Editorial: New reservoirs essential to save Delta, Contra Costa Times

 

January 15, 2006

 

http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/columnists/perspective/13632524.htm

 

 

IN THE WAKE of a Times series on environmental threats to the Delta, business leaders from the Bay Area and Southern California held a meeting in San Francisco to get some expert advice on possible ways to deal with the problem. They know that action is needed because of failed attempts by CalFed, a consortium of diverse water interests, to make any progress despite spending $3 billion.

 

At the San Francisco session, Professor Jeff Mount, director of UC Davis' Center for Watershed Studies, outlined a half-dozen strategies to address the many problems facing the Delta and the 23 million Californians who depend on it for water supplies.

 

Most of Mount's ideas have been suggested in the past at one time or another. However, by placing a variety of alternatives before business leaders, Mount hoped to begin a discussion on how to preserve the Delta ecosystem, provide adequate water for users and avoid a costly and divisive water war.

 

Each of the six ideas had something to offer, but one stands out as the most effective way to assure adequate and reliable water supplies to both users and the Delta environment. That is Mount's suggestion that major new reservoirs be built south of the Delta.

 

These reservoirs would be filled during wet months, when there is more than enough water flowing into the Delta to preserve the ecosystem and provide high-quality supplies to users.

 

If the reservoirs are large enough, they would have enough stored water for release during the dry months and droughts.

 

It is the only feasible way to provide enough fresh water for environmental, agricultural and urban use throughout the year.

 

All of the other ideas mentioned at the meeting have serious drawbacks. One was simply to do nothing new. But that is a proven failure and has led to the degradation of the Delta ecology and will not provide enough water to a growing demand.

 

Another idea was to spend billions of dollars to fortify and raise levees enough to withstand a 200-year flood. Not only would the costs of such a program be ridiculously high, there would be little benefit for water users. Even worse, it would induce even more urbanization and greater strains on water supplies.

 

One possibility would be to abandon the Delta and let it return to its natural state. This would be beneficial to the Delta's ecology, but would threaten land below sea level, allow greater salt water intrusion and do nothing to increase water supplies for anyone.

 

An even more bizarre suggestion was to fill land below sea level in the Delta. This would be prohibitively expensive, take decades to complete and would do nothing to increase water supplies.

 

Perhaps the most contentious suggestion was to build a new aqueduct around the Delta. This is simply a scaled-down version of the highly controversial Peripheral Canal that was defeated by voters in 1982.

 

The major drawback of a canal is a diminished supply of fresh water to the Delta, which would destroy the ecosystem and threaten water quality for the 500,000 customers of the Contra Costa Water District.

 

Unfortunately, with an even greater proportion of the state's population in Southern California today than it was in 1982, something like a Peripheral Canal might well pass in a statewide vote.

 

The more one examines the possible paths toward restoring the Delta and providing adequate and dependable supplies of fresh water to all users, the clearer it becomes that far more water storage capacity is needed.

 

Large, new reservoirs south of the Delta are an essential element in creating a large enough supply of stored water to be collected in wet periods and released in dry times.

 

The Delta ecosystem would be protected, and there would be enough fresh water for all users without the threat of a canal around the Delta.

 

As Southern California's demand for new water supplies increases with its growing population and decreased supply of Colorado River water, the only two viable alternatives could be a Peripheral Canal or new reservoirs.

 

We prefer the latter, but a decision is needed before a canal becomes the only remaining choice.