Environmental Defense Gives Mixed Reviews To CALFED Decision

Oakland - Environmental Defense responded today with mixed reviews to a state and federal plan to restore the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuary and its watershed while meeting statewide water supply objectives. After almost six years of planning, studies and negotiations, Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt is expected to sign a “Record of Decision” today which projects spending $8.6 billion over seven years. The decision includes commitments to restore endangered and threatened fisheries, rebuild levees and ensure a reliable water supply for most of California.

“San Francisco Bay and its Delta deserve a world-class program to keep them healthy,” said Thomas J. Graff, Environmental Defense’s regional director. “CALFED’s program reflects an impressive commitment of the administrations in Washington and Sacramento to restore these resources.

This restoration program will fail, however, if plans to build more dams and to divert more water from our rivers and from the Delta are allowed to proceed. It’s almost as if CALFED has its feet on the brake and the accelerator at the same time.”

“California is missing a unique opportunity to incorporate sound economic principles into water investment and management,” said David Yardas, an Environmental Defense senior analyst. “California cannot control demands for water if it continues to subsidize water supplies. Water agencies and agribusiness will want all kinds of new facilities if they don’t have to pay for their real costs. The lack of financial specifics for a program of this magnitude is unprecedented, and will surely make even the best parts of implementation more difficult.”

“The plan does include some exciting things for California’s environment,” said Spreck Rosekrans, an Environmental Defense hydrologist. “After some small dams are removed, many of our endangered salmon will have restored access to the cold clean water they need to reproduce. Downstream in the Delta, we look forward to the implementation of plans that will reduce diversions when fish are present. The idea behind this approach is sound, but it should not be used as a cover to divert more water.”