AquAlliance Troupers Create Anti-Tunnel Skit

“Gov. Brown” endorses the billion-dollar-per-million Peripheral Tunnels project, while “northstate waters” pour into one end of the tunnels and “Desert Ag” pulls money from the other end. (Photo: Tom Gascoyne/Chico News & Review)

Now you can see our video of AquAlliance Troupers  performing a live skit at a press conference on July 24, 2012  to illustrate their opposition Governor Jerry Brown’s proposed Peripheral Tunnels. The players represented “Gov. Brown” making a deal with “Westlands Desert Ag.” While blue cloth representing water was pushed into one end of the “tunnels,” the Westlands man pulled money from the other end. The “live cartoon” illustrated the folly of draining northstate waters to continue unsustainable agriculture in the most arid part of the south state – and, adding insult to injury, charging Californians tens of billions of dollars to do it.

View our videos:

cartoon by Steve Greenberg (greenberg-art.com).

AquAlliance Opposes Peripheral Tunnels – Urges Planning Before Engineering

“They have no plan,” said AquAlliance Executive Director Barbarar Vlamis. “Brown’s moving forward and says, ‘We’ll figure it out later.’” (Photo: Tom Gascoyne/Chico News & Review)

AquAlliance and colleagues around California oppose Governor Jerry Brown’s attempts to construct two Peripheral Tunnels. They launched their campaign against the Peripheral Tunnels with a press conference near Oroville dam on July 24 and a rally at the State Capitol on July 25. As the governor and federal officials prepared to unveil their proposal, opponents pointed out expected damage to water, the environment, fish, farming, and water ratepayers. Click to read Press Release.

Congress Members Call Tunnels Project “Potentially Damaging”

On June 22, ten members of the U.S. Congress sent a letter to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and Acting Commerce Secretary Rebecca Blank questioning the wisdom of the proposed Peripheral Tunnels project and asking for a “far more detailed description” before finalizing or formal announcement of the project. AquAlliance succeeded in getting some important language about our northstate region inserted into the letter. Click links to read the letter and the letter of support from 36 Northstate environmental and sporting groups: Congressional BDCP Letter 6.22.12 — Group Letter 6.26.12

 

“Integrating” Ground Water into State Water Supply

Crucial Meeting April 12, 2012

It is bad enough when powerful interests have insatiable thirsts, but unfortunately, the local water districts are collaborating with them to squeeze more water from the Sacramento Valley for points south. This year, Butte Water District plans to incorporate ground water into a water transfer to Kern County, and multiple districts have bought into a scheme to “integrate” the ground water here into the state water supply. To hear about the “integration” plan and voice your views, attend the Glenn Colusa Irrigation District meeting on Thursday, April 12th from 6-8 p.m. at the Chico Masonic Hall, 1110 W. East Avenue. If you want to see how they are trying to break the details of their plan to us, click here to view the final report.

The photo below illustrates what happens when too much ground water is used over many years.

So You Think They Don’t Want Our Water … ?

Look what they’re saying right out loud. As you see in the slide below, powerful interests view our Northstate ground water as an ideal way to send more water south of the Delta. The slide was part of a presentation delivered to the newly reconstituted California Water Commission in September 2011 by Mr. Carl Hauge, retired Chief Hydrogeologist for the California Department of Water Resources, a government agency that works on behalf of water contractors, not the public.

They would never show this slide in the northern Sacramento Valley!

[Red line added by AquAlliance]

From Groundwater/Conjunctive Management — Or, Why is groundwater recharge so important? 9.14.11:

Click here to view complete Hauge PowerPoint presentation.

Tagged , , ,

Chico Conference Attracts Experts

Flowers, Shrimp, Birds, and Bees Also Have Their Day

The 2010 Vernal Pool Conference was tremendously successful. It was held in Sierra Nevada Brewing Company’s Big Room and tackled the questions posed by the conference title: Vernal Pool Conservation: Research, Progress, and Problems. Is Recovery Possible?

Both attendees and speakers traveled from around the country to participate in the conference and field trips. One such individual works for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and came all the way from Mississippi to hear the outstanding presentations made by scientists, government regulators, activists, a rangeland representative, and an attorney (see abstracts). Ellen Bauder of San Diego State University capped off the day with her keynote address during the banquet: Science and vernal pool conservation: research questions, methodologies and applications.
The field trip was held the following day with perfect weather. The participants explored the Meriam Park preserve first and found the local star, Butte County meadowfoam (Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica), in rare form. Next the group took in the expanse of the former Bidwell Ranch property from a distance and heard about the 20-year effort to \protect it from 4,000 homes adjacent to Upper Bidwell Park. After lunch, the next stop was the Nature Conservancy’s Vina Plains Preserve where we found the pools teeming with life. The happy group disbanded around 3:30 p.m., departing with broad smiles and buoyed spirits.

The conference would not have been possible without the generous support of the sponsors, friends, and the dedicated Vernal Pool Landscapes Committee. AquAlliance deeply appreciates the contributions of each individual and entity that made the conference such a success!

Conference Sponsors

The Rose Foundation and the Sierra Nevada Brewing Company
California Department of Fish and Game, Friends of the Herbarium, CSU Chico Institute for Sustainable Development, New Urban Builders, Northern California Botanists, Rawlins Advisory Board, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Conference Friends

California Native Plant Society, Mount Lassen Chapter, Oxford Suites, the Nature Conservancy, USFWS Sacramento National Wildlife Refuge Complex, VernalPools.org

Special Thanks to the Vernal Pool Landscapes Committee and AquAlliance’s Webmaster!

Douglas Alexander, Barbara Castro, Francine Gair, Jake Jacobson, Jenny Marr, Robert Schlising, Joseph Silveira, Elizabeth Warne

Conference Materials

Presentations by Speaker

Some Ground Water Background

Surface water depletion from excessive ground water use has been observed over many decades in portions of California. One recent example is the Cosumnes River, where “[d]eclining fall flows are limiting the ability of the Cosumnes River to support large fall runs of Chinook salmon,” (Fleckenstein, et al. 2004) due to elevated agricultural and municipal pumping. This is a river that historically supported a large fall run of Chinook salmon, yet in the last 40 years their numbers have dropped from 5,000 to zero with an average of 600 in recent years. Id. (USFWS 1995). Indeed, “[f]all flows in the Cosumnes have been so low in recent years that the entire lower river has frequently been completely dry throughout most of the salmon migration period (October to December).” Id.

The massive ground water extractions that have decimated the Cosumnes River have not taken place in the northern Sacramento River watershed, but they have begun through the Drought Water Bank , the Glenn Colusa experimental pumping project. The programmatic planning for many more projects is already completed. The projects and plans ignore the northern Sacramento Valley, foothills, and mountains that need water not only for their own cities, residential wells, recreation, businesses, and family farms, but also for threatened and endangered species that require the indigenous aquatic and terrestrial habitat. Fourteen significant rivers and creeks (the Sacramento River, Feather River, Battle Creek, Big Chico Creek, Butte Creek, Comanche Creek, Deer Creek, Lindo Channel, Little Chico Creek, Mill Creek, Mud Creek, Rock Creek, Thomes Creek, Stony Creek) are part of the system that provide crucial habitat for native plants and wildlife, including but not limited to Chinook salmon, steelhead, the giant garter snake, countless avian species, and more. Massive proposed ground water extractions would not only drain the aquifers but would also result in the loss of stream flow, riparian habitat, and oak woodlands (Bouwer 1997). Of special significance is Butte Creek’s wild spring-run Chinook salmon, which is the largest run in the Sacramento River system. Impaired surface water flows not only impact the quantity of water for fish and habitat, but also the quality of the water from elevated temperature and the concentration of pollutants.

Butte, Colusa, Glenn, and Tehama counties are the jurisdictions above the Tuscan Aquifer that are central to all the state and federal plans to provide more water for users south of the Bay Delta. As demonstrated above, a fully charged ground water basin keeps creeks flowing and riparian vegetation vibrant. Joseph L. Sax expanded on surface water/ground water dynamics by noting that the interaction between ground water and surface water is geologically varied, complex, and unpredictable from year to year, “[d]epending on a variety of factors, such as the varied transmissivity of the material in which it is found, the varied obstacles it encounters, and the diverse gradients over which it travels in its movement through the earth. In addition, at various points in time or space, groundwater may be in hydraulic connection with a surface stream, or it may be confined, at least for some distance, beneath a quite impermeable layer.” (2002). Scientific understanding of the interactions discussed by Sax are sorely missing in the northern Sacramento River hydrologic region (Hoover 2008). Lacking sound scientific and comprehensive understanding of the region’s water dynamics, the agencies are still willing to throw caution to the wind with massive water transfers that involve hundreds of thousands of acre feet of ground water.

In spite of the lack of a scientific foundation, one principle of hydrodynamics is quite clear: excessive depletion of ground water in the northern Sacramento Valley, whether it is from water transfers or over use, will lower the water table regionally and locally and dewater creeks, streams, and the Sacramento River just as excessive surface diversions and ground water pumping did in the Owens Valley, the San Fernando Valley, the San Joaquin Valley, and the southern end of the Sacramento Valley. Such a result would not only decimate the most significant watershed in California, but it would likely obliterate what remains of the Bay Delta, the largest inland estuary in North America, and its resident and migratory species. AquAlliance seeks to halt the repetition of history.

Delta Plan’s EIR Terribly Flawed

AquAlliance provided the state with considerable material regarding the geography, health, and oversight of the Tuscan Aquifer in comments for the Delta Plan’s Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (DPEIR). The Delta Stewardship Council, formed by the California legislature, was attempting to analyze their Delta Plan to secure a “reliable water supply for California and protecting, restoring and enhancing the Delta ecosystem.” Sadly, the planning and ensuing environmental review pursue the same broken paradigm that led to the water supply and ecosystems crises in the first place.

The 63 page comment letter was crafted by AquAlliance, the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, the California Water Impact Network, and the Pacific Coast Federation of Fisherman’s Association. The comments provide legal standing to challenge the very inadequate effort by the Delta Stewardship Council. Significant flaws in the DPEIR include:

  • An inadequate description of the overall Delta Plan project.
  • A failure to discuss and analyze the benefits and impacts of the Delta Plan.
  • An absence of information regarding baseline environmental conditions.
  • An inadequate evaluation of feasible alternatives.

To read the group’s comments just click on the link below.