Delta Plan's EIR Terribly Flawed
AquAlliance provided the state with considerable material
regarding the geography, health, and oversight of the Tuscan Aquifer in comments for the Delta Plan’s Draft Programmatic
Environmental Impact Report (DPEIR). The Delta Stewardship Council, formed by the California legislature, was attempting to
analyze their Delta Plan to secure a “reliable water supply for California and protecting,
restoring and enhancing the Delta ecosystem.” Sadly, the planning and
ensuing environmental review pursue the same broken paradigm that led to the water supply and ecosystems crises in the first
place.
The 63 page comment letter was
crafted by AquAlliance, the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, the California Water Impact Network, and the Pacific
Coast Federation of Fisherman’s Association. The comments provide legal standing to challenge the very inadequate effort
by the Delta Stewardship Council. Significant flaws in the DPEIR include:
-
An inadequate description of the overall Delta Plan project.
-
A failure to discuss and analyze the benfits and impacts of the Delta Plan.
-
An absence of information regarding baseline environmental conditions.
-
An inadequate evaluation of feasible alternatives.
To read the group’s
comments just click on the link below.
Delta Plan EIR Comments 2/2/12
Butte County Delta Plan EIR Letter
Glenn County Delta Plan Letter
Environmental Coalition Comments on 5th Draft Delta Plan
Bad Bill for Northern California
Water
The San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act (HR 1837) was introduced by California
GOP Congressman Devin Nunes, and co-sponsored by GOP Congressmen Jeff Denham and Kevin McCarthy. This bill is bad for northern
California’s ground water, farms, cities, reservoirs, fish wildlife and rivers.
Northern California politicians, regardless of party affiliation, should oppose this bill.
AquAlliance and a broad coalition of environmental, tribal,and fishing groups
sent a strong letter of opposition to the U.S. House of Representative's committee hearing the bill (below). The next action
will take place in mid-July. Listen to the hearings held on June 2nd and 13th by using the links below.
Coalition Opposition Letter
House Water & Power Subcommittee, June 2, 2011
House Water & Power Subcommittee, June 13, 2011
AquAlliance's opinion on HR 1837 in the Chico News and Review.
Opinion: Herger Gets it Right (Chico News and Review)
Butte County Opposes HR 1837
|
 |
So You Think
They Don't Want
Our Water
... ?
Look what they're saying right out loud. As you
see in the slide below, powerful interests view our Northstate ground water as an ideal way to send more water south of the
Delta. The slide was part of a presentation delivered
to the newly reconstituted California Water Commission in September 2011 by Mr. Carl Hauge, retired Chief Hydrogeologist for the California Department of Water Resources, a government agency that works on behalf of water contractors, not the
public.
From Groundwater/Conjunctive
Management -- Or, Why is groundwater recharge so important? 9.14.11:
|
| [Red line added by AquAlliance] |
They would never show
this slide in the northern Sacramento Valley!
Click here to view complete Hauge PowerPoint presentation
10-YEAR WATER GRAB MOVES FORWARD
SCOPING REPORT RELEASED
The
10-year, 600,000 acre-feet per year, Sacramento Valley Water Transfer Program continues to move forward. The scoping
report was released May 13th despite the fact that eight water sellers stated publicly that they won’t participate
(click for report). AquAlliance submitted comments during the scoping phase and posted other public comments that were
sent to us (see below). The next step will be the Bureau of Reclamation's release of the Environmental Impact Statement/Report
(EIS/EIR) in the late summer or fall of 2011.
The
scoping report perpetuates misinformation that was presented at the January 2011 public meeting in Chico: “Commenters
were concerned that transfers may include up to 600,000 acre-feet of water annually; however, this EIS/EIR will include a
much smaller transfer volume (approximately 100,000 to 150,000 acre-feet).” The report’s response is disingenuous.
The public’s concerns about the 600,000 acre-feet figure comes right out of the Bureau’s Federal Register notice
for this project (click for notice). The larger figure would not have appeared in the Federal Register unless it was the number that will
direct the environmental analysis – and remain possible for water transfers from the Sacramento Valley.
As
many of you know, wealthy, politically connected water districts south of the Delta have wanted north-state ground water for
decades. They already destroyed the abundant natural bounty of south-state watersheds by irrigating marginal lands,
transferring massive amounts of water, and excessive ground water pumping. If you follow the money behind this project, you
will find desert agriculture south of the Delta with junior water rights pressing to steal more north-state water for private
profit.
More links are below.
AquAlliance Scoping Comments for 10-Year Water Transfer Plan
Comments from Richard Meyers
Comments from Elicia Whittlesey
Comments from Tony St. Amant
Comments from O.J. McMillan
Comments from Bruce Meyer
Federal Register Notice for Ten Year North to South Transfers
Bureau of Reclamation's North-to-South Water Transfers' Web Site.
|
|
|
|
|
Click icon to enlarge calendar
|
| |
Monitor Your Wells to Protect
Your Water Rights
Well monitoring is one easy way you can document baseline conditions for your wells, which is vital to preserve individual
and watershed rights. If we document what is here, it establishes a legal basis to protect the water that is the life blood
for our economic and environmental health. It also helps you to identify potential water shortages long before they become
serious problems.
NEWS / VIEWS
Ground Water Banking Lawsuits
The New York Times reports
on yet example of what happens when "the market" and government agencies collude to transfer more wealth to corporations
and patrons of politicians. You will read about how existing ground water banks south of the Delta are being charged with
damaging ground water basins in a recent lawsuit. Another lawsuit challenges how the State of California gave away one of
the ground water banks to a private entity. This is what "the market" and some water districts are trying to establish in
the Sacramento Valley with the full support of the state and federal government. Without the courts, the public has virtually
no voice and is being taken to the cleaners.
NY Times article, July 27, 2011
Does the California constitution hold the key to solving the state's water crisis?
Felice Pace lays out the possibility in an opinion piece in High Country News. To read it use the link below.
Felice Pace Opinion
AquAlliance Advocates for the Public Interest
AquAlliance
submitted comments regarding the need for expanded public participation in the latest regional water planning effort. In 2008,
the Center for Collaborative Policy emphasized the need for "an Area-wide Visioning activity" to initiate a planning process
that could benefit the region's water. The report also recognized the importance of having the most vocal and knowledgeable
public voices at the table. Choosing to ignore this advice, Butte County, the leader in the current 6 county planning initiative,
wrote a proposal that continues dysfunction as usual in the local water world. The California Department of Water Resources,
never having a problem squandering the public's money, will most likely fund this to the tune of $900,000. 12.23.10
AquAlliance Comments
for the News/Views archive of articles previously displayed here
Click here
to hear Jim Brobeck singing his new song, Hidden
Water
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
