Delta Flows- June 3, 2010
Ten more years to deal with that pesky selenium?
West side farmers just can’t make that deadline for cleaning up their irrigation water. They’ve been trying for 14 years and have spent $100 million – although not all their own money, of course. But they need more time to develop a water treatment plant to eliminate contamination from 97,000 acres between Firebaugh and Interstate 5.
The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board has given its approval for a 10-year extension for the Grassland Bypass Project. The California Sportfishing Protection Alliance and the California Water Impact Network argued that contamination will jeopardize revival of salmon runs and harm wildlife as far out as Suisun Bay. They said that a two-year extension would have been more reasonable than a full decade.
Farm representatives argue that fish pass through the river when higher flows dilute the selenium level.
Next, the matter goes to the State Water Resources Control Board, which is not known for making decisions that might inconvenience west side agriculture. They apparently still don’t view selenium as a stressor.
Read more: http://www.fresnobee.com/2010/05/28/1950835/west-side-farmers-clear-water.html#ixzz0pd9sWHk2
Only fast thinkers need apply
On May 28, the State Lands Commission, on behalf of the Delta Protection Commission, sent out a letter soliciting Proposals for Consulting Services entitled “Development of the Framework for Preparation of an Economic Sustainability Plan for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta” (Bid Log No. 2009-14).
The final date for proposal submission is June 14, by 2:00 p.m.
That allows just 17 days, 14 if we don’t count the Memorial Day weekend that immediately followed the letter’s mailing date.
The timeframe could be viewed as favoring bidders already well-connected to Delta policy and governance processes.
Of course, the DPC is itself driven by the same legislation that is driving the rest of Delta governance activities. The legislation gave the Delta Stewardship Council a January 1, 2012 deadline for delivering the Delta Plan. The DSC need a an interim plan by this August in order to have a first draft of the Delta Plan by November and allow three turnaround drafts during the comment period.
A positive angle: The economic sustainability plan must include flood protection recommendations to state and local agencies.
Estimated contract start date is July 15.
No hurdles for Mount
The Delta Reform Act of 2009 requires the new Delta Stewardship Council to appoint an Independent Science Board “not directly affiliated with a program or agency subject to the review activities of the ISB.” It also requires that the ISB review and comment on the draft EIR/EIS for BDCP.
At the DSC meeting on May 27, ten candidates out of a pool of 63 applicants for the ISB were submitted to the Council. The candidates were selected by Dr. Cliff Dahm, the interim lead scientist; Phil Isenberg, the chairman; and Dr. Jeffrey Mount, the chair of the previous CALFED Independent Science Board.
The candidates included Dr. Mount.
According to what definition is this “independent”?
For several years, Mount has been saying that significant portions of the western and central Delta will inevitably revert to open water habitat. That is the future he envisions.
We hope to see people on the Independent Science Panel who might be more inclined to consider reinforcing levees so that they can withstand floods, earthquakes, and sea-level rise, protecting people and property, infrastructure, agriculture, and recreation.
You couldn’t run a business this way
by Karen Medders
It has been interesting theater witnessing the learning curve of the private citizens who are our new Delta Stewardship Council members. Besides sorting out the overwhelming number of agencies, entities, outside and inside interests all with fingers in the Delta pie, these new members have to learn about water rights laws and the current paper water mess. They’ve also gotten a crash course in BDCP 101.
At the May 27-28 DSC meeting, they got a taste of what we are accustomed to from the BDCP, including the MO of waiting until the very last minute to provide any documentation for PowerPoint presentations. The Council also got to see the usual fuzzy prints projected on the wall for nobody to see, not to mention all of the acronyms which of course will make your eyes bleed.
It was satisfying to hear Council member Hank Nordhoff give the BDCP Public Outreach Panel a well-deserved rebuke. Mr. Nordhoff, chairman and chief executive officer of Gen-Probe, with an MBA in international business and finance from Columbia University, said that the lack of time to read and process this new information was making him feel like a complete idiot. He also chastised the presenters for the poor quality of the slides being projected.
Later the first day, Mr. Grindstaff commented that the BDCP has ‘gone rogue’ and is in need of monitoring. To that end, Mr. Nordhoff requested the BDCP provide a written summary of the previous month’s activities to be submitted for review at each DSC meeting. He also suggested the Council come up with its own list of alternatives and instruct the BDCP to address those alternatives, instead of the other way around.
The Council members will also be dropping in on BDCP Steering Committee meetings to monitor how the meetings are coming along.
It is nice to finally see the dog wag the tail, instead of the tail wagging the dog. We just might have a real opportunity to get this out-of-control government process back under some scrutiny and control. Thank you, Mr. Nordhoff and Council members!
Will the DSC be better listeners?
The DSC heard from three panelists from outside the BDCP process regarding their perceptions of what “success of the BDCP” would look like to them.
Gilbert Cosio of MBK Engineers raised the issue of flood control, an issue about which the North Delta Water Agency’s Melinda Terry continually reminds the BDCP Steering Committee. Mr. Cosio commented on the failure of the BDCP to incorporate any mention of flood control in their plan. He then addressed the current situations with Delta levees and advised the Council against waiting to take near-term actions.
Mr. Cosio mentioned that monies from Propositions 84 and 1E have been appropriated, but the Reclamation Districts cannot get the funds from the Department of Finance; $15,000,000 has been waiting at the Department of Finance since April 2009. Matching grants for maintenance and repairs have been funded, but the RDs have no idea if bonds have been sold, and DWR has no idea when the money will be released.
Dick Poole, owner of San Francisco-based Pro-Troll Products (a company that creates and markets innovative fishing and marine products) spoke on behalf of the salmon fishing industry. He said that their major stakeholders have been “mostly shut out” of the process.
He reminded the Council of the economic losses sustained by the salmon industry during the past 2 years. Mr. Poole noted that at the April 11th Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife hearing, there was no mentioned of protections for fish. Aggressive deadlines make it impossible to adequately address these issues.
Mr. Poole presented 10 Action Steps to the Council. Included is a request that the Council write a letter in support of the Biological Opinions and also support the State Water Board flow in-Delta criteria submitted to the Interim Plan process. This would be helpful in turning around the salmon numbers. This same report was presented to the National Academy of Science and has been cited by the NAS in their presentation in Davis.
Mark Pruner, President of North Delta Community and Residents for a Stable Environment (CARES) represented landowners and residents in the North Delta area of the Primary Zone and Clarksburg stakeholders’ interests. Along with most of the previous panel members, Mr. Pruner criticized the BDCP for its failure to make use of extensive local Delta expertise and knowledge. He also criticized BDCP’s failure to seriously consider viable alternatives.
To the question whether local landowners, residents and business owners would have the people to participate in these processes, the answer was a resounding “YES”.
As supervisor Don Nottoli said, “We cannot solve the problems of the state on the backs of the people of the Delta. It is not just the Delta environment at stake, it’s the people, too.”
A glimpse of how the Dutch view floods
The DSC got a European perspective from Annemieke Nijhoff, Director-General, Directorate-General of Water Affairs at the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, the Netherlands. She said that the Netherlands designs for 10,000 year sea flood events and 1,250 year river flood events. By contrast, here in California we are thinking in terms of 100, 200, or 500 year floods.
Another point Ms. Nijhoff made is that for sea level rise or other fresh water concerns, entrepreneurs must have time to change their business operations and long term plans, and the business community, especially agriculture, needs 30-40 years to make changes.
