Da BDCP Redux....

[Darian]

OK,.... In keeping with my interest in trying to be objective, the link below includes a statement made by the San Joaquin Tributaries Authority in the conservative blog, OC Political. The SJ Tribs Auth has raised several points that really have enforced what I've been thinking for some time. That being that the right hand (government) doesn't know what the left is doing or why, not only that they don't seem to want to communicate much other than to tell everyone else what is best for the Delta environment and Salmon recovery.

now, as I've said often enough in the past, I'm not a conservative but this message should be taken to heart by those in charge of meeting the objectives in "da BDCP". While reading the post, think about how long it's taken to get the BDCP to this point in time only to be reduced to make it more palatable and realize that the bond initiative to fund the project was recently pulled from the ballot a second time. Also, keep in mind that there are at least 31 governmental entities involved in carrying out the plan; not counting non-governmental organizations. Each one has their own goals and objectives, not necessarily in keeping with those of the overall plan.

I'm not holding out any hope for change, tho. It seems that these agencies all have adopted the strategy of jumping on their horses and riding off in all directions at the same time. Maybe they'll shoot themselves in the foot. One can only hope.

Geezzz!!! I re-read this this morning and edited a bit. Shouldn't try to post late at night....

The link includes another link to a study done by AECOM on this subject but I was unable to display the report. Take a look at the info available:

http://ocpolitical.com/tag/san-joaqu...ies-authority/

[Tracy Chimenti]

Darian-- I read recently that the creaky, old, "unreliable" south delta pumps will be left in place-- this after reducing the proposed intake capacity at Clarksburg. The supporting cast seems to repeat with greater regularity that "no one's going to get everything they want," that compromises must be made. Basically that just means that salmon and the delta ecosystem are going to get less, while So-Cal and corporate ag gets more... maybe not everything though... because that's what they want...and they won't get everything they want. Or maybe Nor-Cal will just have to contribute more from their supply to maintain the health of the delta-- That would turn northern water intersts into salmon haters then. Divide and conquer. There is increasing double-talk, and policy and construction proposals seem to change weekly.

I read an article in the Placer Sentinal. The story was a virtual "form" statement from the Ca Na. Resource Agency. There were so many hollow claims and softballs it was just, well gross!

These statements really do not lie so much, but tell a twisted hyperspacial truth. Analyze these statement for minute, and you will see what I mean...

A rigorous public environmental review;

The revised approach, which is grounded in science, is designed to help restore fish populations" (why not leave out "help" and just make it a policy to restore the fish).

The status quo isn't working for fish. (No shit, neither will the new plan)

Becasue this is a complicated issue and we do not have all the answers today, we will continue to evaluate and refine the proposal. (Every 5-years as things go to shit)
The 15,000 cu ft. option is still on the table. I thought they were gonna take less!)

In order to determine the benefits of additional habitat and Delta outflow to fish, the state and US governments are developing a process, including independant scientific review, to ensure that science is playing a "neutra" and informative role in determining a "way forward for the BDCP." (Neutral role??? What a croque)

State and US governments will work cooperatively with local water agencies, environmental organizations, and delta governments and districts under a proposed governance structure to achieve an open, transparent, and inclusive process, allowing parties to play and appropriate role in the governance and implementation of the BDCP. (Key words-- local... like Westlands, LAWP, Santa Clara; A governance strucutre that determines what's appropriate)

Associated mitigation of the facility will be paid through charges to the water users who would benifit from it's development and operation. (We've already heard that tax-payers will get the bill for mitigation)

Habitat and conservation measures would be financed in part by contractors, but would mostly be paid by the state over a period of 40-years with likely investment from the federal government through existing programs. (The state can't print money, but with all this thirst, and all those %$#@ almond and pecan plantings, WERE TOO BIG TO FAIL and Uncle Sam will bail us out).

The two largests urban regional water agencies have committed to save 700,000 acre feet a year on predicted future demands. (This is paper water. This is tomorrow's supply. It's horse shit and it stinks).

Sorry if I went on too long, just haven't blow off any delta steam lately.

Tracy

[Darian]

Seems that talking points in this are staying on message. It's evident that heavy management is taking place. An even scarier potential is that the Speaker of the Assembly may propose changes in CEQA in exchange for support of his pet projects. This coincides nicely with Browns disparaging statements about CEQA and his intent to build the tunnels without the need to meet those requirements.