CSPA
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
“Conserving California’s Fisheries"

Home

More News

Your 501(c)(3) tax deductible cash donations are desperately needed if the fight for our fisheries is to continue. Read how you can donate!
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Enter your Email address to sign up 
for our Weekly Newsletter
For Email Marketing you can trust
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

More News

 

horizontal rule

 

CSPA Slams Board, Governor for Water Project Consolidation

 

by Dan Bacher

May 21, 2009 -- Bill Jennings, chairman of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, on Tuesday castigated the State Water Resources Control Board for its draft ruling allowing the consolidation of the federal Central Valley Water Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP) place of use permits. 
 
This proposal will allow for the first time water from Shasta to go to LA and water from Oroville to go to the Westlands Waters District. Under the guise of an emergency drought proclamation by the Governor, the California Environment Water Quality Act (CEQA) and State Board Decision 1641, the only Bay-Delta protections we have, have been tossed into the garbage, according to Jennings. 
 
Jennings said Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's drought proclamation is based on "bogus claims." Had the Board allowed the proclamation to be introduced as evidence, "we would have rebutted its bogus claims lie by lie," said Jennings. 
 
"This order is a backdoor attack upon 150 years of water law and precedent," stated Jennings. "It is an attack upon the public trust. It threatens to undermine faith in public institutions and, indeed, in government itself." 
 
"Never before have we had to waive CEQA and Water Quality Control Plans or turn California's permit system upside down through a truncated hearing that violates the most basic due process rights," he said. 
 
As Jennings was testifying in defense of the Delta and California's imperiled fish populations, Schwarzenegger was in Washington, D.C. playing the incongruous role of the "Green Governor." Schwarzenegger used the Obama administration's announcement of an agreement between the federal government, automakers, and the 14 states led by California in their fight to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles to tout his "environmental" record. 
 
“California’s relentless push for greenhouse gas reductions from automobiles is paying off not just for our state, but for all Americans, for our environment, for automakers and our economy," said Schwarzenegger. "This historic agreement to reduce greenhouse gases will mean cleaner air for our children and grandchildren, greater economic security as we rely less on foreign oil, and a chance at renewal for our auto industry. Today, we’re seeing what happens when California leads on energy and the environment and doesn’t waiver, doesn’t get bogged down, doesn’t let obstacles get in the way.” 
 
However, when Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger finally leaves office, he will actually leave as his "green" legacy collapsing fisheries and environmental devastation unprecedented in California and U.S. history. While the mainstream media and many corporate-funded "environmental" groups praise him for his "leadership" on "green energy," Schwarzenegger has presided over the destruction of Central Valley Chinook salmon, longfin smelt, green sturgeon, striped bass and other fish populations. 
 
"Environmentalism," Schwarzenegger-style, is nothing other than a particularly toxic and destructive form of corporate greenwashing. While he engages in photo opportunities with President Obama, Senators, Representatives and other politicians, his administration's "leadership" is waging an unprecedented war against California's fish populations and aquatic ecosystems. 
 
The same Governor who has repeatedly lied about the California "drought" is relentlessly campaigning for a peripheral canal and more dams, a dangerous project that is expected to worsen the already imperiled state of Central Valley salmon and Delta fish populations. Although some scientists and the Nature Conservancy have gone on record in support of the peripheral canal because it would supposedly accomplish "co-equal goals" of ecosystem restoration and water supply, I have two questions to ask canal proponents.
 
First, can anybody show me one single example in U.S. history where the construction of a water supply canal has led to less water being taken out of a river system?
 
Second, can anybody point to one example of where a massive canal project like the peripheral canal has led to ecosystem restoration, rather than ecosystem destruction?
 
For more information about the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, go to http://www.calsport.org. Here is Jennings' superb testimony before the State Water Resources Control Board in Sacramento on Tuesday, May 19: 
 
 
 
May 19, 2009 -- Mr. Jennings's oral comments before the State Water Resources Control Board: 
 
"Good Morning, Chairman Hoppin, Board Members. Bill Jennings, CSPA, C-WIN. 
 
Why. Why are you proposing this order? 
 
We live in an arid state that experiences frequent droughts. 
 
According to DWR, the last three years have been the 10th worst three-year drought cycle in the period of record. 
 
In fact, since 1959, both the Sacramento and San Joaquin basins have both been dry or critically dry 37% of the years - and one of the basins has been dry or critically dry over half of the years. 
 
Drought in California is as inevitable as death & taxes. 
 
Our seniority-based water allocation scheme is designed to adjust to the inevitability of droughts. And, the system is working exactly as anticipated. 
 
In this third year of drought, Sacramento Valley contractors, Friant contractors, exchange contractors and eastside San Joaquin users are getting their water. 
 
Only contracts pursuant to the most junior water rights are receiving less water. Westland's reduced deliveries are based upon contracts that are predicated on shortages in times of drought. LA is receiving less water only because it voluntarily relinquished its urban preference in the Monterey Agreement. 
 
This order is a backdoor attack upon 150 years of water law and precedent. It is an attack upon the public trust. It threatens to undermine faith in public institutions and, indeed, in government itself. 
 
Never before have we had to waive CEQA and Water Quality Control Plans or turn California's permit system upside down through a truncated hearing that violates the most basic due process rights. 
 
DWR deliberately and despicably withheld introducing the Governor's drought proclamation into evidence until no one had a chance to refute it. Had the proclamation been in evidence, we would have rebutted its bogus claims lie by lie. 
 
There is no evidence in the record that this is order is necessary. There is no evidence that establishes harm if the petition is not granted, other than the unsubstantiated conclusory claims by DWR and the Bureau. 
 
Westlands withdrew their evidentiary testimony. Because, I suspect, they realized we were prepared to refute their claims with hard evidence from the state's Employment Development Department on the increase in farm-labor employment throughout the last three years: just as we were prepared to document their expansion of perennial crop acreage during the drought. 
 
There is, however, a bright spot in this wretched spectacle. You and the Governor have yanked the rug out from under the NGOs attempting to work within the BDCP and Delta Vision processes. 
 
You and the Governor have clearly established that any promises, standards, guarantees or assurances you offer are not worth a tinker's damn. And I suspect that revelation will change the dynamics of the looming debate over conveyance and Delta protection."