<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16674" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -khtml-nbsp-mode: space; -khtml-line-break: after-white-space"
bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A
title=danielbacher@fishsniffer.com
href="mailto:danielbacher@fishsniffer.com">Dan Bacher</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, July 29, 2008 9:12 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Fish and Conservation Groups Blast Schwarzenegger/Feinstein
Water Bond Proposal </DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino
size=4><SPAN class=Apple-style-span style="FONT-SIZE: 14px">Here's my latest
article, followed by an action alert from Steve Evans of Friends of the River
and a sidebar breakdown of the water bond proposal.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino
size=4><SPAN class=Apple-style-span style="FONT-SIZE: 14px"><BR
class=khtml-block-placeholder></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino
size=4><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 14px">Thanks</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino
size=4><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 14px">Dan </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino
size=4><SPAN class=Apple-style-span style="FONT-SIZE: 14px"><BR
class=khtml-block-placeholder></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino
size=4><SPAN class=Apple-style-span style="FONT-SIZE: 14px"><BR
class=khtml-block-placeholder></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino size=4><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 14px">Conservation Groups Blast Schwarzenegger/Feinstein Water
Bond Proposal </SPAN></FONT>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>by Dan Bacher</FONT></SPAN><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino> </FONT><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>As Governor Schwarzenegger threatens to cut
the salaries of 200,000 state workers to the $6.55 federal minimum wage to
supposedly ease the state’s projected budget deficit </FONT><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT></SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>of
</FONT></SPAN><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Georgia>$17.2 billion,
</FONT></SPAN><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Schwarzenegger
and Senator Dianne Feinstein are campaigning for a enormously costly and
destructive "compromise" $9.3 billion water bond proposal that includes more
dams and a peripheral canal. </FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Fishing and environmental groups strongly
criticized the proposal for furthering imperiling already collapsing Central
Valley and Delta fisheries while further indebting California taxpayers, while
Democratic Legislators urged the Governor to spend $800,000,000 already
allocated before talking about another water bond. </FONT><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>The latest proposal follows the Governor’s
signing of an executive order in June declaring a statewide drought that
directed state agencies and departments to “take immediate action” to address
the drought conditions and water delivery reductions that exist in California.
Schwarzenegger also proclaimed a state of emergency in nine Central Valley
counties to address urgent water needs: Sacramento, San Joaquin, Stanislaus,
Merced, Madera, Fresno, Kings, Tulare and Kern.</FONT><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT></SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>This water bond proposal calls for
"increased water storage to ensure our water supply is more reliable
year-to-year and we’re able to capture excess water in wet years to use in dry
years" and "improved water conveyance to reduce water shortages" - a euphemism
for the peripheral canal. </FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>"The goal of this plan is to break the
long-standing stalemate over water,” Senator Feinstein gushed, evoking the
failed "can't we all come together" pseudo-consensus language that her and
Schwarzenegger revel in. “California is facing an unprecedented water crisis.
The combination of drought, court ordered water restrictions, global warming,
and an increasing population has placed a major strain on the existing
infrastructure. </FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>She continued, “We need to prepare now for
the future. This language is comprehensive, balanced and could help increase
water supplies to meet the needs of the environment, our cities, and
agriculture. I hope that all sides can come together around a consensus plan
that can be approved this November.” </FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Governor Schwarzenegger echoed, “There is
an urgent need for comprehensive water reform, and this bipartisan plan is
offered as a potential compromise that puts us on the path toward restoring the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, expanding water supplies and promoting
conversation efforts that will ensure a clean, reliable water supply for
California,” </FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>In a joint statement, the bipartisan duo
claimed that the water bond would somehow restore collapsing Central Valley
salmon and Delta fish species, although not specifying how this would be done
with more dams and an</FONT><SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino> </FONT></SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>“improved conveyance.”</FONT><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>
</FONT></SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>The statement continues, “In two of the
past three years, our once thriving Pacific salmon fisheries have been simply
shut down as former salmon strongholds throughout the state have become
dangerously imperiled. The populations of Delta smelt and other native Delta
fish have collapsed to tiny fractions of their former levels. Threats from
aquatic invasive species, toxic discharges and pesticides abound.</FONT><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>
</FONT></SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Restoring our fisheries
and our riparian ecosystems in the face of all these challenges will require
bold action.”</FONT><SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT></SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Fishing groups said this proposal does
nothing to further real water conservation or ecological preservation, but is
just another version of the Governor and Feinstein's earlier, outdated proposals
to bail out corporate agribusiness, construct new dams and build the canal.
</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>“We already have $6 billion in bond money
that the state hasn’t spent yet,” said Bill Jennings, executive director of the
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance. “This is just the latest scheme to
raid the people’s pocketbooks to further subsidize already subsidized water
contractors.” </FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>He criticized the proposal for including
plans to build Sites Reservoir on the west side of the Sacramento Valley and
Temperance Flat Reservoir on the San Joaquin River east of Fresno. “The Governor
and Feinstein are trying to force through the dams even though they will have
little yield in water,” said Jennings. “Also, the Sites Reservoir would store
water in mercury laden sediments.” </FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>The problem with constructing new dams or
“improving conveyance” is that California water is already grossly
overallocated. California has 77 million acre feet in annual runoff in a state
with a water budget of 85 million acre feet – and where</FONT><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>
</FONT></SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>over half a billion
acre feet is authorized for use, according to Jennings. </FONT><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Jennings said that Feinstein,
Schwarzenegger and other policy makers “have to realize that we</FONT><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>
</FONT></SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>live in an arid state
and the water bond is predicated on an abundance of water that doesn’t’ exist.”
</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>In spite of Schwarzenegger’s and
Feinstein’s claims that the bond will somehow restore the Delta ecosystem,
Jennings noted that it will only “further exacerbate the demise of Central
Valley fisheries.” </FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, campaign
coordinator of Restore the Delta, was also very displeased with the Governor’s
bond proposal.</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>“As was the case in 2007, Governor
Schwarzenegger made what appears on the surface to be another move to
short-circuit his own mandated Delta planning process, Delta Vision, by calling
for a bipartisan $9.3 billion water bond,” she said. “The joint statement sent
out by the Governor and Senator Diane Feinstein calls for (in nebulous language)
"improved conveyance" that will take the pressure of the Delta. </FONT><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>“Restore the Delta staff is very suspicious
of the lack of details regarding Delta conveyance included in their joint
statement as well as the timing of this proposed bond,” she stated. “Could it be
that this initial bond is somehow supposed to finance the proposed Delta Vision
Strategic Draft Plan? While the $3 billion figure for improved state water
conveyance would not cover the entire cost of a new through Delta pipeline,
could money for a new facility be forthcoming from other sources?</FONT><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>She also questioned why the Governor is
calling for this new bond when California has an $18 billion deficit and is in
its</FONT><SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT></SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino>third week of operating without a state budget.</FONT><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>The Planning and Conservation League (PCL)
criticized the bond for including provisions that would limit future legislative
oversight for water storage projects and projects affecting the Bay Delta,
including the unprecedented continuous appropriation of $3 billion for water
storage projects. "If approved, the water bond would bypass the legislature and
grant allocation authority to the defunct California Water Commission (which is
a commission entirely appointed by the Governor and which currently has no
appointed members)," said Mindy McIntire, PCL's </FONT></SPAN><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Water Program Manager. </FONT><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>"The proposal also includes confusing
language that seems to limit the Legislature's ability to engage in a solution
to fix the Delta by requiring a two-thirds vote of the Legislature to change or
amend any portion of the proposal's directives regarding the Delta," she
added.</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>"New dams and the Peripheral Canal truly
represent a 19th century solution to a 21st century problem," summed up Steve
Evans in a letter to Feinstein and Schwarzenegger. "</FONT></SPAN><SPAN
style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>We
respectfully urge you to reconsider your support for this budget-busting and
environmentally destructive bond measure."</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino></FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Legislators Respond to Proposal</FONT><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Senate President pro Tem Don Perata
(D-Oakland) also criticized the Governor’s proposed $9.3 billion water bond
measure, saying the best way for California to boost water supply quickly is to
put the $9 billion in bond money approved by voters in 2006 to work.</FONT><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>
</FONT></SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>However, fishing and
environmental groups were alarmed by his increasing willingness to sponsor a
compromise water bond with Schwarzenegger and Feinstein, drawing fears that the
final version could include a peripheral canal and dams.</FONT><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT></SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>“This latest bond proposal shares many
similarities to one I put up for a vote last September, before the state
encountered its current fiscal crisis,” he concluded. “ I am open to doing a
water bond." </FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Perata said the state should spend the bond
money voters approved in 2006 - and then pass a “responsible budget” that can
pay for the debt service on a new bond. “Once we do that, we’ll sit down with
the Governor and Republicans to draft a bond measure to secure the state’s
long-term water supply,” he explained.</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>On July 14, Perata and Assembly Speaker
Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles) further indicated their willingness to come up with a
compromise bond when they announced that they would push legislation to fund
“water storage, reliability and conservation efforts” with already approved bond
money.</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>"It's imperative that we get to work
immediately improving water conservation, water storage and water management --
and that's exactly what these two bills do," Bass said. "This package sets a
realistic target for boosting water conservation and uses already approved bond
money to make big improvements in California's water system."</FONT><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>“Just like California’s transportation
infrastructure, our water system must be overhauled and upgraded to meet the
growing demands of the 21st century,” Perata said. “These bills take an
important first step by quickly getting more than $800 million out the door and
making conservation a top priority.”</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>The two bills are:</FONT><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>• SB 1XX (Second Extraordinary Session), by
Perata. This bill appropriates $812.5 million in Proposition 84 and Proposition
1-E dollars already approved by the voters in 2006. These funds are desperately
needed by water agencies to address the current water drought and fire crisis
and to provide immediate investments in water supply reliability.</FONT><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>• AB 2175, by Assemblyman John Laird
(D-Santa Cruz). This bill establishes a 20 percent water conservation target for
most urban water agencies by the year 2020.</FONT><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>
</FONT></SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>It essentially says
that within 12 years, the state will meet one-fifth of its water needs through
more efficient use of the water we have.</FONT><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>
</FONT></SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>“Perata's now talking compromise with the
governor,” contended Jerry Neuburger, CSPA webmaster. “Is the legislature
sailing us down the peripheral canal?"</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Everybody who cares about the future of the
California Delta, West Coast fisheries and California water supplies should
oppose Schwarzenegger and Feinstein’s proposal – and urge Bass and Perata to not
include dams and a peripheral canal in any final “compromise” bond
proposal.</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Write, call or visit your Legislators today
and phone or write Governor and Dianne Feinstein about your strong opposition to
their plan that will result only in the further decline of imperiled chinook
salmon, delta smelt, longfin smelt, striped bass, green sturgeon and other fish
populations.</FONT><SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> I</FONT></SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> strongly urge you to sign on to the letter
authored by Steve Evans of Friends of the River opposing the
proposal</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>For more information on the legislation, go
to <A href="http://www.calsport.org">www.calsport.org</A>, <A
href="http://www.restorethedelta.org">www.restorethedelta.org</A></FONT><FONT
class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> and <SPAN>www.friendsoftheriver.org</SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Helvetica>.<O:P></O:P></FONT></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><BR
class=khtml-block-placeholder></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino size=4><SPAN
class=Apple-style-span style="FONT-SIZE: 14px">Action Alert from Steve Evans,
Friends of the River: Ten Problems With the Water Bond
Proposal </SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Dear
Friends, </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>It’s time
once again for the conservation, fishing, and Native American communities to let
their voices be heard in opposition to the unneeded, destructive, and budget
busting $9.3 billion dam and canal-building bond proposed by Governor Arnold
Schwarzenegger and Senator Dianne Feinstein. </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Please sign
your organization on to these two important letters opposing the
Schwarzenegger/Feinstein water bond. The first letter is to the Governor and
Senator Feinstein. The second letter is to Senate Pro Tem Perata and Assembly
Speaker Bass. </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Last year,
more than 50 organizations signed on to a letter opposing the Governor’s
previous water bond. Let’s see if we can include even more organizations on this
letter.</FONT></SPAN><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Please sign
your organization on by providing your name, title, and group affiliation to
Soren Jespersen by replying to <A
href="mailto:soren@friendsoftheriver.org">soren@friendsoftheriver.org</A> no
later than COB Friday, Aug. 1. For more information about these letters, please
contact Soren or Steve Evans at <A
href="mailto:sevans@friendsoftheriver.org">sevans@friendsoftheriver.org</A>,
phone: (916) 442-3155 x221.</FONT><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT></SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino>Both letters are attached and the letter to the Governor/Feinstein
is copied below. </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino>Thanks, </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Steven L.
Evans </FONT></SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Conservation
Director </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Friends of
the River</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>1418 20th
Street - Suite 100, Sacramento, CA 95814</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Phone: (916)
442-3155, Ext. 221</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino>F</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>ax; (916)
442-3396</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Email: <A
href="mailto:sevans@friendsoftheriver.org">sevans@friendsoftheriver.org</A></FONT><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Web Site: <A
href="http://www.friendsoftheriver.org">www.friendsoftheriver.org</A>
</FONT><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><BR
class=khtml-block-placeholder></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Letter to
Feinstein and Schwarzenegger </FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Dear Senator
Feinstein and Governor Schwarzenegger: </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>The
undersigned conservation, recreation, and Native American organizations
respectfully oppose your proposed $9.3 billion water bond. Although we
appreciate the provisions in the bond that would fund water conservation and
watershed restoration, the bond could also provide significant funding for
destructive and unneeded new and expanded surface storage dams, as well as the
Peripheral Canal.</FONT></SPAN><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Our primary
concerns about the bond are: </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino>1.</FONT><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT></SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>New dams are not needed. Wise investments
in increased water conservation and efficiency, expanded water reclamation and
recycling programs, and improved groundwater management can easily meet our
current and future water needs at a fraction of the cost. Funding of these
programs now would produce virtually immediate results in response to the
drought while funding of new dams would not produce new water for decades.
Allocating billions for unneeded new dams prioritizes limited public dollars
away from other more cost effective and environmentally beneficial water
programs. </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino>2.</FONT><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT></SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>New dams are not a solution to the drought.
Dams do not create water, they simply capture rainwater and snowmelt. If any of
the proposed dams existed today, the reservoirs would likely be as empty as our
existing reservoirs due to the drought and the state’s primary focus on
exporting water for consumptive purposes. If construction of any of these dams
began today, they would not provide a drop of water for decades. Increased
investments in conservation, efficiency, recycling, and reclamation could
produce savings and water almost immediately.</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino>3.</FONT><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT></SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Water conservation and efficiency are
cheaper and more effective alternatives. Every dollar invested in urban water
conservation produces four times more water than twelve dollars invested in new
dams. Current and past investments in conservation and efficiency have reduced
California’s per capita consumption of water by half in the last 40 years. And
yet, there is much more that can be done to reclaim, recycle, conserve, and more
efficiently utilize our existing water supplies. </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino>4.</FONT><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT></SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Dam costs are exorbitant and increasing
daily. As currently proposed, the bond could provide as much as $5 billion for
new or expanded dams. Current cost estimates for each new or expanded dam are in
the billions of dollars and these estimates do not include actual escalated
costs, including the rising price for raw materials and energy needed for
construction, inflation, interest, and mitigation of environmental impacts. The
public debt service on the proposed bond will cost taxpayers billions of dollars
over the multi-year life span of the bond, at a time when the state and its
taxpayers are already struggling to fund essential public services.
</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino>5.</FONT><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT></SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>New dams and large reservoirs are
ineffective and wasteful. The 2005 California Water Plan found that surface
storage conservatively produces the least amount of water than any other water
management option, including cloud seeding. The 1,400 existing dams in
California already use the most effective dam sites. Because of this, many of
the proposed dams will store no water during drought and relatively
insignificant amounts of water during normal water years. For example, the
proposed Temperance Flat Dam on the San Joaquin River would provide no
additional water storage three years out of four. California’s major reservoirs
already lose more than 2 million acre-feet of water every year from
evaporation. </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino>6.</FONT><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT></SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Dams are not a solution to global warming.
Experts agree that our existing comprehensive system of dams can be operated to
meet the hydrological changes caused by global warming. Large reservoirs created
by new dams actually produce greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming.
Worse yet, many of the CALFED dam projects are energy losers and may force
California to become more reliant on polluting energy sources (moving water is
already the top energy use in the state). For example, the Sites and Los
Vaqueros projects will require more power to pump water into the reservoirs than
the facilities will produce when water is released downstream. The Temperance
Flat dam will drown more existing power capacity than it will
generate. </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino>7.</FONT><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT></SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Local ratepayers who benefit most from new
dams should pay for them, not state taxpayers. None of the dam projects under
consideration are able to muster a majority vote in the California Legislature.
As long as there is a possibility that state and federal taxpayers will pick up
the tab to build expensive new dams, many local water agencies will likely
decline to invest in expensive new dams. Where local water agencies have
determined that a new dam is essential for local needs, the local ratepayers and
beneficiaries paid for the new dam (as is the case with the Metropolitan Water
District’s Diamond Valley Dam, the San Diego Water Authority’s Olivenhain Dam,
and Contra Costa Water District’s Los Vaqueros Dam – all built in the last 15
years). </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino>8.</FONT><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT></SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Dam studies are not completed. We don’t
really know how much these dams truly cost, how much water will actually be
produced, who will receive and pay for the water, and the true extent of their
actual environmental impacts. Funding dams before legally required environmental
and engineering studies are complete and their true costs are known is bad
public policy and violates the spirit if not intent of our environmental
laws. </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino>9.</FONT><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT></SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>The dams may cause great environmental
harm. The Temperance Flat Dam will drown up to 5,000 acres of public recreation
land, wildlife habitat, and Native American cultural sites in the San Joaquin
River Gorge. The Sites Project will drown 14,000 acres of wildlife habitat and
possibly divert enough water from the Sacramento River to harm its ecosystem and
endangered fisheries and wildlife. Raising Shasta Dam and enlarging its
reservoir will drown the cultural homeland of the Winnemen Wintu Tribe and
violate state law requiring the protection of the McCloud River. Proponents
claim that the new dams could be operated to benefit the environment but
numerous state and federal court decisions prove that government agencies are
incapable of operating dams in compliance with environmental laws when pressured
by water interests and elected officials to provide more water for
consumption. </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino>10.</FONT><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>
</FONT></SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>The bond could fund the
initial steps to building the controversial Peripheral Canal. The bond would
provide nearly $2 billion to facilitate Delta “conveyance.” California voters
overwhelmingly rejected the Peripheral Canal in 1982. Any conveyance that
facilitates exports of fresh water from the Delta at current or increased levels
is little more than a death sentence for the Delta ecosystem and its endangered
fisheries. In addition, improved conveyance will harm Delta agriculture and
perpetuate water quality violations in the Delta. </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>New dams and
the Peripheral Canal truly represent a 19th century solution to a 21st century
problem. We respectfully urge you to reconsider your support for this
budget-busting and environmentally destructive bond measure. In addition, we
urge you to support legislation introduced by Senate Pro Tem Don Perata to
appropriate $800 million in bonds already approved by the voters to expedite
funding for water conservation, efficiency, recycling, and reclamation programs.
Passage of this legislation will provide nearly immediate relief from water
shortages caused by the drought.</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Thank you
for you consideration.</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino>Sincerely,</FONT></SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Steven L.
Evans</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Conservation
Director</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Friends of
the River</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>Sacramento,
CA </FONT></SPAN></P></SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino></FONT>
<P></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino></FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><FONT class=Apple-style-span size=4><SPAN
class=Apple-style-span style="FONT-SIZE: 14px">Schwarzenegger and Feinstein’s
Proposal Broken Down:</SPAN></FONT></FONT></SPAN><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><FONT class=Apple-style-span size=4><SPAN
class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 14px"> </SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>$2,000,000,000 for Water Supply
Reliability: For regional water supply and conservation projects that implement
an integrated regional water management plan and to support regional and
interregional connectivity and water management. </FONT><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>$1,900,000,000 for Delta Sustainability:
For projects that support delta sustainability options – levees, water quality,
infrastructure and to protect and enhance the sustainability of the Delta
ecosystem.</FONT><SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino> </FONT></SPAN><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>$3,000,000,000 for Statewide Water System
Operational Improvement: For water storage projects to improve state water
system operations and provide net improvement in ecosystem and water quality
conditions. </FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>$1,335,000,000 for Conservation And
Watershed Protection: For ecosystem and watershed protections and restoration,
invasive species removal, watershed restoration in fire damages areas, and for
fish passage improvement and dam removal. </FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>$800,000,000 for Groundwater Protection And
Water Quality: For groundwater protection, small community wastewater treatment,
stormwater management and water quality, and coastal water quality. </FONT><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino>$250,000,000 for Water Recycling.
</FONT><FONT class=Apple-style-span face=Palatino><O:P></O:P></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN><FONT
class=Apple-style-span
face=Palatino></FONT><O:P></O:P></SPAN></P><O:P></O:P></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>