“The Delta is one of the most productive and ecologically important watersheds in the country,” said Senator Feinstein. “Our bill recognizes the Delta’s important contributions to California and helps secure additional resources to protect its rich culture and history. Establishing the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta National Heritage Area will ensure future generation can enjoy everything this region has to offer.”
“Generations of families have enjoyed the abundance of the Delta, and we must preserve that opportunity for generations to come. That’s why I’m proud to work with Senator Feinstein and Congressman Garamendi to introduce this bill establishing the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta as a National Heritage Area, which would bolster conservation and economic development projects for this environmentally, culturally, and historically rich region.” said Senator Harris.
The bill would establish the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta as a National Heritage Area, to be managed by the Delta Protection Commission. It authorizes $10 million in federal assistance over 15 years to provide matching grants to local governments and nonprofit organizations. This federal funding is necessary to help implement the locally developed National Heritage Area management plan to promote environmental stewardship, heritage conservation and economic development projects throughout the Delta.
The bill would have no effect on water rights, water contracts or property rights and creates no new regulatory authority or burden on local government or private citizens. The bill would also have no effect on fishing and hunting within the National Heritage Area.
Congressman John Garamendi (D-Calif.) introduced companion legislation in the House of Representatives.
The full text of the legislation is available here. A map of the proposed National Heritage Area is available here.
California Farm Bureau sues to block flows plan for lower San Joaquin River
A plan for lower San Joaquin River flows misrepresents and underestimates the harm it would cause to agricultural resources in the Central Valley, according to the California Farm Bureau Federation, which filed suit today to block the plan.
Adopted last December by the State Water Resources Control Board, the plan would redirect 30 to 50 percent of “unimpaired flows” in three San Joaquin River tributaries—the Stanislaus, Tuolumne and Merced rivers—in the name of increasing fish populations in the rivers. The flows plan would sharply reduce the amount of water available to irrigate crops in regions served by the rivers.
In its lawsuit, filed in Sacramento County Superior Court, Farm Bureau said the flows plan would have “far-reaching environmental impacts to the agricultural landscape in the Central Valley,” and that those impacts had been “insufficiently analyzed, insufficiently avoided and insufficiently mitigated” in the board’s final plan.
“The water board brushed off warnings about the significant damage its plan would cause to agricultural resources in the Central Valley, labeling it ‘unavoidable,’” CFBF President Jamie Johansson said. “But that damage can be avoided, by following a different approach that would be better for fish and people alike.”
The Farm Bureau lawsuit says the water board failed to consider reasonable alternatives to its flows-dominated approach, including non-flow measures such as predator control, food supply and habitat projects for protected fish, and said it ignored “overwhelming evidence” that ocean conditions, predation and lack of habitat—rather than river flows—have been chief contributors to reducing fish populations.
The water board’s analysis of impacts on agricultural resources “is inadequate in several respects,” Farm Bureau said. The lawsuit says the board plan fails to appropriately analyze its impact on surface water supplies and, in turn, how cutting surface water would affect attempts to improve groundwater under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act—all of which would cause direct, indirect and cumulative effects on agricultural resources.
“California farmland is a significant environmental resource, providing food, farm products and jobs for people throughout the state, nation and world,” Johansson said. “Before cutting water to thousands of acres of farmland for dubious benefit, the state must do more to analyze alternatives that would avoid this environmental harm.”
Get the Notebook blog by email and never miss a post!
Sign up for daily emails and get all the Notebook’s aggregated and original water news content delivered to your email box by 9AM. Breaking news alerts, too. Sign me up!
About News Worth Noting: News Worth Noting is a collection of press releases, media statements, and other materials produced by federal, state, and local government agencies, water agencies, and academic institutions, as well as non-profit and advocacy organizations. News Worth Noting also includes relevant legislator statements and environmental policy and legal analyses that are publicly released by law firms. If your agency or organization has an item you would like included here, please email it to Maven.