Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Reinitiation of Consultation on the Coordinated Long-Term Operation of the CVP & SWP

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Shatanistan
    Posts
    94

    Default Reinitiation of Consultation on the Coordinated Long-Term Operation of the CVP & SWP

    Say goodbye to the Delta and everything connected to it if this goes through. This document along with the USFWS and NOAA BioOp were extremely rushed and not based on good science. This is the biggest threat to CA fisheries in the last twenty years.

    Let BOR know what you think.
    https://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_pr...oject_ID=39181

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Placer County
    Posts
    1,135

    Default

    "They" are not going to stop............... Unless the culture of this State favors fisheries and prioritizes fisheries management, this will continue........

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Sacramento
    Posts
    7,786

    Default CVP/SWP Co-ordinated Ops

    Editorial comments: Read the summary, so far. Looks like Trump/McCarthy/Nunez are going to try to keep past promises for increased water deliveries thru the Interior Secretary to southern San Joaquin Valley growers. As I'm not a scientist I can't comment about the quality of research involved but if it's anything like the climate change issue and many of the issues raised by southern San Joaquin growers in the past....

    This shouldn't surprise anyone. On his (Trump) visits to California, he has been for re-negotiating these contracts between the CVP/SWP This is just the latest angle to attempt to acquire more water for agriculture. If this fails, something else will be thought up and tried.

    Since neither political party has anyone in them who will champion the Delta and its fisheries, It's just a matter of time before they collapse.

    Sorry for the rant....
    "America is a country which produces citizens who will cross the ocean to fight for democracy but won't cross the street to vote."

    Author unknown

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Shatanistan
    Posts
    94

    Default

    Here's an article from a few weeks back about the rushed BioOps. Typically these take about 1.5-2 years to complete. This was finished in half the time and it shows.

    https://www.kqed.org/science/1944278...say-scientists

    The BOR NEPA was also rushed but I'm not sure when that process started. Either way this administration has showed they are going to attempt to subvert the law.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Sacramento
    Posts
    7,786

    Default Draft Documents....

    Why do biologists/scientists try to analyze/respond to incomplete documents?? The article points out that in at least one instance, a chapter was left out of the document delivered. Why not reject the document until all of it has been received?? Since the original biologists were replaced, anyway, what was gained by trying to respond with some analysis??
    "America is a country which produces citizens who will cross the ocean to fight for democracy but won't cross the street to vote."

    Author unknown

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    139

    Default

    Perhaps when the Delta is evaluated in public trust doctrine within our state's constitution this pendulum of influences will cease to swing. Sadly there are parties on both sides of this issue that don't want to do this because either they will be out of water or a career.
    Meanwhile the Delta declines. Mono Lake was protected under public trust doctrine and old water warriors know that the Delta is just another larger similar example.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Shatanistan
    Posts
    94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darian View Post
    Why do biologists/scientists try to analyze/respond to incomplete documents?? The article points out that in at least one instance, a chapter was left out of the document delivered. Why not reject the document until all of it has been received??
    This may be the only time reviewers get to have any influence on the document before its released to the public, complete or not. Any competent reviewer would make note of the missing documentation and respond accordingly. Those comments can be FOIA'd if necessary. If a reviewer doesn't respond, it makes it look like they are giving their approval.

    Quote Originally Posted by Darian View Post
    Since the original biologists were replaced, anyway, what was gained by trying to respond with some analysis??
    You nailed this one Darian. DOI knew how the scientists would respond and would obviously not get the response they were looking for. Why not replace them with someone who is more friendly to the administration? That said, this process being is lead by David Bernhardt, former lobbyist of Westlands. The blatant conflict of interest here is astounding, but then again, ethics doesn't really apply to this administration.

    Just in case you didn't see what Darian was alluding to replacing federal officials...
    https://www.kqed.org/science/1944904...fornia-farmers

    Keep in mind these people being replaced are career employees who have most likely served under multiple administrations . They understand the law and policy far better than most. They have most likely done their best to be apolitical and attempt to follow the direction of the executive branch. To be replaced at a whim by political hacks is an insult to anyone working for the federal government. Maybe that is why they are leaving in record numbers and grossly unqualified people are now leading agencies they have no business leading.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •