PUC approves removal of dams to help trout

Don't abandon Delta

Editorial
Friday, April 14, 2006

FRUSTRATION DOES NOT always spawn the best ideas. Such is the case concerning a bill to revive the Peripheral Canal to divert water around the Delta. The many years of inaction to save the Delta ecosystem and protect the fresh water that 23 million Californians depend upon certainly has been cause for frustration. But the lack of political will to do what is necessary to shore up levees and maintain adequate fresh water flows into the Delta need not result in an abandonment of efforts to do what is necessary.

State Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, understandably is upset about the deteriorating and vulnerable levee system in the Delta. If several of the levees failed, fresh water supplies for two-thirds of Californians would be in jeopardy.

That is why he has resurrected the highly controversial Peripheral Canal, which was defeated by voters in 1982.

The overwhelming opposition to the canal in Northern California overcame less-than-overwhelming support in Southern California. Today, if the same percentages of voter opposition in Northern California and support in Southern California were tallied, it is likely that the Peripheral Canal would pass. Since 1982, growth in the southern part of the state has been far greater than in the north. Also, this time around, a revised plan that appears to be friendly to the environment might have a better chance for approval.

At least that's what Simitian is considering.

His bill would place a $3 billion bond measure on the ballot to build a smaller Peripheral Canal. The board that controls the canal would be made up of environmentalists, fisheries experts and almost exclusively Northern Californians. Under Simitian's bill, the canal would not be able to divert any more water from the Delta than is now allowed. The measure also calls for substantial urban water conservation plans.

However, the bill does not have guarantees for fresh water flows into the Delta. It places a heavier conservation burden on urban users than on agriculture, which uses at least 80 percent of the water and has been lax on employing the most efficient irrigation techniques.

There is a very real danger that even a modified Peripheral Canal would end up accelerating the deterioration of the Delta ecosystem and eventually destroy it. Instead of coming up with plans to divert water around the Delta, state officials need to focus on fixing the problem by rebuilding key levees and making sure that enough fresh water flows into the Delta even in dry periods.

The Delta needs to be restored and safeguarded, not abandoned, as this latest version of the Peripheral Canal threatens to do.

http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/editorial/14341878.htm