To pump or not to pump, do a peripheral canal with dams or not, these seem to be the two questions the legislature continues to struggle with as plans for the Delta are shaped.
We obviously need to protect the Delta, and move Northern California water to Southern California and the peripheral canal seems the best option for that.
We also want to reduce the fish death rate from the pumps and need to continue to work in that direction, but only with the health of the human community which needs the water as the priority governing principle.
Dems push for Delta action
Proposed bill sets deadline for deciding how to divvy up fresh water statewide.
By Judy Lin and Matt Weiser - Bee Staff Writers
Published 12:00 am PDT Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Amid judicial threats to shut down water pumps to protect endangered fish, Senate Democrats on Monday unveiled legislation that would set a deadline for consensus for how California should maintain its largest source of fresh water -- the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
"The Delta is going to hell in a handbasket," said Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, one of the authors of Senate Bill 27. "There are 23 million Californians who were understandably worried about water quality and water security, which they depend on.
And Northern Californians who have traditionally thought of it as 'their water' continue to be anxious about how much of that water would flow to other parts of the state."
SB 27 sets a Jan. 1, 2008, deadline for the state Department of Water Resources to pick one of five options for water transfer put forth by a recent research paper.
The report by the Public Policy Institute of California proposed three versions of an aqueduct for channeling fresh water from the Delta to other parts of the state, and two that call for reducing water pumping and building dams near the Delta.
The bill is being pushed by the Democrat-controlled Senate at the same time as an environmental lawsuit is threatening to disrupt the state's most vital water source.
