Posted by: Jan | July 15, 2010

Delta Council 2nd Draft Plan Comments by Aug. 3


For your information – The Delta Stewardship Council is inviting comments on the second draft of the Interim Plan.

They report that the Second Draft was revised substantially based on comments from the public, agencies and Council members. Once again, they are notifying people with little response time to get comments in for the next Council meeting. Email received today stated that comments on the second draft received by Monday, July 19, will be provided to Council members for discussion at the July 23 meeting.

However, comments received by August 3, will still be considered for revisions made in developing the third – and final – draft Interim Plan that will be considered for adoption by the Council at its August 26-27 meeting. Click here to read the Second Draft Interim Plan.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. This “draft” is the biggest bullshit boondoggle I’ve read in my life and I’m 70-years-old. As a long time reporter, I’ve learned it’s always “Follow the money.” Why not just admit it’s about sucking all the water down to Southern California to benefit the super wealthy people like Kern County-Beverly Hills resident Stuart Resnick who sold some of his water rights for $77 million a year? Thanks to the excellent 4-part video on U-Tube now, more of the public is beginning to understand your smoke screen and Resnick’s evil involvement. If you’re trying to sell it is about the fish, I have a bridge to sell you. Just the name of your organization makes me want to stick my finger down my throat because you’re all a bunch of blood sucking hypocrites selling out our beloved Northern California Delta for big money. For all the money you are spending, you could be building more desalinization plants and conducting campaigns to shut down more Southern California swimming pools and golf courses in the damned desert—where they should never have built them in the first place. I’ve heard Governor Arnold owns a cement company. Now I just wonder if there might be a lot of cement in that Panama Canal you want to build through the Delta! I salute the farmers here who have refused to allow the state to drill on their property! The more you pursue this, the bigger war you will create and the dumber your organization will look to the world. So perhaps I should say, keep it up to hang yourselves on your asinine stupidity. Right now you are a model of why our state and federal government is going down the tubes with this over the top bureaucratic draft of a future water policy for the state of California. I hope all of you live long enough to drown in the salt water you will create in the future California Delta when you suck too much water out of the Sacramento River! Government officials have a habit of ruining our waterways and this is a prime example. Back off!

  2. Sorry, I thought this was another organization with the Bay Delta Conservation Plan people; I forgot you changed your name. All my comments are directed at the BDCP and their Southern California cronies out to wreck the California Delta for their personal gain. I still think it is an example of how the common, hard working people have to waste their time fighting big government, who are using tax payer money to fight the people, as they funnel the money to people like Stuart Resnick.

  3. The plan should include restrictions on developing
    new land use projects like Palm Desert that use
    Delta water.

  4. If you are truly the Stewardship for the safe keeping of the Delta…..You will not let the 2 Gates project succeed! Its all about grabbing our water and Greed!

  5. Has an environmental study been done on the effect these gates would have on the lower delta and the community of Discovery Bay? If so what effects will it have? If not, why? Right now Discovery Bay is battling aquatic weeds with these gate our water levels go down the weeds take root. What will then be the cost to rid these weeds from our water ways? What about all the other aquatic animal that the lower delta support, what will there fate be? Every water way that Southern California have touch has been completely destroyed. Now they want the delta.

  6. Interested how the recent article about the Delta needing at least 25% more water flow to the bay interacts with this project? They seem to conflict.

    and what can we do to hold off or stop the construction of the gates.

    Thank you for you continued efforts on our behalf.

  7. Please email your comments on the plan to interimplan@deltacouncil.ca.gov.

    Of concern to Delta communities is Page 5, second bullet which specifically calls for implementatino of the Two-Gates Fish Protection Demonstration Project by December 1, 2010.

    As we all know, Two-Gates has been shown to be:
    (a) More likely harmful to the Delta Smelt than protecting them. A recent report on the Head of Old River fish barrier identifies that dams located mid-river (not flush) like the Two Gates proposed area entrap smelt behind them and allow their predators to attack them. Not fish protection but fish elimination.
    (b) An extremely negative impact to the Delta communities’ economies – affecting marinas and marine-based businesses in the area; thus negatively affecting home values.
    (c) A safety issue for boaters and marine rescue operations in the area
    (d) A negative impact on the quality of the water in Discovery Bay and potentially affect the health of the citizens using the water for swimming and recreation
    (e) An issue for the City of Discovery Bay to be able to safely discharge treated waste water
    (f) Unreasonably expensive, especially for a temporary experiment. Project costs more than doubled from original estimates and, not yet estimated, due to safety issue, expensive locks would be required, not inexpensive butterfly gates.

    All of the communities’ comments and concerns input on the Two-Gates project is why the USBR decided to postpone the project for further analysis.

    This plan should not specifically name the “Two-Gates” project – it is not a good solution.

    The plan should also address restricting water transfers from agriculture to urban developments (for profit) and using ground water for agriculture after transfering allotted Delta water.

  8. I believe the responses by Gene and other’s are accurate depictions of the irresponsible BDCP.

    I only ask that the BDCP spend some quality time in Sausalito observing the Bay and Delta Model. Although the presentation has been a popular attraction. It serves as a serious reminder to everyone who observes the model, that w hat makes our lives enriched in the Bay Area is the water run-off and the intrical tributaries that carries the precious water throughout the region. With the salt migration according to the presentation, we have already caused harm and stress to the ecosystem.
    In what set of circumstances would it be okay to continue to destroy natural resources in the Bay and Delta to supply ‘water junkies’ in Southern California?

    The 2-Gate experiment needs to go away permanently. It was an ill conceived notion, based on lies and deception. The more one learns about the 2-gates and other similar projects, the more one realizes the bureaucrats have been eating off of ‘lead’ plates (as the Romans did) and have gone completely mad.

    In the end, will the South be satisfied to drink our Salt Water in Discovery Bay, or will they go into warp speed with desalinization systems (as they should already being doing in a major scale)?

  9. PLEASE STOP THE 2 GATES PROJECT!
    As we all know, Two-Gates has been shown to be:
    (a) More likely harmful to the Delta Smelt than protecting them. A recent report on the Head of Old River fish barrier identifies that dams located mid-river (not flush) like the Two Gates proposed area entrap smelt behind them and allow their predators to attack them. Not fish protection but fish elimination.
    (b) An extremely negative impact to the Delta communities’ economies – affecting marinas and marine-based businesses in the area; thus negatively affecting home values.
    (c) A safety issue for boaters and marine rescue operations in the area
    (d) A negative impact on the quality of the water in Discovery Bay and potentially affect the health of the citizens using the water for swimming and recreation
    (e) An issue for the City of Discovery Bay to be able to safely discharge treated waste water
    (f) Unreasonably expensive, especially for a temporary experiment. Project costs more than doubled from original estimates and, not yet estimated, due to safety issue, expensive locks would be required, not inexpensive butterfly gates.

    Shannon Morton


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: