Notes from all over

The boards of supervisors of four of the five Delta counties – San Joaquin, Contra Costa, Sacramento, and Solano counties have adopted resolutions opposing BDCP, as has the City of Stockton.

In Santa Barbara County, Southcoast water agencies are beginning to realize how bad a peripheral canal would be for their budgets. The Santa Barbara County board of supervisors is the region’s State Water Project (SWP) contractor. But the Central Coast Water Authority (CCWA), the actual wholesale provider of water, has already voted NOT to go forward with BDCP and the peripheral canal.

Finally, Santa Clara Valley Water District, Zone 7 (in the Livermore-Amador Valley), and the Alameda County Water District (ACWD) are falling all over themselves to praise BDCP, issuing an error-filled “Fact Sheet.”

Among the “facts” that this fact sheet gets wrong:

  • “The Delta’s 150-year old man-made network of levees is old and fragile.” The levees aren’t fragile, and they are being constantly maintained by Delta reclamation districts.
  • “The BDCP improves water quality, benefiting industrial processes and reducing costs to business operations.” Not in the Delta region it doesn’t.
  • “The BDCP supports the recovery of endangered or threatened aquatic species and their habitat.” Not according to the National Research Council, the Bay Institute, and other science organizations.
  • “The BDCP restores tens of thousands of acres of tidal marsh and other habitat lost in past decades, an area as large as the City of San José.” What it does is take tens of thousands of acres of prime farmland out of production, experiment with habitat creation, and ask taxpayers to foot the bill.
  • “The BDCP addresses one of the most complex resource issues in California and has been championed by both a Republican and Democratic governor.” And we only need to follow the money to find out why.

Related Posts