February 2022

Invented by the region's Moorish rulers 1,200 years ago, Valencia's irrigation system is now a model for sustainable farming.

It's early. Fingers of sunlight are only just starting to creep along the streets of Valencia's Old Town, but the stalls inside the city's Mercado Central are doing a brisk trade already. There's a queue at the charcuterie, and the man behind the counter is slicing wafer-thin strips of jamón serrano in double time. He zips from one customer to the next, ducking between stocky legs of ham that hang from the front of his stall like fatty windchimes. In the seafood section, tuna, sea bream, anchovies and huge pink langoustines glisten in the ice. One stall here specialises in snails; another sells only saffron.  Among them all, taking pride of place at the heart of the Mercado Central, are the fruit and vegetables – plump, richly coloured and all grown in La Huerta (L'Horta in Valencian), a patchwork of neat market gardens that fan out for 28 sq km around the city. Encarna Folgado, owner of Frutas y Verduras Folgado, has been running a stall here for more than 45 years, buying seasonal vegetables direct from the farmers who work in La Huerta's fields. If you need to buy the beans used in a traditional paella Valenciana, you come to Folgado.  "The ferraúra have to have a bright green colour, but not too intense," she tells me, referring to the horseshoe-shaped beans that are almost spilling out of their crate. The rochet, a red and green bean, "has to be a few centimetres wider and thicker, but only a little bit". And as for butterbeans, which I can see bulging through their cases, "the best (ones) to eat are when they begin to turn from yellow to green".  Alongside the beans are spongy heads of broccoli, waxy red peppers, fat garlic bulbs and spring onions the size of truncheons. They're all part of an incredible bounty of produce that is grown in La Huerta each year, despite the fact that its fields enclose Spain's third-largest city. The secret is an ingenious maze of channels, ditches, weirs and floodgates invented by the region's Moorish rulers 1,200 years ago.

Eight main irrigation channels, or acequías, funnel water from the River Turia, which is then carried – by gravity – along a series of smaller branches, which distribute the water to thousands of tiny plots across the fields. The amount of water each plot receives isn't measured in terms of volume but rather on how well the river is flowing. The unit, known as a fila (from the Arabic word meaning "thread"), represents an individual's right to a proportion of the water over a period of time; the irrigation cycle usually lasts a week, but when the river's level is low, the cycle is extended.  It's an incredibly efficient system. Each plot receives the same access to water for the same amount of time, no matter where they are in the mosaic, and there are no water shortages, even in periods of drought. And the result is an incredibly diverse crop yield. Centuries-old local rice varieties grow in the fields around Lake Albufera, south of the city, while unique species like chufa, or tiger nuts (which are used to make the ice-cold milky Valencian drink of horchata), are sown in the north.  You may also be interested in: • Switzerland's gravity-defying solution • A luxury resort from 1,500 years ago • The technology that powered the Inca  "The system of water management adopted here [means that] aubergines, oranges, artichokes and olive trees can all co-exist together," said Clelia Maria Puzzo of the United Nations' Food & Agriculture Organization (FAO), which added La Huerta to their list of Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS) in November 2019. "A variety of crops were imported from Asia and America hundreds of years ago, but they adapted perfectly because of this irrigation system."  The whole process is held together by a unique social organisation that has been governing La Huerta for more than 1,000 years. The Tribunal de las Aguas de la Vega de la València, or Water Court of the Plains of Valencia, was established around 960 CE and as such is officially the world's oldest judicial body. The tribunal is made up of eight farmers, elected representatives of the communities that work off each of the main irrigation channels, who meet to settle disputes outside the doorway of Valencia Cathedral every Thursday at noon. Visitors can watch the meeting of the Tribunal every Thursday at noon outside Valencia Cathedral (Credit: Visit Valencia)  Visitors can watch the meeting of the Tribunal every Thursday at noon outside Valencia Cathedral (Credit: Visit Valencia)  It's quite a sight, with the men – they are all men – dressed in black smocks and seated in a semi-circle of leather-topped wooden chairs, where they enforce the rules of distribution. Water is the only issue up for debate, and according to María José Olmos Rodrigo, the Tribunal's secretary, the defendants are usually hauled before the court because "they've flooded a neighbour's field, taken water out of turn or haven't maintained their section of irrigation ditch correctly". Proceedings are in Valencian and are ruthlessly quick; all decisions are final.     

 It's trendy to talk about resilience, but this is the history of La Huerta  While the Tribunal has been an ever-present aspect of the system, the use of the land itself has evolved over time. "It's trendy to talk about resilience, but this is the history of La Huerta," said Miquel Minguet, CEO of Horta Viva. "We adapt the crops to the times, we change a lot, very often, just to survive." His company reflects this mentality, moving from farming a small organic garden near Alboraya, north of the city, to organising tomato tastings in La Huerta and running agritours around the region.  This culture of adaptation – in La Huerta's case, an intervention that has not only conserved but remarkably improved the existing conditions, according to FAO’s Puzzo – is seen as a potential sustainable solution to modern farming problems, and since July 2019, Valencia has been home to the World Centre for Sustainable Urban Food (CEMAS), an initiative set up with the aim of ensuring sustainable food for future generations.

February 2022

By Ian James LA Times Staff Writer   

California’s  mountain snowpack is shrinking, and climate change is intensifying the  severe drought. Streams have dwindled and reservoirs have declined as  vast quantities of water are diverted for farms and cities. Endangered  fish are struggling to survive. And in farming areas in the Central  Valley, hundreds of families are struggling with dry wells as  groundwater levels continue to drop.

A group of prominent legal  experts has presented a blueprint for updating California’s system of  water laws to fix long-standing weaknesses and adapt to the worsening  effects of climate change. They say their proposals, if adopted by the  Legislature, would help the state better manage surface water and  groundwater, protect vulnerable communities and ecosystems, and improve  state oversight of the water rights system.

The group presented  their 11 proposals this month, saying the reforms would represent a  major revision of laws that govern diversions from streams and rivers,  and would give state officials better tools to deal with mounting  strains on the state water system.

“California’s water laws, they  were adopted a long time ago ... in a California that was a very  different place,” said Holly Doremus, a UC Berkeley law professor who  was part of the group. 

“It’s past time to take a broad look,” Doremus said. “Climate change makes the situation that much more acute.”

The  group recommended changing state law so that decisions about water  rights, including approvals of new diversions from streams and rivers,  would require regulators to consider the effects of climate change. With  the heating of the planet bringing more extreme droughts, the legal  experts said there is an urgent need to change how California  administers water rights, and to start monitoring in real time how much  water is taken from rivers.

They called for measures to protect  vulnerable Californians in low-income rural communities, who have unsafe  contaminants in their tap water or  wells that are at risk of running  dry.

The  group urged the Legislature to require completion of a long-delayed  water-quality plan to protect threatened fish in the Sacramento-San  Joaquin River Delta, the heart of the state’s water system. And they  said the state needs to change the rules governing water releases from  dams so that agencies must consider not only the flows that fish need  but also the water temperatures — because warmer temperatures have taken  a worsening toll on endangered salmon and other species.

“We are  in a time of crisis. We have a climate crisis, we have wildfire crisis,  and we have droughts intensifying over time,” said Jennifer Harder, a  member of the group and a law professor at University of the Pacific’s  McGeorge School of Law.

Climate & Environment

Despite California groundwater law, aquifers keep dropping in a ‘race to the bottom’ 

Harder  and other lawyers in the group said they expect to face resistance but  hope the unrelenting drought may help build support for changing  California’s water laws. The group said in a 43-page report detailing their recommendations that they’re suggesting a “focused  approach to updating existing laws, regulations, and funding.”

They  recently presented their recommendations during a webinar organized by  the Planning and Conservation League. The Sacramento organization  convened the group more than a year ago to consider proposals for  modernizing California water laws.

“This is not our report, but we  do agree with its recommendations,” said Jonas Minton, senior water  policy advisor for the Planning and Conservation League. He said there  have been warnings for years that people will suffer from climate change  in the future, but Californians are already seeing the water rights  system “fail for disadvantaged communities, the environment, farms and  our cities.”

Under the current system, the State Water Resources  Control Board considers historical stream flow data in decisions about  water rights permits, but that “is no longer defensible” as climate  change leaves less flowing in watersheds, said Clifford Lee, a former  state deputy attorney general who was one of the report’s authors.

“Climate  change will result in less precipitation as snow; shift peak runoff  from historical patterns to earlier portions of the year; shorten the  precipitation season; and increase the intensity and frequency of  drought,” Lee said. “There simply will be less water in the future.”

He said relying on historical water data to estimate future flows is the “Waiting for Godot fallacy.”

“As  you all know, from the Samuel Beckett play, Godot never arrives,” Lee  said. “And that is the problem with using historical data to determine  future flow. The flow is not going to arrive.”

The last two years  have been some of the driest on record in California, and extreme heat  has compounded the problems by baking soils, increasing evaporation, and  reducing flows in streams and rivers.

An unusually wet December blanketed the Sierra Nevada in heavy snow, but the snowpack shrank during an extremely dry January, and now stands at 79% of average for this time of year.

The  water levels in California’s largest reservoirs remain far below  average. And if March doesn’t bring wetter conditions, the state appears  headed for another long summer of drought.

To better prepare for  extremes, Lee said, climate effects  must be incorporated into the water  rights permitting process by requiring that any analysis of whether  water is available be based on science that estimates likely future  flows. The state should also adopt this approach, he said, in managing  existing water rights.

Among its recommendations, the group said  the state needs better water data. Lee said it’s astounding that  California, the land of high technology and home of Silicon Valley,  “lacks the ability on a real-time basis to determine who is diverting  water from surface water sources, when such diversions are occurring, in  what amounts.”

Under existing law, the state requires only that diverters report how much they used in the previous  year.

“So  basically, during the drought, the state is flying blind. We do not  know who’s taking water,” Lee said. “It’s extremely important to get a  handle on a real-time basis during drought.”

The lawyers  recommended that California initially start real-time monitoring of  diversions in at least two watersheds, then consider whether to expand  tracking to other areas.

Another problem with the current system,  they said, is that the state water board is unable to investigate the  water rights of some of the state’s major water users — the most senior  rights holders with pre-1914 claims — to determine whether they are  valid, or whether some water users might be taking more than they  should.

They recommended giving the state water board new  authority to selectively investigate these water rights claims. Lee said  this change would align California with other western states and make  for a “more unified water rights system.”

Other members of the  group included law professors from UC Davis and Stanford University, as  well as former state water board member Tam Doduc.

The group  proposed some changes aimed at addressing widespread problems of  contaminated drinking water. Harder pointed out that an estimated 1  million Californians, including many in low-income communities of color,  do not have access to safe drinking water. Many rely on household wells  or small water systems where the water is contaminated with chemicals  or naturally occurring pollutants such as arsenic.

“Many of these  communities are historically underserved minority populations that have  been subject to explicit and implicit racism in the delivery of services  including water,” Harder said.

Harder said she and others in the  group believe California water law should correct these systemic  inequities and protect disadvantaged communities.

State  legislators in 2012 passed a law recognizing access to clean water as a  human right, and have since approved funding to pay for fixes in  communities where the tap water isn’t safe to drink. The group  recommended the state start requiring that at least one member of the  state water board — and each regional water quality board — have  experience working on environmental justice issues.

Other  proposals focus on the continuing problem of wells going dry as heavy  groundwater pumping in farming areas causes declines in aquifer levels.  According to state data, more than 3,700 dry household wells have been  reported since 2013, and the number of dry wells has risen dramatically over the last year. The state received reports of 975 household wells that ran dry in 2021, many in farming areas in the Central Valley.

The  group called for measures to protect homeowners struggling with dry  wells while the state gradually implements regulation under its 2014  groundwater law, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, which  requires local agencies to develop plans to eliminate problems of  chronic overpumping.

They suggested the state require local  groundwater agencies to determine whether pumping will probably cause  more wells to fail, and to ensure protections for people who depend on  wells by deepening or repairing their wells if needed, or connecting  their homes to new water pipes.

The state Department of Water  Resources recently reviewed plans submitted by local groundwater  agencies and told agencies in farming areas across the San Joaquin  Valley that their plans are “incomplete”  and will require changes to address widespread risks of more wells  going dry, as well as other problems. The local agencies will have six  months to revise their plans. If they fail to address the criticisms,  state regulators could deem their plans “inadequate,” which would  trigger intervention by the state water board.

Other proposals by  the group focus on addressing threats to fish that are struggling to  survive. The experts said the state water board should adopt  long-delayed updates to the state’s Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan  by the end of 2023.

They said the board also shouldn’t approve  any new water rights permits or extensions in the watershed until the  final plan is adopted.

“In light of the fish crisis in California  and the state’s clear authority to address that crisis, the failure to  get revised fishery flow objectives across the finish line, for whatever  reasons, is an unacceptable public policy failure,” Harder said. “The  group’s sense was that the fish don’t have time to wait longer for  further delays.”

Harder noted that many of California’s surviving  fish species are struggling, and some are at risk of extinction.  Endangered winter-run Chinook in the Sacramento River, for example, have  suffered major losses in drought years, in part because of warmer water  temperatures.

The group said because cold water is vital for  salmon, state law should be amended to require agencies that manage dams  to ensure not only sufficient flows but also water temperatures cool  enough to protect fish.

The report’s authors said they hope state legislators will take up their proposals and introduce bills.

The project followed a similar effort in 1977-78 by the Governor’s Commission to Review California Water Rights Law,  created by then-Gov. Jerry Brown. Some of that commission’s  recommendations were subsequently adopted, while others — such as  managing groundwater — failed to gain traction for years.

If the  Legislature were to adopt the full slate of proposals, the authors   believe, the reforms would represent the most significant changes to  California’s surface water laws since 1913.

Doremus  said these proposals aren’t intended to be a complete list of needed  upgrades, but rather a start to “move the system in the right direction”  and make it work better for the 21st century.

by Tom Cannon

The Delta is still here, albeit not what it used to be.  Yes, the Delta smelt are gone, the striped bass are at historic lows, and largemouth bass and bluegill abound.  Plankton densities are way down and their species-composition is highly altered.  Waters are warmer and saltier, and less turbid in dry-year summers.  Invasive aquatic plants are taking over.  Tidal flows now dominate over river inflows and Delta outflows.  Winter flushes still occur in odd years, but droughts predominate.  Climate change, heavy water use, and pollution have taken a toll.  But the Delta is still home to a vast array of native fish and other aquatic organisms, and remains a seasonal critical rearing and migrating habitat of endangered salmon, steelhead, sturgeon, lamprey, and smelt.  So what does the future have in store for the Delta, and how can we influence the outcome, especially for the aquatic ecosystem and its fish community?

To me, it has always been a simple solution involving the following array of strategic actions, although they are a very hard sale.  I have seen little progress and further damage to the Delta in my nearly 50 years working on the Delta issues, because of uncertainties and high costs, slow planning processes, and oh so many delays.

1. Stop exporting from the south Delta. Most of the water supply comes in from the north, so why pull it through and export it from the south?  It has always been the main problem.
2. Cut back on taking water from the Delta. Projects take a quarter of inflow and other users take another quarter or more (Figures 1 and 2).  In early June 2021, just 2000 cfs was reaching the Bay, out of 6000 cfs of Delta inflows.
3. The Delta needs more inflow in most years. The Delta is too warm in summer (Figure 3), and now more prone to blue-green algae blooms.  Inflow from the San Joaquin is especially important to the Delta ecosystem.
4. The Delta needs more nutrients to produce more plankton and benthos; it lacks nutrients because nutrients and aquatic productivity are exported/diverted and replaced by reservoir water that is very low in nutrients and productivity.
5. The low salinity zone should be located west of the Delta in the cooler eastern Bay where it can be more productive – more outflow is needed. This is especially important in spring of dry years (Figure 4), when low outflow results in the low-salinity zone being located in the Delta.
6. Invasive aquatic plants should be cut back as much as possible – this will help improve plankton, lesson water clarity, lower water temperature, and reduce habitat of non-native fishes.
7. The biomass and productivity of non-native fishes should be reduced by whatever means possible.
8. Pollutant inputs to the Delta should be minimized. Herbicides and pesticides and other pollutants inputs are too high.
9. Ship-channel dredging and shoreline-shoal habitat degradation should be lessened.
10. The tidal-prism should be increased with expansion of flow-through Delta tidal channels. Avoid shallow floodplain enhancements that increase water temperatures.
11. Restore Delta channel riparian habitats to increase shoreline protection, provide shade, and increase aquatic and terrestrial food for fish.
12. Release hatchery-raised delta smelt in optimal habitats in the Delta to reduce the imminent threat of their extinction.

There are more planning and restoration efforts today than 50 years ago.  So much more information is available.  It should not be this hard.

July 2021

Experimental Habitats for Hatchery Delta Smelt

Re-establishing Delta smelt in its native Delta using hatchery smelt is  an extremely difficult task, given how completely the habitat has been  altered (Stompe et al 2001). Releasing fish directly into the wild is  very risky and success will be hard to determine. Alternative projects  need to be developed to spread risk. The Polder Pond Project proposed  here is one such project. It proposes to rear Delta smelt in large ponds  on a Delta island, on natural foods, which should prepare the fish  better, at larger sizes, for release into the wild. The project also  entails some risk for the Delta smelt needed for the project (ca.  2,000/year) but even if the smelt fail to adapt well to the ponds,  useful information will be obtained on restoring native fishes to the Delta.

June 2021

A  California farmer decides it makes better business sense to sell his  water than to grow rice. An almond farmer considers uprooting his trees  to put up solar panels. Drought is transforming the state, with broad  consequences for the food supply.

In America’s fruit and nut basket, water is now the most precious crop of all.

It  explains why, amid a historic drought parching much of the American  West, a grower of premium sushi rice has concluded that it makes better  business sense to sell the water he would have used to grow rice than to  actually grow rice. Or why a melon farmer has left a third of his  fields fallow. Or why a large landholder farther south is thinking of  planting a solar array on his fields rather than the thirsty almonds  that delivered steady profit for years.

These are among the signs of a huge transformation up and down  California’s Central Valley, the country’s most lucrative agricultural  belt, as it confronts both an exceptional drought and the consequences of years of pumping far too much water out of its  aquifers. Across the state, reservoir levels are dropping and electric  grids are at risk if hydroelectric dams don’t get enough water to  produce power. 

California’s fertile Central Valley  begins in the north, where the water begins. In normal times, winter  rain and spring snowmelt swell the Sacramento River, nourishing one of  the country’s most important rice belts. On an average year, growers  around the Sacramento River produce 500,000 acres of sticky,  medium-grain rice vital to sushi. Some 40 percent is exported to Asia.

But  these are not normal times. There’s less snowpack, and, this year, much  less water in the reservoirs and rivers that ultimately irrigate  fields, provide spawning places for fish and supply drinking water for  39 million Californians.

More from the New York Times here.

June 2021

Drought Rock Barrier in the Delta

In a new symbol of California’s worsening drought, construction crews are putting the finishing touches on a $10 million emergency project to build a massive rock barrier through part of the Delta in Contra Costa County to preserve water supplies for millions of people across the state.

The 800-foot long barrier — the size of San Francisco’s Transamerica Pyramid laid on its side — is essentially a rock wall, 120 feet wide, built in water 35 feet deep….

… Most environmentalists say they accept the need for the barrier. But they worry about the impact on fish, such as endangered smelt and salmon, and the risk of huge algae blooms in the area. More broadly, they say the state Department of Water Resources and federal Bureau of Reclamation let too much water out of big reservoirs last fall and this spring for farmers in the Central Valley, even after they knew the drought was worsening.

“They do not have the backbone to say no to the big agriculture producers, especially during a recall election,” said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Restore the Delta, an environmental group in Stockton. “But even without a recall, they cannot come to terms with the fact that we have promised far more water through water rights than exists in the system. And climate change is making it worse.”

June 2021

Hatchery Delta Smelt 2021

Efforts continue to gain approval for releasing hatchery-raised delta smelt in the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuary. However, given a poor prognosis for a successful introduction, the chances of approval are not good.

The biggest obstacle is the absence of a location to release the hatchery-raised fish that will allow their survival and thus contribute to the species’ recovery. Another problem is the potential detrimental effect on the remaining wild smelt from genetic compromise.

Two locations for release of hatchery smelt seem most plausible: the low salinity zone in the west Delta/eastern Suisun Bay and the Deep-Water Shipping Channel in the north Delta. These are primary late spring and early summer nursery areas that are most likely to have the right habitat conditions (water temperature and low salinity) and food supply. 

The better of the two sites is the eastern-Bay/west-Delta location, because the ship-channel gets too warm by summer (Figure 3). In contrast, the region between Collinsville in eastern Suisun Bay and Decker Island in the west Delta is cooler and within the low salinity zone. A nighttime near-bottom release into cooler, deeper channel waters would give the hatchery smelt at least a minimum opportunity to acclimate to the warm Bay-Delta waters.[2. 20ºC is the likely limit for releasing hatchery smelt into the wild: (https://academic.oup.com/conphys/article/7/1/coy076/5334620)]

April 2021

Klamath Crisis Looks Familiar

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — One of the worst droughts in memory in a  massive agricultural region straddling the California-Oregon border  could mean steep cuts to irrigation water for hundreds of farmers this  summer to sustain endangered fish species critical to local tribes.

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which oversees water  allocations in the federally owned Klamath Project, is expected to  announce this week how the season's water will be divvied up after  delaying the decision a month.

For the first time in 20 years, it's possible that the  1,400 irrigators who have farmed for generations on 225,000 acres  (91,000 hectares) of reclaimed farmland will get no water at all — or so  little that farming wouldn't be worth it. Several tribes in Oregon and  California are equally desperate for water to sustain threatened and  endangered species of fish central to their heritage.

A network of six wildlife refuges that make up the  largest wetland complex west of the Mississippi River also depend on the  project's water, but will likely go dry this year.

The competing demands over a vanishing natural resource  foreshadow a difficult and tense summer in a region where farmers,  conservationists and tribes have engaged in years of legal battles over  who has greater rights to an ever-dwindling water supply. Two of the  tribes, the Klamath and Yurok, hold treaties guaranteeing the protection  of their fisheries.

For more: https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Tensions-rise-in-water-battle-along-16094742.php?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=briefing&utm_campaign=sfg_thedaily&stn=nf&sid=53b769cfa256abc76400017c

April 2021

San Francisco Fails to Conserve Water Critical for Survival of Fish

Most  San Franciscans know that their drinking water, among the best in the  world, comes from Hetch Hetchy in the Sierras.  Hetch Hetchy dams the  Tuolumne River which originates in Yosemite National Park.  

Many  San Franciscans probably have no idea that the City has been told by  the state to leave a little more water in the river to help heal severe  harm to salmon and the health of the San Francisco Bay and  Delta.  Instead of doing its part, at the urging of the SFPUC staff, the  City has sued the state to block these stronger protections.  

Instead  of being a river of pure snowmelt full of salmon and trout, today the  Tuolumne, downstream of the dams, is a trickle of warm water  inhospitable to salmon and other native wildlife.  

Further  downstream, where the Tuolumne water once fed the Delta and Bay,  stagnant water now turns to cesspools of toxic blue-green  algae.  Getting more Sierra river water flowing back through the Delta  and Bay is the solution identified by state environmental officials, but  San Francisco, under the direction of SFPUC staff, is refusing to do  its part.  This flies in the face of San Franciscans’ value to protect  the environment. 

Once abundant salmon runs that helped feed the Bay Area and beyond are  weak and sick.  As a result, the billion dollar recreational and  commercial fishing industry that helped build fishermans wharf is  suffering badly - after being shut down completely a decade ago.  The  answer is for the City of San Francisco to lead the way in restoring the  river and to do its part to help restore the Delta and Bay.  

We  know there’s enough water to supply the City while protecting the  environment because San Franciscan cut a third of their water use during  the last drought.  Instead of reflecting City residents’ experience and  values, the SFPUC now argues that conserving won’t work and they’re  using faulty studies to argue for the keeping the status quo.   

Recently,  the National Marine Fisheries Service commissioned a group of  independent scientists to examine studies the SFPUC staff paid for to  prop up its no compromise position.  The independent scientists found  they had little to no scientific validity.

The  SFPUC is woefully behind other major California communities including  Los Angeles, San Diego and Orange County in using water wisely.  Water  recycling, and other 21st century water tools, can reduce our dependence  on the rivers supplying the Bay-Delta, particularly in dry years.  They  can also reduce the risk to our water supply from climate  change.  Instead of working with local groups to adopt such tools, the  SFPUC is teaming up with anti-environmental San Joaquin Valley  agribusiness.

Recently  the General Manager of the SFPUC resigned after he was indicted on  corruption charges.  This indictment and the SFPUC staff’s  anti-environmental positions highlight the need for new leadership at  the agency.

Mayor  Breed didn’t create this problem.  She just had the bad luck of  inheriting it.  Mayor Breed and the SFPUC Commission will now appoint a  new General Manager and it’s crucial the Mayor bring in a highly  qualified, environmentally responsible outsider who can clean  house.  Many highly qualified candidates would jump at the chance of  guiding San Francisco back to being a progressive, high tech,  environmental leader.   

Ask  San Francisco Mayor London Breed to hire a new general manager to run  the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission who reflects San  Francisco’s values and leadership in protecting the environment.   

March 2021

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021, Restore the Delta submitted our “Stockton Coalition Comments on Delta Adapts Vulnerability Assessment” to the Delta Stewardship Council.

The goal of the Delta Adapts Draft Vulnerability Assessment is to evaluate the vulnerability of the Delta and Suisun Marsh to climate impacts through end of century. Our comments are part of the public review process to evaluate the draft assessment, especially the plans to identify areas within the Delta that are socially vulnerable to climate change impacts. We are proud of all the local people who spoke up during this process including the youth of the Restore the Delta’s Climate Action Team and the climate fellows working with Little Manila Rising, Third City Coalition, and environmental justice youth advocates from Fathers and Families of San Joaquin.

Here is a taste of what we told the council:
“Since we are commenting on a draft report, we respectfully suggest for the upcoming final report outlining areas where adaptation strategies for the Delta will be most needed, as well as potential legislative and policy initiatives that push forward climate change mitigation that will result in “no regrets” for the Delta region as well as other parts of the Central Valley and California. This will provide useful stepping-stones to a successful adaptation strategy phase of the Delta Adapts process.

“The final version of this vulnerability assessment should also clarify what existing services, practices (e.g., flood fighting), and infrastructure are already available to Delta communities as a baseline for adaptation strategies. How prepared are these baseline elements of disaster response for dealing with flood, extreme heat, wildfire, and other climate hazards at the different planning horizons examined in the assessment’s scenarios?”

Click here to read the letter in its entirety.

February 2021

Preparing for a Fast-forward Future in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta

In a recently released report, a science panel argues for a new approach to make research nimbler and more  forward-looking to improve management in the ailing Delta.

Radically transformed from its ancient origin as a vast tidal-influenced  freshwater marsh, the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta ecosystem is in  constant flux, influenced by factors within the estuary itself and the  massive watersheds that drain though it into the Pacific Ocean.

Conditions in the Delta change daily, affected by numerous factors  inside and outside the region. The Delta drains the Sacramento and San  Joaquin river watersheds and upstream diversions affect water quality  and other factors. The health of the ecosystem is dogged by multiple  stressors, among them changing water use, changing water quality and invasive species.

According to the Science Board, what’s not widely appreciated are the  consequences of the accelerating speed of change, of more frequent and  larger extreme weather events, and of increasing encounters with tipping  points.

Tipping points, such as the decline of pelagic (open water) fish such as Delta smelt, longfin smelt and threadfin shad, show a system blinking red.

“Any observer, any fisherman, anyone who lives in the Delta or anyone  who has studied it will tell you there is an accelerated ecological  timescale that is swirling now into an ecological crisis,” said Jay  Ziegler, director of external affairs and policy with The Nature  Conservancy. See more at https://www.watereducation.org/western-water/ecosystem-change-sacramento-san-joaquin-delta-outpacing-ability-science-keep

January 2021

From the Golden State Salmon Association:

On May 11, GSSA and allies won a major federal court ruling against the federal government forcing it to cut excessive water diversion and Delta pumping because of the extreme environmental damage they were causing to salmon and other wildlife.

The new federal water plan being sued over allows boosted water diversions from salmon rivers in northern California and the Delta by 600,000 acre feet at a time when the state and multiple scientific agencies documented the need to reduce such diversions to maintain salmon and other native wildlife.  

Last July the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) scientists rejected the pumping and diversion plan because of the harm it would do to salmon and other wildlife. Their warnings were ignored. 

Groups in the court case are Defenders of Wildlife, the Natural Resources Defense Council, The Bay Institute, the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations and Institute for Fisheries Research.  Legal representation is being provided pro bono by Altshuler Berzon LLP.