June 1994 Issues Online June 2007 April 2007 February 2007 December 2006 October 2006 August 2006 June 2006 April 2006 February 2006 December 2005 October 2005 August 2005 June 2005 April 2005 February 2005 December 2004 October 2004 August 2004 June 2004 April 2004 February 2004 December 2003 October 2003 August 2003 June 2003 April 2003 February 2003 December 2002 October 2002 August 2002 June 2002 April 2002 February 2002 December 2001 October 2001 August 2001 June 2001 April 2001 February 2001 December 2000 October 2000 August 2000 June 2000 April 2000 February 2000 December 1999 October 1999 August 1999 June 1999 April 1999 February 1999 December 1998 October 1998 August 1998 June 1998 April 1998 February 1998 December 1997 October 1997 August 1997 June 1997 April 1997 February 1997 December 1996 October 1996 August 1996 June 1996 April 1996 February 1996 December 1995 October 1995 August 1995 June 1995 April 1995 February 1995 December 1994 October 1994 August 1994 June 1994 April 1994 February 1994 December 1993 October 1993 August 1993 Select any issue from the menu in this bar.

Long-term Delta Planning

by Gary Bobker, Bay Institute

"Environmentalists left the negotiating table on long-term solutions for Delta protection in protest over the governor's abandonment of interim solutions in the form of D-1630. What we want, if we're to come back to the table and the state planning process, are several things.

"First, it's got to be a truly joint effort in which both state and federal government agencies representing both the water supply and resource missions are equal, fully participating players.

Second, the long-term process has to be linked to short-term solutions. There has to be some agreement on having water quality standards in effect by a certain time, so we can keep the Bay-Delta environment viable while we plan ahead. Any short-term agreement must include milestones for standards adoption and implementation. It can't be just another process the state can change in mid-stream or walk away from.

"Third, the goals of the process have got to include full protection and restoration of the Estuary. Neither the draft federal standards, nor the state's parallel process, come close to that goal. Adopting short-term protections is only setting the floor, not the ceiling, of what we need to do to protect the Estuary.

Fourth, long-term solutions considered have to include a full range of water management strategies, addressing not just supply but also demand.

"Fifth, the long-term effort should proceed in the context of efforts that have gone before. For instance, we just went through a five-year state/federal process to agree on the 150 actions in the S.F. Estuary Project's CCMP. It would be a sign of good faith and serious intent on the part of the state to begin assuming its share of CCMP implementation and of other joint projects such as those called for in the Central Valley Project Improvement Act."

«To @@(newsletter_title)@@ Index

[ ABAG HOME | SFEP HOME ]

Copyright © 2002, San Francisco Estuary Project