Take Action Against a New Canal!

F

Flutterby

Active member
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
RO Number
14378
Messages
9,320
"Stop the Canal Friends,

In case you missed it, Saturday, December 8th's front page article in the Contra Costa Times entitled "Secret Study Shows Canal Back in Play" disclosed an ongoing plan by Southern California water interests and the Department of Water Resources to begin the planning process for a new canal.

In short, these outside water interests are in the process now of calculating the dollar costs for building a new canal or Delta bypass for inclusion in a Sacramento water bond that will go to the voters sometime in 2008.

This strategy is moving fast and continues behind the scenes between special interests that want to see more of our quality water moving south faster and more efficiently.

I am writing for your help. We need our local city leaders to take a formal position IN OPPOSITION TO THE BUILDING OF A NEW CANAL.

Please contact your Mayor and City Councilmembers as soon as possible to ask them to support a resolution in opposition to ANY MOVEMENT to build a new canal which will send our good water South and have a devastating effect on our Delta ecosystem.

Thank you, again, for your continued commitment to Stop the Canal!

Regards,

Joe Canciamilla

www.StoptheCanal.org
Joerb2@gr5tStoptheCanal.org"
 
And I bet all the earlier hub-bub about the millions in local communities going without water in a drought was secretly produced by the same people. It's scary because a good percentage of these people weren't around during the last big drought or the last fight against the canal.

One thing that really burned me was the filling of the artificial lakes for new golf courses and all the beautiful swimming pools in southern Ca while we saved bath water to flush toilets and water the garden during the last drought.

Flat-out, Southern California doesn't deserve any more water...PERIOID!!
 
quote:
Flat-out, Southern California doesn't deserve any more water...PERIOID!!
Click to expand...

Remember, over 80% of the water exported from the Delta goes to Agri-biz, and less than 20% to cities & municipalities...much of that to grow crops that requires lots of water like cotton & rice - for a product largely exported.
 
Mitch, you are right----somewhat. This year, agri-biz is being limited to 25% of the normal water supply to them, so they will be planting more drought friendly crops or not planting at all. Are the inhabitants of southern Cal being asked to conserve? I don't think so and there is certainly no mandatory conservation! They need to be educated that water doesn't come out of a faucet; it comes from northern CA!!!!

end of rant
 
Be Awaew --- A proposed ballot proposition for the November '08 election is moving through the process (several variatiobs in wording sent to AG's office already). It would fund a new canal AND new dams. Guess the proponents believe northerners would vote for dams and not realuze the canal would also be funded. A counter-bond also is going through the preliminaries, introduced by an S.J. county senator (Machadao). Be aware, this is going on right now in the Legislature. I too believe that every city council and board of supervisors in the north should adot a reso;ution opposinmg a canal. Be aware that there is considerable pro-canal pressure in the southern valley. -- Warren
 
quote:
Originally posted by Flutterby

Mitch, you are right----somewhat. This year, agri-biz is being limited to 25% of the normal water supply to them...
Click to expand...

Is that the Feds (CVP) and the State (DWR)? I don't even know if any DWR water go to agri-business? Anyone know that one?
 
I think it was back in 1978, I was active in stoping the canal and brought this issue to the voters. As I remember Jerry Brown signed the bill to build the canal and it was stopped by a state election. It was a very hard fought battle. I went sports shows and shopping center passing out pamphlets. I latter owned a christmas tree farm east of Stockton... How the Westland farms (down south) get governmemt subsidized water is another issue to screw the little farms and the urban water users. As I remember the Westland farms pay about $3.00/acre foot of water, the urban user pays over $100.00 acre foot of water (usually billed as cubic/foot.
I knew this issue would not rest. I compare it to a "turd that won't flush".

Another Toy
 
This is an excerpt from a letter to theeditor of the Record. The source of the information was not given, so take it or leaveit. //// Water allocation really 'dreadful'

........ "The editorial claimed California's economic health is at stake.
While 80 percent of the water consumed in California goes to agriculture, the contribution of agriculture to the state's gross product is just 2 percent.
Worse yet, close to half the water used by agriculture goes to grow cotton, rice, alfalfa and pasture land - contributing an infinitesimal 0.15 percent to gross state product.
That's a dreadful misallocation of a scarce resource. ......"
 
There are some crops that take a lot more water than others. Alfalfa is one of the worst. Dairy and cattle take huge amounts of water.

Evapotranspiration rates vary by locality. And, the further you ship water above ground the more you loose. CA ships Delta water to the friggin' Mojave desert where they want even more water for development.

Putting a legal limit on the amount that can be shipped south is a necessity. That will make water more valuable and it will become more economical to build desalination plants for Southern California. San Diego has always been on the short end of the water ration: getting the leftovers from L.A. Looks as if San Diego will build it first small desalination plant and bigger ones will probably follow. San Diego is not afraid use nuclear energy to meet the very large power requirments made by very large desalination plants.

Here's some good news. Judge Wanger strikes again...
http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_7725101
 
Mitch, SWP (State Water Project) provides water for 23 million Californians and 755,000 acres of irrigated farmland. SWP is operated by DWR (CA Department of Water Resouces)

CVP (Central Valley Project: Federal-Bureau of Reclamation) provides about half of California's irrigation water.

There used to be two major river systems that drained fresh water into the California Delta. Nearly all of the San Joaquin River system is diverted before it reaches the Delta. Friant Dam is the largest reservoir. Most of the water that reaches the Delta is agricultural run-off.

50% of the Sacramento River system is diverted before it reaches San Francisco Bay.

Here's the info from some stuff I had on the hard drive. It's a few years old, but it gives you the picture.

Water Exported from the Delta

The Delta is the major source of fresh water to the San Francisco Bay and provides a portion of the water supply for many other communities in the Bay region. Water from the Delta supplies drinking water for over two-thirds of the state’s population (over 23 million people) and irrigation water for more than seven million acres of farmland statewide. The largest source of water for the Delta is the Sacramento River, which transports about 18.3 million acre-feet into the Delta in an average year. Additional flows from the Yolo Bypass and the San Joaquin River bring in an average of 5.8 million acre-feet, with precipitation adding about another 1 million acre-feet. Larger diversions in the Delta include the State Water Project (Banks Pumping Plant and the North Bay Aqueduct), Central Valley Project (Tracy Pumping Plant), and Contra Costa Water District, which withdraw about 3.7 million, 2.5 million, and 126 thousand acre-feet in an average year, respectively. Table 2 summarizes the Delta water balance and identifies the major water inputs and outputs for the Delta.

table2.jpg
 
quote:
Originally posted by yzer

Here's some good news. Judge Wanger strikes again...
http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_7725101

Click to expand...


yzer, I posted a similar news article as a separate topic before I read this. I'm going to leave it so folks who might not read this will see the other. This is such an important issue for those of us who love/enjoy the Delta! We must do everything possible to educate all the voters of the real issues. Your informative posts really help in meeting this need. As one Deltaphile to another, Thank You so much!
 
quote:
Originally posted by Another Toy

I think it was back in 1978, I was active in stoping the canal and brought this issue to the voters. I knew this issue would not rest. I compare it to a "turd that won't flush".
Click to expand...


A lot of folks worked really hard back then to vote down the Peripheral Canal Proposition! Good job! Now we have to do this all over again.

One of the problems, as I see it, is so many of the new residents of the Delta region do not understand the issues [What's the Delta?] and will just vote yes 'cause it sounds good!!!!

We all need to be active in trying to stop this!
 
Well, even if agribiz is getting only 25% of its "normal" allocation, that would still be 20% of the "normal" total, or half the water flowing south. The point about huge water usage for marginal crops is key--rice is a monsoon crop, for cryin' out loud, and we're growing it in a desert!

Litigation may also help here--clearly, when an EIR is done, it will have to consider the possibility of expanding SoCal water resources by just buying up water rights and retiring marginal farmland.

BTG
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top