheral Canal in 1982 for good reason. Unfortunately, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has taken the position that this canal should be built. This demonstrates his lack of understanding of what a truly unique place the Delta is to those who use and understand this wonderful resource.

The Delta is enjoyed and used by a variety of Californians. Farmers grow crops in the rich island peat soil. Businesses of the Delta rely on visitors enjoying the more than 1,000 miles of waterways. Wildlife of all kinds thrives in the diverse ecosystem. Oceangoing cargo ships navigate the channels to the deepwater ports of Stockton and Sacramento and deliver goods to and from around the world.

A canal would irreversibly damage this unique area. If the canal were built, there would no longer be the need to maintain the existing levees to the highest standards, increasing their vulnerability. The resulting saltwater intrusion from a levee failure and/or lack of fresh water to maintain the water quality of the Delta would destroy its ecosystem. The fear that an earthquake would collapse Delta levees was misconstrued from a report published in March 2005 by the San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science. What is needed in California is comprehensive reinforcement of Delta levees to prevent a levee failure and the subsequent saltwater intrusion.

It is time for Californians to look for alternatives, such as increasing water storage in wet years, conservation of existing supplies and investing in saltwater desalinization projects.

The board of directors of the California Delta Chambers and Visitors Bureau strongly encourages Californians to help protect this unique resource by contacting their elected representatives and urging them to explore alternatives to the Peripheral Canal.

• Blair Hake is immediate past president of the California Delta Chambers and Visitors Bureau, based in Rio Vista.

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (4)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/Hide comments

...
written by Wes Rolley , January 23, 2008

Everyone in California is concerned about the delta, or should be. I read one report that defined the Delta as the "hub of California's future."

Mr. Hake is right about the peripheral canal. If there is one idea that politicians seem to love and which makes the public question their motives, it is the peripheral canal. Still, once these ideas take shape, they have a life of their own and seemingly never go away.

Real local leadership on this issue is coming from Restore the Delta. They are the only group that has held community meetings to educate the public, to get feedback. The rest, including the Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force, has just been window dressing for back room deals.

...
written by Michael M , January 23, 2008

I see that the author is using the old scare tactics that were used by JG Boswell (the largest cotton grower in the US) to defeat the initiative in the first election (see "King of California"). One thing to remember, the Delta before the flood control projects was a SALT WATER ESTUARY for part of the year. The aquatic life and the rest of the ecosystem had adapted to that influx of saline water in the late summer and thrived on it. The native fish were able to live in the heart of the delta where there was more food and habitat for them. But WE had to alter the whole system so farmer could get fresh water all year by sticking their pipe into the river. We also introduced some very predatory fish - striped bass, largemouth smallmouth and black bass, bluegill, and then we introduced water hyacinth, egeria densa, and those lovely boats gave us the asian clam and mitten crabs. The farmers gave us a legacy of subsidance that has caused the land to sink to at some places 20 - 30 feet below sea level. The St Water Resouces Control Board needs to look at changing the way fresh water is required in the delta, bring the saline water back and you would increase some habitat and get rid of some of the invasive species that are causing some of the probelms. Get the farmers and cities up stream to clean up their water on the San Joaquin river and you solve another part of the problem. The peripheral canal isn't the problem, the people with those archaic views and entrenched ideas are the problem because there are ways to do things if enough thought and forethough it given to the probelm.

...
written by yzer , January 23, 2008

Delta Blue Ribbon Task Force admitted in the Final Report that they have no science to show what effect a new Isolated Conveyance (Peripheral Canal) would have on Delta environment. They recommend building one anyway. Mr. Hake offers no evidence that an Isolated Conveyance would harm the Delta environment, or that it is possible to maintain wobbly levees that were built upon a peat bog or muck foundation. He also ignores the effects of climate change on the Delta: an established scientific theory predicting a minimal one meter rise in sea level during the 21st century. This change will significantly alter California Delta topography.

The nature of the old Delta and the affects of salinity are misunderstood. Prior to 1850, the Central Delta was an estuary, a tule marsh that turned brackish during drought years. Mostly fresh water was found year-round at Antioch and as far as the Carquinez Strait. C&H located its sugar plant to draw fresh water from the Strait. Antioch pumped its municipal drinking water from the river. Saltwater incursion began in the 1930's with combined droughts and water diversions from the San Joaquin River. With the San Joaquin completely diverted by agribusiness at Friant Dam, the Delta environment began its death spiral. Bureau of Reclamation drove another nail in the Delta coffin when it tore out natural levee shorelines and replaced it with riprap. Increasing water diversion from the Sacramento River accelerated pelagic decline and permitted invasion by introduced species.

There is a chance to rebuild parts of the Delta and make plans for what it could be sometime in the future, but there are no easy answers. Cutting back water diversions will not do it all. A canal will not fix the problems.

Until the entire Sacramento/San Joaquin watershed is governed by a single entity from the Golden Gate to the crest of the Sierra Nevada don't expect any changes for the better. Chaos is the strongest ally of avarice.

...
written by yzer , January 23, 2008

"We also introduced some very predatory fish - striped bass, largemouth smallmouth and black bass, bluegill, and then we introduced water hyacinth, egeria densa, and those lovely boats gave us the asian clam and mitten crabs."
-Michael M

The striped bass is a game fish introduced to the California Delta late in the 19th Century. Fisheries science current to the last 30 years has shown the striped bass was not a threat to any native Delta species prior to the Pelagic Organism Decine (POD). Nor have I seen a shred of research to indicate that the other introduced game fish you listed you listed are implicated as causes for the POD.

There are many other invasive species that have done real damage to the Delta, but again you are short on facts. Water hyacinth and egeria densa are common aquarium plants and were probably introduced to the Delta by people dumping unwanted aquariums into the water. The asian clam and mitten crabs were introduced by ships (very, very big boats) dumping ballast water into the shipping channels. All of "those lovely boats" could not have possibly introduced these pests: not unless they traveled to the far east and back again to the Delta. That would be a whale of a tale.