default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
Logout|My Dashboard

Assemblywoman Alyson Huber wants hurdle to canal around Delta

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Monday, April 26, 2010 12:00 am

Alarmed that a proposed canal to funnel water around the Delta to Southern California is gaining momentum, a Northern California lawmaker wants to ensure the Legislature has the final say.

A bill by Assemblywoman Alyson Huber, D-Lodi, would prohibit the construction of a canal, tunnel or any other project that would send Delta water south to cities and farms unless state lawmakers authorize it.

It also would ban a canal that diminishes the supply, rights or quality of water currently used by residents of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, the heart of California's water-delivery system.

"I don't think we should have an infrastructure project of this size without legislative oversight," said Huber, who represents a district in the Delta and opposes the canal. "I think the Legislature should do its job and give it an up-or-down vote."

A region the size of about Rhode Island, the Northern California Delta is a maze of rivers, islands and sloughs where mountain runoff collects before spilling into San Francisco Bay. The water that passes through the fragile ecosystem supplies drinking water to some 25 million Californians and irrigation water to thousands of acres.

Those water deliveries have been curtailed in recent years because of drought and pumping restrictions intended to protect threatened fish that live in or migrate through the Delta.

A state-federal working group that is crafting a new habitat plan for the Delta has said a canal could ensure future water deliveries to Southern California while protecting the estuary's ecosystem. It also is studying an underground tunnel as an alternative to a canal. The underground pipeline would divert the same amount of water out of the Delta but potentially help the state avoid costly legal challenges as it seeks to acquire land for a canal.

Building a canal around the Delta has been discussed for decades but is an issue fraught with political peril, leading most politicians to avoid it. In 1982, California voters overturned plans by the Legislature to build a canal.

The debate has rekindled in recent years as water deliveries have been significantly reduced and thousands of farming acres have withered for lack of water.

The Legislature adopted a series of water bills last year and placed an $11.1 billion water bond on this November's ballot. Even so, lawmakers did not specifically call for building a canal, despite a growing consensus that it will be an essential element to overhauling the state's antiquated water system.

The bond that will go before voters in November sets aside money to pay for new dams, groundwater cleanup, conservation and habitat restoration.

In an effort to appease Delta lawmakers, the bond expressly prohibited any money from being spent on the design or construction of a canal. Instead, Southern California water contractors and Central Valley farmers have offered to pay for it.

Estimates for building a canal around the Delta range as high as $9 billion, while an underground pipeline could cost as much as $11.7 billion, according to the Department of Water Resources.

At the same time, lawmakers imposed tough requirements should a canal ever be built, mandating that minimum river flows be set for the Delta, in part to prevent it from becoming too salty with water from San Francisco Bay.

They created the Delta Stewardship Council to decide whether a canal should be built and draft a comprehensive plan to manage the Delta. A canal also would have to be approved by state and federal wildlife and water agencies.

Huber's bill is scheduled for a hearing Tuesday in the Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee, where she expects a spirited debate.

"It's going to be a fight, but I think it will be very difficult for committee members to justify why the Legislature shouldn't have oversight," Huber said.

Associated Press writers Cathy Bussewitz and Robin Hindery contributed to this report.

© 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don't pretend you're someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don't insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.

Welcome to the discussion.


  • posted at 8:21 am on Wed, Apr 28, 2010.


    Without getting to low brow for the intellectuals amongst us...Alyson isn't exactly hard on the eyes is she?

  • posted at 10:06 am on Mon, Apr 26, 2010.


    If towns like Lodi keep dumping their contaminants, pesticides, herbicides, sulfur, ecoli, contaminated wine "effluent", contaminated cannery washdown water, hydro plant cooling water, etc. into the underground streams and visible waterway systems into the Delta, Lodi will need its own desalination plant for drinking water.

  • posted at 8:09 am on Mon, Apr 26, 2010.


    I totally agree with wtf! I have said the same thing about desalinization plants...and for sure there is plenty of ocean water!!!

  • posted at 5:35 am on Mon, Apr 26, 2010.


    I havent taken a count, but cant southern calif lawmakers outvote northern calif lawmakers??

  • posted at 5:02 am on Mon, Apr 26, 2010.


    I think maybe the residents who will be affected - US - should have a vote on whether this pipeline is built or not; regardless of who's paying for it.One more time....Why don't those down south build themselves desalination plants? There's plenty of ocean water. In this way, the entire state can have fresh water.

  • posted at 4:17 am on Mon, Apr 26, 2010.


    Alyson You have my vote from now on.



Popular Stories



Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists