Save the California Delta Alliance (STCDA)

Thanks to those of you who trekked up to the Delta Stewardship Council Meeting in Sacramento last week. I’m sorry we didn’t have enough to fill a bus but lots of you came anyway. Between all of the organizations who put out the call, the room was full.

Bill Wells offered testimony during the public comment phase of the Delta Stewardship Council’s hearings in response to the Department of Water Resources request for the California WaterFix’s certification of consistency with the Delta Plan in West Sacramento, Calif., Friday, Oct. 27, 2018. (Tony Kukulich/The Press)

Jan McCleery, president of Save the California Delta Association, offered testimony during the public comment phase of the Delta Stewardship Council’s hearings in response to the Department of Water Resources request for the California WaterFix’s certification of consistency with the Delta Plan in West Sacramento, Calif., Friday, Oct. 27, 2018. (Tony Kukulich/The Press)

Jamie Bolt, harbormaster at Bethel Harbor. offered testimony during the public comment phase of the Delta Stewardship Council’s hearings in response to the Department of Water Resources request for the California WaterFix’s certification of consistency with the Delta Plan in West Sacramento, Calif., Friday, Oct. 27, 2018. (Tony Kukulich/The Press)

Councilmember Skip Thomson listened to testimony offered during the public comment phase of the Delta Stewardship Council’s hearings in response to the Department of Water Resources request for the California WaterFix’s certification of consistency with the Delta Plan in West Sacramento, Calif., Friday, Oct. 27, 2018. (Tony Kukulich/The Press)

Chair Randy Fiorini listened to testimony offered during the public comment phase of the Delta Stewardship Council’s hearings in response to the Department of Water Resources request for the California WaterFix’s certification of consistency with the Delta Plan in West Sacramento, Calif., Friday, Oct. 27, 2018. (Tony Kukulich/The Press)

Michael Brodsky, STCDA Legal Council, made an excellent appeal to the DSC on Wednesday, highlighting the impacts the horrible construction project will have throughout the Delta – from the north to the south. (See the full text of his Appeal and his slides).

Comments started on Thursday afternoon. Thanks to you who went to Sacramento and delivered comments including our members and California Assemblyman Jim Frazier. Here’s Jim’s Comments.

On Friday, the comment period started with folks representing the exporters making their plea for why they need clean water in LA and for Central Valley farming. They were good and valid comments, but they ignored that this plan will destroy the Delta as a Place including the communities and people who live here.

Then Pro Delta speakers took their turn at commenting. Those included yours truly, STCDA Board Members Bill Wells and Jan McCleery. Jan’s comments focused on the construction impacts to Delta communities, highways, and boating waterways and raised the question about why the destructive through-Delta route was chosen instead of the around-the-Delta Eastern Route. Jamie Bolt, the owner of Bethel Harbor, represented the many, numerous establishments on Bethel Island and throughout the Delta that will be devastated with this project. Contra Costa Supervisor Diane Burgis gave a strong rebuttal to the exporters comments and advocated the need to balance concerns for the Delta with the water exporter’s needs. Cecily Tippery from Discovery Bay read the comments from Jerry McNerney (very good – read them including the updated W.E.S.T Bill he’s introducing to the US Congress for a better solution to California’s water), Barbara Barrigan-Parrada from Restore the Delta complained about the lack of communications and outreach to the impacted groups, Deirdre Des Jardin from California Water Research raised very interesting technical questions pointing out concerns about if the plan will protect salinity control in the Delta.

There were a host of folks who showed up to comment. Particularly moving was a gentleman from Locke who showed pictures of that legacy town built in 1915 by Chinese immigrants and considered an important historical site. The second picture showed a grim depiction of how the fragile town would look after only a few years of construction trucks rumbling 24×7 down the narrow main street – shaking the town structures down. Another man from Hood described the historical farmhouse he purchased and has been preserving for decades. Like Locke, his home is on the CA historical registry. The tunnel construction plan is to put a construction road right down the middle of his front yard and going through groves of 100 year old cypress trees.

The damage throughout the Delta from this ill-thought-out plan will be immense. Wouldn’t you go around a treasure like the Delta if you were trying to protect it? Not through the middle, tearing everything up? See more here:

DSC Meeting References:

• Michael A. Brodsky Save the California Delta Alliance’s slides
• Michael Brodsky’s appeal on behalf of STCDA and the Northern Delta legacy communities.
• U.S. Rep. Jerry McNerney’s Comments: Public Hearing Letter_10.25.18
• CA Rep Jim Frazier’s Comments
• Jan McCleery, Discovery Bay/STCDA Comments to the DSC
• Deirdre Des Jardins, CWR comments WaterFix consistency certification

As more and more information emerges about the horrible and significant Delta Tunnel construction impacts on the Delta, the question arises, “Why did the DWR pick the through-Delta route for their tunnels?”

It’s hard to believe anyone would plan a major construction project through the heart of the fragile estuary they are committed to protecting. Especially when they have a much better alternative – the Eastern route.

The recent Delta Protection Commission scathing report to the Delta Stewardship Council argues that the California WaterFix (CWF) tunnel construction and resulting facilities are totally inconsistent with the rural aspects of the Delta that make it so unique and worth preserving. The DPC letter points out that the construction facilities and pumping stations “create impacts on Delta communities will be lasting and severe.” Read more from our prior blog: DPC is on our side.

The DWR’s EIR says the construction impacts to the Delta (to communities, recreation and boating, etc.) are “Significant and unavoidable”. But we argue that the 10 plus year construction impacts are avoidable. The destruction to the Delta from this huge construction project, through the fragile estuary and wetlands, under fragile levees, the Santa Fe Railroad trestle, and other infrastructure could be avoided – if they had chosen the Eastern route.

Because of cost, (10 miles, $1 to $1.5 billion) DWR has ignored the risk to levees and infrastructure, waterfowl and communities and chose the through-tunnel route. (Does it sound like the same mistakes DWR made with the Oroville Dam?)

I do not think that any tunnel is cost-justified and since there is no guarantee they will operate the new tunnels (or tunnel) with any more concern to the required delta flows than they have for the past decades, we are sure water quality will continue to degrade and salmon continue to head towards extinction.

BUT . . . if they dig around the Delta, the Eastern Route, they wouldn’t need to clog small rural highways since there’s quick access to/from Highway 5. They wouldn’t go through wetlands, wouldn’t affect legacy towns, wouldn’t shut down boating and recreation. Then the DWR could say they are working to protect the “Delta as a Place.”

How can the DWR have chosen the through-Delta route when one of the co-equal goals was to protect the Delta as a place?

We would still have concerns with a tunnel along the Eastern route, but that route would not destroy the Delta as we know it.

References:

• Michael A. Brodsky Save the California Delta Alliance’s slides
• Michael Brodsky’s appeal on behalf of STCDA and the Northern Delta legacy communities.
• Jan’s Comments to the DSC

Acronyms:

• CWF – California WaterFix; i.e., the Delta Tunnels
• DPC – Delta Protection Commission. The good guys representing the Delta as a Place. They are trying to live up to their name and “Protect” the Delta.
• DSC – Delta Stewardship Council. Responsible for writing the Delta Plan which defines the co-equal goals of:
  (1) Providing reliable exports of water
  (2) Protecting the Delta as a Place.
  The DSC is focused on #1; they are the bad guys when it comes to protecting the Delta as a Place. They are not “Stewards” of the Delta.
• DWR – California Department of Water Resources. The agency responsible for writing the CWF and will be responsible for building the tunnels. Note: This is the agency that designed and built the Oroville Dam and manages the State Water Project (the export pumps sending Delta water to the Central Valley farmers).

ta Stewardship Council.

An open letter to the Delta Protection Commission(*):

Thank you DPC for your loud and strong statement that the California WaterFix (CWF) is inconsistent with the Delta as a Place. Finally a government group is standing up for Delta communities!

As you know, Delta communities and organizations have been arguing against the CWF for years. More recently, at the SWRCB hearings, Save the California Delta Alliance (STCDA) brought in expert witnesses focusing on the construction phase of the project: the impact of 24×7 construction traffic on all of our Delta highways (rural, mostly 2-lane roads), the impact of the barge docks and barge traffic on boating and recreation (boating in the Delta will become a thing of the past), the impact on the small legacy towns of Locke, Hood, etc. that are of historical significance, and the impact on all of the communities in the Delta that rely on tourists and boaters to come to the Delta (but won’t be able to when all the highways are gridlocked with construction traffic). For people living in the Delta communities, their lives will be significantly impacted for many years. Your letter highlighted the “blight” this project will bring to our communities. Thank you.

My favorite paragraph from the DPC Letter:

Our review of the record suggests that CWF does not “avoid or reduce conflicts . . . when feasible”, as required by [the Delta Plan]. DWR’s supporting findings identify numerous impacts to Delta communities associated with the CWF project. Included among these impacts are disclosures of the impacts on community character of the CWF project’s construction activities, including declining property values, blight and abandonment. It is not hyperbole to suggest that the CWF project presents an existential crisis for the small Delta communities that would be most affected by the protracted, intensive construction period, the permanent infrastructure, and the radical – not evolutionary – effects on the Delta economic drivers of agriculture, recreation, and emerging heritage tourism. DWR has failed to grapple with the reality, demonstrated through evidence in the record, that CWF puts the long-term sustainability of small Delta communities in serious jeopardy; it also thoroughly fails to offer any meaningful mitigation for such impacts.

Again, thank you soooo much for DPC’s bold stand against the Delta Tunnels. The Delta “Stewardship” Council members are not being stewards of the Delta. Thankfully now the Delta “Protection” Committee is stepping forward and protecting us. Good job !!!

Note: (*) The Delta Protection Commission is a state-appointed commission with responsibility to:

• Provide oversight of Delta land use and resource management
• Promote the protection of life and property through the maintenance and improvement of Delta levees, and by facilitating coordinated emergency preparedness and response
• Promote a robust regional economy – one that protects agriculture, natural resources, recreation and the cultural and historic values of the Delta

The fifteen-member Delta Protection Commission was created under the Delta Protection Act. Its diverse composition provides for stakeholder representation in the areas of agriculture, habitat, and recreation.

Members of the Commission include: One member of the Board of Supervisors of each of the five counties within the Delta (Contra Costa, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Solano, and Yolo); an elected city council members representing the Delta counties; landowners from north, south, and central Delta reclamation districts; and high-level leaders from Business, Transportation and Housing, the Natural Resources Agency, Food and Agriculture, and the State Lands Commission. The two ex-officio members of the Commission are representatives of the Senate and Assembly.

The DPC has the responsibility to provide comment and input on projects that would affect the Delta.

Website: delta.ca.gov

Here’s a great blog with more information about the bad review the Delta Protection Commission gave on the meetings this week being held to approve the Delta Tunnels (WaterFix). This week, the Stewardship Council is planning on certifying the Delta Tunnels as being “Consistent” with the Delta Reform Act and the Delta Plan. Whereas they are just the opposite. They violate both.

Read more here . . . https://cah2oresearch.com/2018/10/22/delta-protection-commission-waterfix-inconsistent-with-delta-reform-act-and-delta-plan/

Bill Wells reported in the Bay and Delta Yachtsman in his Delta Rat Scrapbook article in September that:

Just when we are getting the invasive plants in the Delta under control a new scourge rears its ugly head in the region, the nutria. They were first brought to California in 1899 when someone tried to establish a fur ranch with the animals in Los Angeles. They spread throughout the state and were subject to intense eradication efforts. By 1978 they were thought to be gone but apparently they just went underground and hid, waiting for the day to launch a new attack. Since the first one was seen in Merced last November over 200 have been caught in traps around the greater Delta area. Nutria are found in 30 states including the entire west coast and wreak havoc wherever they are found. They were introduced into southern states to control invasive plants like hyacinth. Unfortunately, they eat all plants including the roots. They also burrow into levees and farmlands. In some places in the U.S. they have turned tidal marsh into open water.

Nutria are carriers and transmit a host of communicable diseases. They don’t have many predators in California and one female can produce 200 offspring in her lifetime. These are some bad hombres. Right now the only way to deal with the Nutria invasion is to trap, poison or hunt them out of existence. In Louisiana there is a five-dollar bounty for each Nutria tail turned in to state agents. Also, in Louisiana, Nutria meat is on the menu in restaurants. They also make dog snacks out of the meat. Supposedly it is high in protein and low in fat compared to most domestic animals. In California it is illegal to hunt or possess the cute little creatures so the best you can do is report them when you see them.

Here is a link: https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Invasives/report. Recently I have seen two dead animals alongside the road in the Walnut Grove/Isleton area that looked a lot like nutria. The roads did not have a shoulder near where I spotted them so I could not stop to investigate. Keep your eyes open for these pests; from a distance they can be confused with a beaver or muskrat. They are identifiable by their white muzzle and white whiskers.

Here’s more pictures and information:
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Invasives/Species/Nutria/Infestation.

Though muskrats may have a white muzzle, both muskrats and beaver have dark whiskers. Nutria have characteristic white whiskers, and most often have conspicuous, darks ears with light-colored fur underneath, as seen in this image. Photo courtesy of Peggy Sells.

The Delta Protection Commission (DPC) came out Friday with a scathing review of the California WaterFix (CFW). (Note: The DPC is a group that includes the Delta County Supervisors and who’s charter includes working with the Delta Stewardship Council and protecting the Delta.)

Their review helps set the stage for our comments to the Delta Stewardship Council on Friday, October 26.

This is why we need all boaters to get on the bus to Sacramento this Friday. This is a unique opportunity to drive home these points to the Stewardship Council!

The points made in the DPC’s letter are pertinent to the Friday meeting at the Delta Stewardship Council and help provide concrete reasons why the Stewardship Council should not adopt the Delta Tunnels and call them “consistent” with the Delta Plan. They are not!

A key part of the DPC’s arguments against the WaterFix are around recreation:
“When first presented with the environmental analysis of socioeconomic impacts in 2013, Council staff’s comment letter raised concerns about changes to Community Character:

“The EIR/S states that ‘adverse social effects could also arise as a result of declining economic stability in communities closest to construction effects and those most heavily influenced by agricultural and recreation activities.’ Actions should be offered to reduce or mitigate adverse impacts in Chapter 16.”

The letter continue to say: “Of the numerous mitigation measures and “other commitments” DWR presents in the Consistency Certification, none are directed at supporting local communities as they address the impacts to their community character.”

• DWR did not adopt any mitigation measures that would meaningfully support the economic health and well-being of Delta communities.
• Recreation is second only to agriculture in contributing to the Delta region economy. According to the ESP (the Delta Protection Commission’s Economic Sustainability Plan), visitors to the Delta region generated a total of 12 million visitor days of use annually in 2010 with a direct economic impact of more than $250 million in spending, with most of this visitation in interior areas of the Delta that will be largely impacted by CWF [WaterFix].

This point is key:
“Included among these impacts are disclosures of the impacts on community character of the CWF project’s construction activities, including declining property values, blight and abandonment. It is not hyperbole to suggest that the CWF [WaterFix] project presents an existential crisis for the small Delta communities that would be most affected by the protracted, intensive construction period, the permanent infrastructure, and the radical – not evolutionary – effects on the Delta economic drivers of agriculture, recreation, and emerging heritage tourism. DWR has failed to grapple with the reality, demonstrated through evidence in the record, that CWF puts the long-term sustainability of small Delta communities in serious jeopardy; it also thoroughly fails to offer any meaningful mitigation for such impacts.”

Isn’t that what we have all been saying in every way we know how to say it? That this horrible construction project will ruin our community, our economy, our way of life.

I know people have shown up time and time again, before this same Delta Stewardship Council, and given similar comments. But now we can point to the conclusions that the State’s Delta Protection Commission is highlighting and say that this terrible project will not protect the Delta as a Place and definitely will not protect boating and recreation or the communities that rely on it for economic sustainability.

Between DWR’s failure to adequately consider or mitigate impacts to Delta recreation from WaterFix construction the failure to adequately consider or mitigate impacts to North Delta towns, it is looking like there is a strong case that DWR just blew it.

Similar points were also brought up in Michael Brodsky’s excellent appeal filed for Save the California Delta Alliance, which is available here:
https://coveredactions.deltacouncil.ca.gov/profile_summary.aspx?c=f794626c-c216-4600-885d-fe27c1cbedeb

The Delta Stewardship Council is also allowing 3 minute testimony from individuals, most likely on October 26, 2018. Save the California Delta Alliance is organizing a bus on that day.

Email stcda@NoDeltaGates.com to reserve your seat on the bus. Also let us know if you have time restrictions and/or what time you would prefer the bus to return to Discovery Bay.

The bus leaves Discovery Bay at 7:30 AM on Friday, October 26 . . . if we have enough sign-ups. So please RSVP as soon as possible!

We’re headed to Sacramento this Friday, October 26, to give our final comments to the Delta Stewardship Council about why the Delta Tunnels (California WaterFix) should not be part of the Delta Plan.

Are you coming with us? Please email stcda@NoDeltaGates.com if you can join us on the bus for $25/person!

The bus (if we have enough people responding “yes”) will leave the Discovery Bay Marina/Boardwalk Grill Parking Lot at 7:30 AM in order to get to Sacramento at 9 AM.

Location of the Meeting:
Ramada Inn West Sacramento – Conference Center
1250 Halyard Drive
West Sacramento, CA 95691

Michael Brodsky and others representing the Delta forces working to protect the Delta, will be doing our final arguments to the DSC on Wednesday and Thursday. Then Friday is the final public comment period to the Delta Stewardship Council.

We need you to attend and stand up and tell the Council why the Delta Tunnels don’t protect the “Delta as a Place” or Recreation. The question is whether the tunnels project is consistent with the Delta Plan. Our commenters should say the “tunnels project is not consistent with the Delta Plan because…….” and then give their reasons.

Here are some of the things we are arguing in our appeal to the Council.

1. Achieving the “coequal goals” is the guiding principle for the Delta Plan. The Coequal Goals are “ the two goals of providing a more reliable water supply for California and protecting, restoring, and enhancing the Delta ecosystem. The coequal goals shall be achieved in a manner that protects and enhances the unique cultural, recreational, natural resource, and agricultural values of the Delta as an evolving place”

   The tunnels do not protect and enhance recreation and do not protect and enhance the cultural values of the Delta. The Tunnels EIR admits that the project will have “significant and unavoidable adverse impacts on recreation,” which are “long-term and cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance.” These impacts will “occur year-round” This is all found in the EIR at p.15-469. The EIR also found that the Tunnel Project would have significant adverse environmental impacts on agricultural resources.

   People should talk about whatever impacts concern them the most. Most importantly, the Delta Tunnels have failed to address recreational appropriately – it is a weak spot and Achilles Heel for them. Comments about how this impacts recreation and why that is important to you personally is important. Others who aren’t boaters should talk about impacts to them personally – to their communities, farming, etc.

2. The Tunnels Project is not consistent with the Delta Plan because the water contractors have failed to implement measures to reduce reliance on the Delta as required by the Delta Plan.
3. The Tunnels Project is not consistent with the Delta Plan because it does not contain measures required to mitigate traffic impacts. Here people can talk about the traffic impacts on Highway 4. In case you haven’t been paying attention, the plan is to route construction traffic 24×7 from Antioch to Bacon Island Road. That is passed Discovery Bay, across the single-truck-lane bridge, and tearing up our fragile 2-lane Highway 4 levee road. (They are doing similar over-loading of all of the little Delta highways – Highway 12 and 160). The stupidity of having a huge construction project located in an area where there are mainly waterways and little levee roads is beyond belief. Yet here we are. That plus the barges that will flood the waterways will bring noise, pollution, and a mess into the center of the Delta.

I have attached the brief Brodsky filed with the Council. You can look there to get more talking points:
Michael A. Brodsky appeal c20185-a2 no attach

Are you coming with us? Please email stcda@NoDeltaGates.com if you can join us on the bus for $25/person so we know whether to have a bus (or 2)! Wear your tee-shirts or we’ll have more for people to buy. And Stop the Tunnel signs!

As we took our STCDA Sunset Cruise aboard Captain Frank Morgan’s Rosemarie this week, from Twin Sloughs Captain Morgan pointed out barges in the distance. He said that they were starting construction of the Woodward Bridge on Middle River.

Barges in the distance, seen from Twin Sloughs

As we rounded the corner to go north past Ski Beach we could get a better look at the barges with cranes on them for construction.

We passed the old cable ferry that the new fancy bridge will replace.

Woodward Island Ferry

Seen from Google Maps, the ferry crossing goes between Bacon Island Road (which you can get to turning left off Highway 4 after the Middle River Bridge) which ferries vehicles across to Woodward Island.

When I first heard about this bridge, I asked myself, “Why would they build a fancy, 30-foot high bridge to get to Woodward Island? What’s there?” Looking at Google Maps, I could only see a single farmhouse. “Why would this farmer get this fancy bridge?” I asked.

I was very suspicious with the Delta Tunnel project being planned. I was told though that the main purpose was that East Bay Municipal Utility District’s Mokelumne Aqueduct, the major source of water for the East Bay including Oakland, crosses Woodward Island. The concern was if there was a major issue, maintenance crews needed better access than the ferry can provide.

Even with that explanation, most of us on the boat remained skeptical that there isn’t some underlying desire to get that fancy bridge in place to help with the tunnel effort in some way. (Sung to the music, “Suspicious Minds.”)

Ferry ramp on Woodward Island with barges in the background – smokey sunset

I wondered why there was a cement truck trying to get to Woodward Island – the one that had gone plunging into Middle River in July, when the driver went back instead of forward on the ferry. Now it makes sense – they were starting on the construction of the bridge.

July 6, 2018 – Cement Truck falls off the Woodward Ferry into Middle River

At least, the bridge will be high enough (30 feet above the water for the mid-span) for the Rosemarie and other big boats to go under. It will not be operated, but there will be a center span that can be removed by a crane to allow big equipment to pass if needed.

Side Note: You have to wonder if when they try to just build one bridge, they don’t know enough about the Delta to know how to keep their one cement truck out of the drink, how will they handle their 24×7 line of construction trucks traveling across narrow levee roads and bridges for the massive construction project they are planning. The Delta just is not a place for huge construction projects!

There is another reason that there may have been urgency for this bridge to be built that is not to aid the tunnels but because of the tunnels. EBMUD has been contesting the Delta Tunnels project because the tunnels runs directly under Woodward Island. EBMUD believes the tunnel drilling through soft alluvial soils will cause settling that will affect their pipeline and they want the WaterFix project to pay for pumps on both sides to ensure the EBMUD water can keep flowing. So they would need that bridge to get the pumps in stalled and any emergency crews to the island if the tunneling causes havoc.

That brings up the other huge issues with the tunneling plan. Not only does it cause EBMUD issues, the Kinder Morgan fuel pipeline also crosses Woodward Island, and the bridge will help for any emergencies there.

Speaking of emergencies, an even bigger concern is that the Sante Fe Railroad is on pilings between two sloughs just north of Woodward Island. Tunneling activities has been known to twist railroad piers which would be disastrous if it caused issues with that line. It is a heavily used freight and Amtrak line. We saw the Amtrak pass as we were on our smokey Sunset Cruise.

See how the train is on piers – that’s a big concern with tunnels going underneath. Yet levees and trains aren’t listed as a problem in the WaterFix EIR.

Related/References:

1. “Woodward Island Bridge Project (ferry replacement)” – Initial Study
2. “Ferries are a Dying Breed in the Delta” – RecordNet News
3. “Another Week, Another Project affecting the Delta” – Prior STCDA blog about the new bridge/ferry replacement project

Here’s a good opinion piece in the Sacramento Bee.

The writer, Mark Arax, knows a thing or two about water since he wrote a great book called “The King of California” that told the story of the cotton empire of J.G. Boswell, which had risen out of the bottom of Tulare Lake, once the biggest body of freshwater west of the Mississippi. If you have never read it, I strongly recommend it. The book tells the true history of the first farmers in the Central Valley, how they dried up the biggest (by area) lake west of the Great Lakes (yes, even bigger than the Great Salt Lake and about as shallow). The Tulare Lake would percolate down and refill the aquifers. Drying it up is much of the reason that the Central Valley is sinking as the aquifers dry up.

The editorial gives interesting insight into the thinking of the Central Valley agribusinesses that want the Delta water. Arax is also a farmer, but thinks more logically than Nunes, obviously.

In the spring of 2014, well into the drought, farmers including Arax were at a meeting. Devin Nunes, also from the Central Valley farming family and currently a US Representative, was there. Arax reports that Nunes “knew the sky hadn’t spilled enough rain in three years. He knew we [the farmers] were facing the hottest and driest spell on record. But it wasn’t drought that bedeviled our valley, he’d told us. It was a conspiracy hatched by the Communists.”

I remember the misleading Sean Hannity segment about the plight of the farmers about that same time. News footage depicted orchards uprooted, fields fallowed and equipment spoiling to rust. The truth, says Arax? “Never mind that the fallowed dirt where Hannity and Nunes were standing next to each other had produced a bounty of tomatoes the day before. One hundred feet away, beyond camera frame, acre after acre of irrigated green fields awaited harvest.”

During that timeframe, there were reports of all of the farm workers out of work, standing in food lines. It tugged at people’s hearts. Then I was told by a representative from Joan Buchanan’s office that the unemployment rate in that area is 30 percent and has been ever since harvesting machines were introduced which replace many farm workers. It was not about the smelt, but they tried to make it look that way.

But as Nunes was later quoted to say during a congressional debate, “If you tell a lie long enough, eventually people will believe you.” The people wanting our water continue to spread the lies about earthquake threats, the fish really aren’t endangered, plus they ignore the real impacts to the communities in the Delta.

It would be funny if it wasn’t so sad that these farmers like Nunes are so out-of-touch with the reality of the Delta and why enough water needs to remain in the north. Or it’s a ploy.

Nunes reportedly has said about groups like ours that are fighting to save the Delta, “When you look at the radical environmental fringe, there’s no question they are tied closely to the Communist Party. I have the documents that can prove it,” Nunes claimed.

Well, I know Save the California Delta Alliance and the good people of Discovery Bay aren’t Communists! But having folks like Nunes in the US Congress make it hard for our representatives to fight the lies about the issues in the Delta.

Arax says, “My neighbor farmers are still hoping Nunes might be repaid for his loyalty to Trump, that the Interior Department will gut the Endangered Species Act and free up more water for agriculture.”

That’s my fear, that the Interior Department will gut the ESA. The EPA is what finally stopped the Two-Gates Fish Protection Project which would have put dams in Old River and Connection Slough – virtually locking big boats from Discovery Bay to getting out to the rest of the Delta except when the Bacon Island Bridge is operating. If that bridge broke, people would be stranded. The EPA also kicked back the earlier BDCP plan because it wasn’t a “Habitat Conservation Plan” and instead would kill fish. Already the EPA has been weakened. Hopefully they will still step in when the WaterFix/Delta Tunnels gets to them for final sign-off.

I’m looking forward to Mark Arax’s next book: “The Dreamt Land: Chasing Dust and Water Across California”

Here’s a good article by Ken Oliver, KCRA 3 Reporter, including a video talking about the damage that will occur to the Delta highways from the Tunnel construction project.

I wonder if he got that information from our traffic expert witness, Chris Kinzel, who gave his testimony at the State Water Board Hearings.

Watch the video to see the traffic impacts. The story is very well done.

It’s great that negative articles are coming out on major networks about the tunnel construction impacts.

Other References you may find interesting:

1. Chris Kinzel’s Experience: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/california_waterfix/exhibits/docs/STCDA%20et%20al/part2/scda_101.pdf
2. Chris Kinzel’s Testimony to the SWRCB Hearings: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/california_waterfix/exhibits/docs/STCDA%20et%20al/part2/scda_100.pdf
3. STCDA Blog about Traffic Issues (and waterway/barge issues): https://nodeltagates.com/?s=Bridges+Over+Troubled+Water&x=0&y=0
4. Earlier Info about the impacts of Construction: https://nodeltagates.com/the-crisis/