Daily Democrat - Thompson, Wolk agree with delta panel

Two Yolo County-area politicians agree with a panel of national scientists who reported this past week that a sweeping plan to restore California's ailing freshwater delta and build a pipeline or canal to carry water to the south is missing critical information.

The National Academy of Sciences found in its review that the draft plan to restore the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta lacks clear goals and a scientific analysis of the plan's potential impact on the delta's diverse plant and animal species.

Both state Sen. Lois Wolk and Congressman Mike Thompson agree.

Both are Democrats. Wolk, D-Davis, represents the 5th District; and Thompson represents the 1st Congressional Districts. The scientists found that it is unclear whether the main purpose of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan is simply to build a canal or pipeline, or whether it is a broader plan that would restore and protect the delta ecosystem and provide a stable water supply.

"This report provides us with a choice," stated Wolk. "We can continue with business as usual, making shortsighted decisions based on bad science without accountability for the consequences, or we can learn from our past mistakes to ensure that the BDCP utilizes credible science and a process that includes the people who live, work, farm, and recreate in the Delta.

"I am hopeful that our new Governor and his Administration will look at this as an opportunity to strengthen this plan, which may very well decide the fate of the Delta, to not only restore and protect the health of the Delta as a source of drinking water, but as well as the heart of numerous communities, economies, and a unique and irreplaceable ecosystem," Wolk added.

Thompson agreed, stating "The National Academy of Sciences report confirms what we already knew - the plan is so murky that it's unclear whether the project is simply to restore the troubled delta, or build a pipeline to south-of-delta water interests. Such failings run counter to good water policy, and run against the science-based planning I have supported for years.

"At a Congressional summit I attended last week, farmers and fishermen came together to call for science-based solutions to guide the Delta's restoration process," Thompson stated. "The message was clear - weak science will not restore the delta, but instead unfairly favors powerful south-of-delta water interests and harms family farmers and fishermen.

Deputy Secretary of the Interior David Hayes said the review provides useful guidance as the plan continues to be developed. He added that many of the suggestions are already being implemented.

Hayes acknowledged there is a potential for the "restoration goal to be compromised by the goal for reliable water supply."

But, he said, the plan's aim is to satisfy both goals. "Whatever alternative is chosen - including the no-action alternative - will need to lead to the recovery of the species in question," Hayes said. The Bureau of Reclamation, which is part of the U.S. Department of the Interior, coordinates its water operations with the state of California and is participating in the development of the delta plan.

The delta supplies much of the drinking water for nearly two-thirds of the state's population, irrigates millions of acres of crops and provides habitat for hundreds of plant and animal species.

The decline of protected fish species once abundant in the delta has triggered Endangered Species Act regulations to protect salmon and smelt, which have in turn limited water pumping in recent years. Farmers and urban water users, roiled by the restrictions and several years of drought, have clamored for a permanent pipeline or canal system to guarantee water supplies.

Estimates for building a canal around the delta range as high as $9 billion, while an underground pipeline/tunnel could cost as much as $11.7 billion, according to the state Department of Water Resources.

Environmental groups said Thursday the review confirmed problems with the planning process.

To date, about $150 million has been spent in developing the plan, a process which started in 2006 and has involved hundreds of meetings among state and federal agencies, local water districts, and environmental and conservation groups.