Most wanted: Delta water
Contra Costa Times - 9/30/03
By Mike Taugher, staff writer

A plan to boost the Southern California water supply could pump an additional 1 million acre-feet a year from the Delta, far more than water officials have previously disclosed, documents show.

That figure is roughly equal to the amount of water used each year in the entire Bay Area, and would increase the flow of water south of the Delta by more than 15 percent.

It contrasts sharply with earlier estimates that a privately crafted agreement called the Napa Proposition would result in modest pumping increases from the Delta.

The figure was included in a recent presentation to congressional aides that Southern California water agencies say was meant to show the wide range of water supply benefits included in the CalFed water program. Increases due to the Napa proposals were just a small part of that, they say.

But others, including at least one leading supporter of the plan, said the presentation is an accurate portrayal of how much water could be moved out of the Delta if the proposals in the Napa agreement, along with closely linked initiatives, are approved.

"The public has a right to know what the big picture looks like," said Tim Quinn, vice president of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, dismissing the fine line between the Napa agreement and CalFed, a sweeping effort among farmers, cities and environmentalists to cooperatively address Delta water issues.

"Frankly, it's a difficult question to say what's CalFed and what's Napa. From the perspective of those of us who were involved, Napa is CalFed," Quinn said.

Increasing Delta pumping from its current level of between 5 million acre-feet and 6 million acre-feet a year could harm fisheries and worsen water quality, particularly in the Contra Costa Water District.

Although the Napa plan promises to take steps to maintain environmental and water quality standards, environmentalists and officials at the Contra Costa district are skeptical.

"We're very concerned that they'll get down the road with their projects and say, we got our stuff, to heck with CalFed," said Greg Gartrell, assistant general manager at the Contra Costa Water District.

Since details of the Napa plan were first reported in the Times on Aug. 7, water officials have given a range of estimates on how much water would be pumped from the Delta. The figure is of concern because the more water is pumped, the greater the potential for damage to fisheries and water quality.

Most recently, the organization that represents customers of the state water project told the Times the Napa proposition would increase Delta exports by about 200,000 acre-feet, and that would only be possible in wet years.

But in a presentation called "CalFed Implementation: The Role of the Napa Proposition," the California Department of Water Resources and customers of state and federal water projects told congressional aides that the changes could add 700,000 acre-feet a year to their supply, while also making it possible for them to transfer an additional 300,000 acre-feet if they can find farmers willing to sell it.

All of that water would come through the Delta, although the amount would vary year-by-year depending on rainfall and the snowpack.

"They're trying to be up front about the fact that, yeah, we're going to be moving more water than we did 10 years ago," said Laura King Moon, the Bay-Delta program manager for customers of the State Water Project.

King Moon said it was wrong to attribute the entire 1 million acre-feet to the Napa provisions, saying the bulk of the water would come from water transfers and separate initiatives, including CalFed.

The Napa Proposition was developed during four days of closed-door meetings in July that included California's biggest water users, the state Department of Water Resources and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

Environmentalists and Delta water agencies were excluded, and although the Contra Costa Water District was allowed to have an observer present, that observer was not allowed to participate in the talks.

The agreement marked the first time since the Peripheral Canal fight ended in 1982 that state and federal water agencies and their customers have "united on such a bold program to ramp up Delta exports at the expense of California's aquatic environments," according to testimony to be given today by Environmental Defense regional director Tom Graff.

But Quinn, the Met vice president, said the agreement represents an environmentally sensitive approach to meeting Southern California's water needs. It does not include a Peripheral Canal or new dams, and it relies on water transfers, increased efficiency and flexibility.

"That vision (of dams and canals) is completely gone," he said. "The environmentalists won."

Today, a state Senate panel headed by Sen. Michael Machado, D-Stockton, will convene an "informational" hearing on the Napa meetings and the proposal that grew out of it.

"There has been concern that the proposed Napa water agreement is not going to address issues that face the Delta," Machado said.

"This hearing will bring sunshine on the process and make sure that the fundamental principles in the CalFed record of decision are adhered to," Machado added, referring to a document signed three years ago in which all sides in California water conflicts pledged to work together for mutual benefits.

Supporters of the Napa proposition say it made sense to increase cooperation between the two projects, and that tensions made it necessary to meet privately.

"We haven't had any supply increases for many years in this state," King Moon said. "At the same time, we've diverted a lot of water to the environment. ... That's created a lot of friction in the water community, fighting for a supply that isn't there anymore."#