<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
<table border="0" width="80%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3"><img
src="cid:part1.01060601.06090502@tcrcd.net" alt=" N&R"
border="0" height="59" width="116"></td>
<td><span class="PrintFriendlyIntro">This article was printed
from the Opinions</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><span class="PrintFriendlyIntro">section of the <i>Sacramento
News & Review</i>, originally published December 1,
2011.</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><span class="PrintFriendlyIntro">This article may be read
online at:</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="125"> </td>
<td><span class="PrintFriendlyIntro"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/content?oid=4545794">http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/content?oid=4545794</a></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="125"> </td>
<td><span class="PrintFriendlyIntro">Copyright ©2011 Chico
Community Publishing, Inc.</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="125"> </td>
<td><span class="PrintFriendlyIntro">Printed on 2011-12-01.</span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<h1>Water grab, part II</h1>
<h2>The fix is in on the Delta Water Plan</h2>
<br>
<span class="ContentBy">By <a
href="http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/archive?author=oid%3A939437"
class="AuthorLinksOff"
onmouseover="this.className='AuthorLinksOn';"
onmouseout="this.className='AuthorLinksOff';">Burt Wilson</a></span>
<span class="PrintFriendlyBody">
<table style="table-layout: auto;" align="right" cellpadding="0"
cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr valign="top">
<td align="right" width="250">
<center>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>
<table border="1" bordercolor="#ff3333"
cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><span class="ContentInfoBox">Burt
Wilson a member of the Bay Delta
Conservation Plan’s Conveyance
Committee and the Forum Sub-Committee
of the 2013 State Water Plan</span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td> </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</center>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><b>“One state, one water!”</b></p>
<p>I heard a Department of Water Resources employee blurt that out
at a recent Delta Water Plan hearing. It’s the latest DWR
propaganda to get us to believe that Northern California water
also belongs to Southern California. It has about as much
credibility as compassionate conservatism.</p>
<p>Still, it ranks second to the so-called “co-equal goals” of the
Delta Water Plan. They’re described in the California Water Code
as 1. “providing a more reliable water supply for the state of
California,” and 2. “protecting, restoring, and enhancing the
Delta ecosystem.”</p>
<p>In my view, these dual goals actually constitute a logical
fallacy—a statement that may appear logical on the surface but
is contradictory in fact. Ask any teacher of rhetoric; the dual
goals are not co-equal, but mutually exclusive because they
falsely propose that the Delta ecosystem can be saved by taking
even more water from it!</p>
<p>Hey! The Delta ecosystem was ruined years ago by huge water
diversions to the south.</p>
<p>Allow me to also decode these dual goals for you: 1. a “more
reliable water supply for the state of California” means sending
more Delta water south and, 2. “enhancing the Delta ecosystem”
means they need a “cover story” to make their water grab appear
to be an environmental benefit to the Delta.</p>
<p>You ask, “How can the Delta Stewardship Council get away with
proposing billions of dollars be spent under the aegis of such
spurious goals?” The answer lies with the state Legislature.
This is the body that wrote the co-equal goals into state law.
So no matter how dubious and deceptive the Delta Water Plan may
be, the DSC will be able to declare “We’re only doing what is
mandated to fulfill the law,” as they continue to plot the
ruination of the Delta.</p>
<p>How will the plan be financed? The latest hair-brained scheme
to come out of the DSC is that instead of raising taxes they
will “make the beneficiaries pay.” This sounds good until you
figure out that it means raising your water rates with impunity.
In fact, this is already happening around the state.</p>
<p>In my 46 years of political and consumer activism (I worked on
the campaign against the Peripheral Canal in 1982, which we won
by a two-thirds vote statewide), I have never seen a state water
project where the “fix” has been more “in” on so many
cross-party levels. The fact that everything possible is being
done to keep the Delta Water Plan from being voted upon by
California citizens is indicative that something nefarious is
going on.</p>
<p>In past writings I have said that the California Business
Roundtable and the construction industries in the southland need
water to develop the high desert areas east of Los Angeles.
Well, on October 27, the Obama administration unveiled its plans
for solar-energy development in desert lands in the western
United States. Thus “solar energy zones”—many in the Mojave
Desert—will eventually open land for development. But they can’t
build if they can’t certify there is enough water to sustain
development. Can you guess where they’re expecting the new water
to come from?</p>
<p>Do you think the feds are so dumb they will invest billions in
solar energy in the desert before the water for development is
secure? Or do you think someone in government knows something we
don’t and isn’t telling us?</p>
</span> <img src="cid:part2.02050809.03030201@tcrcd.net" alt=""
height="0" width="0"><br>
</body>
</html>