One of the Great Moral and Political Issue of Our Time in California —Water, Fish, and the Environment

By Frank D. Russo

Having grown up in Southern California in what is technically called a “semi-arid region,” watched folks watering what otherwise would be desert, and fished as a kid and younger adult, it is difficult to get out mind the worsening news about the potential—some would say looming—extinction of fish species including salmon, smelt, and steelhead trout. Something is seriously amiss as salmon fishing has been shut down for the West Coast of the United States.

There are many different facets to the interrelated issues of water usage in California—political, scientific, philosophical, and economic—just to mention a few. As I was about to finish law school in the 1970’s, a wise uncle advised me to practice in the area of water law and predicted that legal fights over this issue would intensify as the years rolled on. Although I never became a “water lawyer,” this advice keeps coming back to mind as I read the news and the reports about water and fish.

Today, we have published an article from Dan Bacher, one of many from him about water, fish, and the environment that have focused on the delta, damming of rivers, and other details this topic area. He is steadfastly opposed to a peripheral canal and critical of those who recommend it as a solution to the problems we face. Remembering the vote in the 1970’s on the peripheral canal, especially as a northern Californian now, I am also suspicious of the building of a peripheral canal and trusting the powers that be in not willy-nilly diverting increasing amounts of water from the Delta for other “needs,” including those who may have never visited the Delta or know much about it. The economic interests are titanic and the lifestyle issues (how many have become used to a bountiful supply of water in landscaping, farming, and for other uses) evoke strong feelings. To me, protecting fish species is a moral issue—and certainly has a profound practical reach, not only in the fish we eat, but is the canary in the coal mine that is our state.

A friend of mine who was a prominent legislator in the 1970’s when the peripheral canal was on the ballot—and a strong opponent of it—told me about a year ago that he was becoming convinced that a peripheral canal was in fact needed to save the Delta. The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC), for which I have a lot of respect, has issued a 184 page report, “Comparing Futures for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta,” that examines our options and recommends the construction of a peripheral canal—but not before discussing the tradeoffs. I recommend to the general reader, at least taking a look at the accessible 6 page issues brief, “Navigating the Delta: Comparing Futures, Choosing Options,” that the PPIC has issued in conjunction with this report.

Another former legislator who I have gotten to know during my work in Sacramento, and for whom I have the utmost respect, Phil Isenberg of Sacramento, chairs the Delta Vision Commission at the appointment of Governor Schwarznegger. This Commission is looking at all aspects of these issues. You can read a little more about Isenberg’s approach in an article from last year. The Delta Vision Commission’s site has tremendous information on this issue as well and the commission has held many hearings and received input from many with differing viewpoints.

Comments

Get Email Updates

Want the California Progress Report by email? Once a week, we'll send you the latest and greatest headlines.