The peripheral canal that was proposed is not the same one that came about circa 1980. This one is much smaller. The recommendations for the canal were published in the Delta Vision papers and another Calfed document. These all came out in the last year. The fish people working on this looked at four scenarios:
1) Keep the status quo (all water through pumps).
2) Zero water exports.
3) All water exported through Peripheral Canal
4) Water exported through both systems so that they could select when and where to draw water.
They basically found that #1 isn't working out that well (see Delta Smelt, Chinook salmon, longfin smelt), #2 would be great for fish but will NEVER happen (as much as we ALL would like it), and #3 has its own challenges. This left #4 which allows the greatest flexibility with regards to pumping. It is essentially the lesser of two evils.
By no means is it the BEST for fish but something has to change to ensure the long term viability of the Delta. We have to be realistic about what we as fish-people want to try to get. Will we ever see a cessation of Delta exports? Not likely. Can we see an alteration of export practices, coupled with better water use practices and habitat restoration, greatly improve the Delta ecosystem? Definitely, that is a goal that we should be working towards. As with any related to fish and water, some sort of compromise has to be the solution.
See ya,
Mike
Bookmarks