Delta Water Exports Rates Halved!!!

[chiselchst]

Delta water exports halved

It was the first cut rising from a court ruling to protect threatened smelt.

By Matt Weiser - mweiserrb2rb2@gr5tgr5tsacbee.com

Published 12:00 am PST Saturday, December 29, 2007

Water exports from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta were slashed in half Friday to protect a threatened fish, marking the first action sparked by a federal court order earlier this month.

The Dec. 14 ruling by U.S. District Judge Oliver Wanger in Fresno requires state and federal water agencies to reduce their draw from the estuary under certain conditions to protect the Delta smelt. The agencies operate separate canal systems, which serve 25 million Californians and more than 2 million acres of farms from the Bay Area to San Diego.

But those water exports have contributed to a steep decline in the population of the smelt, a fragile fingerling protected by the Endangered Species Act. The fish are not strong enough to resist the pull of the pumps, which reverse natural water flows in the Delta.

Wanger's ruling requires pumping reductions under certain conditions that affect the smelt. One of those triggers was tripped on Christmas Day when water clarity declined at a South Delta monitoring site.

"It's a belated Christmas present to the Delta smelt from Judge Wanger," said Bill Jennings, executive director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance. "It is a historic occasion."

DWR and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation had three days to respond after the trigger point was reached. They did so Friday morning by reducing combined pumping from 5,250 cubic feet per second to about 2,400, said Carl Torgersen, chief of operations and maintenance for the state Department of Water Resources.

The goal is to minimize reverse flows in the Delta to meet a threshold set by the court. The result, Torgersen said, will be about 5,600 acre-feet of water per day not delivered to users. That's enough water for about 10,000 average households for a year.

The cutback probably won't have an immediate effect. Torgersen said it will hinder the ability to refill San Luis Reservoir near Los Banos, a storage point for the southbound water.

But there could be long-term shortages, particularly if 2008 ends up being a drought year.

The pumping reductions must continue for 10 days unless rainfall substantially boosts natural runoff through the Delta.

"But we don't see that in the forecast," Torgersen said. "The effects of the Wanger decision can vary greatly and I wouldn't be able to say right now that it's actually putting us in a drought or not. That's a tough one."

The Zone 7 Water Agency, which serves about 200,000 customers around Livermore and Pleasanton, draws from the state's Delta canal before water reaches San Luis Reservoir. As a result, it could be among the first to suffer from pumping reductions.

"While this one cutback won't impact our customers' taps, it is going to reduce our supply of water for the year," said spokeswoman Boni Brewer. "Obviously the Delta habitat is in trouble and we're hoping there's some solution that can protect that habitat and long-term water supplies."

Zone 7 has already increased residential water rates by about $2.25 per month to pay for conservation measures and emergency supplies. Officials have also urged customers to reduce consumption by 10 percent.

The smelt's plight is viewed by many biologists as a warning of larger ecosystem troubles in the Delta. The smelt's decline is blamed on pumping effects as well as poor water quality, competition from invasive species, and loss of habitat and food.

Wildlife officials are preparing a new court-ordered management plan for the smelt, which may include water delivery rules that could make Friday's pumping reductions commonplace.

State officials are also studying long-term solutions, including major habitat restoration projects and new ways to move farm and domestic water around the Delta, such as a canal.

http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/597256.html
_____________________________________________

 

[yzer]

Right now we are seeing one of those periods when the Delta Smelt are most likely to leave the Sacramento River and head into the central Delta. When winter water flows are low like they are now the Delta Smelt leave the rivers to swim into water with more turbidity (less clarity). Once the smelt get into the central Delta they get pulled into the south Delta pumps.

More water flow though the Delta (a good storm or two) will keep them from swimming toward the pumps. When that happens, the pumping limits will be lifted.

Despite the Governor's recent Blue Ribbon Delta report, a lot hasn't been said about the future of water exports from the Delta. Most everyone agrees now some form of the "Big Gulp" approach to water exports offers the best chance to maximize pumping and protect Delta species.

With the Big Gulp you take as much water as possible during periods when pelagic species are the less likely to be affected and reduce pumping drastically when they are most vulnerable to pumping damage.

So, the idea seems to be: do the science and pump like mad during those periods when the pumping will do the least or no damage. Pumping would be reduced during dry years and increased during wet years. Store that water somewhere during surplus (wet) years.

There are problems with the Big Gulp idea. SWP and DWR do not have the pumping capacity to gulp water fast enough during the safe pumping periods. That's where the idea of the multiple pumping facilities (including a peripheral canal) becomes attractive. The ultimate eco-friendly pumping facility might have many pumping points located throughout the Delta. But, that could be too expensive to be a realistic solution. Pumping could be tailored to meet species protection needs and water export opportunities. If upper limits are placed on export pumping and those limits are tied into seasonal flows: this kind of system would maximize exports and protect species. The other problem is you need more water storage to save the surplus needed to get through dry periods.

There is one SWP pumping facility that a lot of people don't know about. This is the small Barker Slough pumping facility that supplies water for Travis AFB and other systems in Solano County. It was installed with little fanfare about ten years ago. Because these pumps are located close to spawning areas for the Delta Smelt they have been fingered as a possible contributor to the Delta Smelt decline. For its size, this may be the most damaging pumping facility in the Delta. These pumps cause Barker Slough to run backwards and suck water out of the Cache Slough area. There have been big water quality issues with this facility too. Local ranching contributes coliform bacteria and other health issues and the muddy waters from this area contain heavy metals. The Barker Slough water requires very expensive treatment before it can be used for human consumption. Someone should take a good hard look at this system and either get rid of it or run the intake to the Sacramento River downstream of Cache Slough.

 

[Flutterby]

I don't know if the ruling is good news or not when thinking about the big picture. What happens to all the other species, including us recreational boaters and deltaphiles, when all decisions are being made around the health of ONE species. I understand the importance of the smelt as a bell weather for the delta. But surely there will be other, currently undiscovered, repercussions to the delta. The fear of the unknown makes me cautious.........

 

[gcolton]

This seems to be the modern trend. Protect the smelt/Apalachicola Oyster/whatever and to hell with the humans affected.

G

 

[yzer]

I think the modern trend worth dumping here is oversimplification. If pumping at the wrong time kills off the Delta Smelt, you can be sure that everything smaller including zooplankton and phytoplankton are going with it. When that's gone nothing is left but bullheads and asian mussels. Better get used to fishing in the mud with a spaghetti strainer.

I don't think lot of people are going to die right now or be seriously impacted because pumping gets a temporary reduction. But it will certainly exert economic pressure that will help motivate the state to seek long term solutions.

 

[Flutterby]

George, without understanding the issues in the delta, it is easy to assume they are the same as in the southeast. This is not the case.

The water hungry fields of the central valley uses 80% of the water from the delta. And the cost federally subsidized, so they have no incentive to conserve water. Then there is the populous of southern CA and AZ who insist on living in a desert, but still have swimming pools, green grass and water runoff into the ocean. Again, their costs are not what the marketplace would demand. Again they have no incentive to conserve. Again the Delta gets raped of its water. This has been going on since the 1950s, causing a slow dying of an area which used to be rich in fisheries, boaters and other water sports recreations. If even more water is allowed to hit the pumps before making its way into the SF Bay Area, we will destroy the life of the Delta. That would be a national tragedy.

 

[dugsboat]

FB, the water problems really are similar.... the cause is population growth and the location of the water. Don't forget there are many more people in Southern CA, and although the canal vote failed last time, if these people are really short water they will out vote the north. The courts can only intervene for so long and eventually they will be removed. Southern Cal has to come with programs like de-salinzaton and reverse osmosis in a big way. I remember the big drought of 1976- we couldn't water our lawns in N. Ca, but if you visited the south their lawns were green. Mine was dead.
Here in Cape Coral our potable water is from one of the largest reverse osmosis operations in the world, and my irrigation water is all "reclaimed" water. As a matter of fact, SW Florida is presently allowed only 1 day a week lawn watering but Cape Coral has an exemption because of its water policy. These same policies are what S. California needs to implement. Florida has no snow capped mountains for water reserves, heck, no mountains period. If it doesn't rain here during the summer rainy season, there is no storage available.

 

[Flutterby]

dugs, yes I remember the drought years of the 1970s too. We in northern CA had to conserve a mandatory 25% while southern CA eventually were told to conserve 10% What's wrong with THIS picture! I agree that they have the political power and that is what scares me. How do we get so Cal to build and use other means of hydration?