Banta - Carbona Irrigation District, Broadview Wa ter District, Byron Bethany Irrigation District (CVP), Central California Irrigation District, Centinella Wa ter District, City of Tr acy , Colum bia Canal Com

pany , Del Puerto Water District, Eagle Field Wa ter District, Firebaugh Canal Wa ter District, Fresno Slough Water District, Grasslands Water District, Jam es Irrigation District, Laguna Wa ter District, Mercey Springs Wa ter District, Oro Loma W ater District, Pacheco Wa ter District, Pajaro Va lley W ater Managem ent Agency , Panoche Irrigation District, Patterson Irrigation District, Pleasant Va lley W ater District, Reclam ation District 1606, San Benito County Water District, San Luis Canal Com pany , San Luis Wa ter District, Santa Clara County Wa ter District, Tr anquillity Irrigation District, Turner Island Wa ter District, We st Side Irrigation District, We st Stanislaus Irrigation District, We stlands Water District, Wi dren Wa ter District. 

## City of Tr acy Ke ttleman City**To San Francisco** 
 **Stockton**
**Jones Pumping Plant Clifton**  **Court Forebay** 

# • **Fr esh w**  **ate r from the Delt**  **a supports:** 

– **25 million**  **Calif ornians;** 

– **Regional ecologies;**

– **Agricultur e and Industry** **.** 

# • **$400 billion of the St ate**  **’s econom**  **y**

• **An y loss impacts our econom**  **y and en**  **vir onmen**  **t.** 

# Wh **y is the Delt a so import**  **an t?**  **The Delta**

# Endangered Species Act and other Species of Concern


## Chinook Salmon 1989 – Winter - Run: Endangered (CESA) 1990 – Winter - Run: Endangered (FESA) 1999 – Spring - Run: Threatened (CESA/FESA)


## Green Sturgeon 2006 – Threatened (FESA) No CESA

listing 

## Steelhead 1998 – Threatened (FESA) No CESA

listing 

## Sacramento Splittail 1999 – Threatened (FESA) 2003 – FESA

listing removed No CESA

listing 

## Longfin smelt

2007 – Petition under consideration (FESA & CESA) 

## Longfin smelt 2007 – Petition under consideration (FESA & CESA) 

## Delta smelt 1993 – Threatened (CESA/FESA)



## 8

# Ke y Delt a Risk s

Seismic Risk Bay Area Faults 

# Flooding Risk Jones Tr act (2004) 

# Fishery Declines Delta smelt

90 . 1

1 1 0 2 1 0 3

0 . 1

1 1 0 100

1 0 2 1 0 3 1 0 4 1 0 5

1970 1980 1990 2000 0 . 1 1 1 0
1 0 2 1 0 3 1 0 4

1970 1980 1990 2000

1 1 0 1 0 3 1 0 4AbundanceIndexCatchperTrawl



### Y e a r D e l t a S m e l t Longf i n S m e l t


### S t r i ped bas s T h r e adf i n s had



## Source: Kimmerer and Nobriga (2005); Sommer et al. (In Press, Fisheries 32(6) )



# Exhibit D The Pelagic Organism Decline

1970 1980 1990 2000 1970 1980 1990 2000AbundanceIndex



## Striped bass Delt a Smelt
Thr eadfin Shad Longfin Smelt

## Stockton



# Near - Te rm Other Stressors To xics, Unscreened diversions, etc. 

# Near - Te rm Other Stressors To xics, Unscreened diversions, etc. 

# Other Stressors  

## Toxic pollutants  

## Upstream **diversions**  

## In **- Delta**  **diversions**  

## Invasive **species**  

## Predation  

## Climate **change**  

## Recreation/commercial **activities**  

## Intentional **take**  

## Ocean **conditions**  

## Water **quality**  

## Food supply  

## Stock recruitment

# Fo **rums Considering Delt a “Solutions”** 

• Ba y Delt a Conserv ation Plan • CALFED • Delt a Vision • Governor ’s Of

fice
• Public P olicy Ins titut e of California • St ate W ate r R esour ces Contr ol Boar d

# Our Curr en t Wa te r Supply Pa thw ay

(P eat Soil is 10 - 30 ft. deep)

- 20 ft. - 30 ft.

- 30 feet Sea Level 

# SWP Pumps CVP Pumps - 5 ft.

## - 20 ft. - 30 ft.

- 30 feet Sea Level 

# SWP Pumps CVP Pumps - 5 ft. 

# Isolated Facility Pathway (Peat Soil is 0 - 10 ft . deep) 

# Isolated Facility Pathway (Peat Soil is 0 - 10 ft . deep)**DRA FT:**  **D el**  **ta Ou tflo**  **w, U**  **pst re**  **am C onsum**  **pt iv**  **e Use,**  **In -D**  **el ta**  **C onsum**  **pt iv**  **e Us**  **e, a**  **nd Ex**  **por ts** 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005**M i** **l l** **i o** **n A** **c r** **e F** **e e** **t** Delt a Out fl ow

Ba nk s Exp ort s Trac y Exp ort s Ups tr eam C ons um pt iv

e Us e In-Delt a Cons um pt iv

e Us eMWD 4.5 %• **Impacts of Water Supply to San Joaquin Valley Agriculture** • • • **Water Loss since CVPIA 1992** • **1992 –**  **Enactment of CVPIA** • **Section 3406(d) –**  **Reallocated water from south -**  **of -**  **Delta CVP Ag service contractors**  **to Level 2 Refuge Supplies: 156,000 acre -**  **feet**

• **1994 –**  **Bay -**  **Delta Accord** • **South -**  **of -**  **Delta CVP and SWP contractors agreed to dedicate, on a temporary basis, water to Delta fisheries**  **restoration: 1,000,000 acre**  **- feet from CVP and SWP contractors**  **in a dry year. The Accord provided that management of CVP water under the Accord to be**  **counted toward section 3406(b)(2) obligation. (Reduced south**  **- of**  **- Delta CVP and SWP contract reliability by approximately 25%)** 

• **1997 –**  **Decision on Implementation of CVPIA section 3506(b)(2)** • **November 1997 and subsequent decisions prescribed management of section 3406(b)(2):**  **183,000 –**  **275,000 acre -**  **feet. (Reduced south**  **- of**  **- Delta CVP contract reliability by an additional 10**  **– 15%.)** 

• **2000 –**  **Trinity River Record of Decision** • **Prescribed new flow criteria for Trinity River: 100,000**  **– 600,000 acre**  **- feet depending on year type (Average**  **supply reduction for south**  **- of**  **- Delta CVP contractors**  **approximate 5% (91,500 acre -**  **feet).)**

• **2007 –**  **Wanger Decision** • **Prescribed additional actions to protect Delta smelt: Water cost 650,000 acre**  **- feet**  • **On Farm Job Loss** • 2006 - 100% water supply 140,000 acres not farmed • 2007 - 50% water supply 25% full time decrease of on farm jobs 225,000 acres not farmed • 2008 - 40% water supply 65% full time decrease of on farm jobs 235,000 acres not farmed • **2009 -**  **0% water supply 60,000 Employment Loss ** ** • **$1.4 Billion Income Loss   • ** $1.2 Billion Farm Revenue Loss **** • ** The Economic Impacts on Agriculture of the Biological Opinion & Drought in 2009; Richard Howitt, Duncan MacEwan & Josue Medellin; UC Davis Dept of Agricultural & Resource Economics , & UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences

## • **Calif ornia**  **is f acing a water supply**  **crisis.**

– **2009 Centr**  **al V**

**alley Pr**  **oject allocation**  **for SOD wat**  **er service contr actor**  **s –**  **10%** • **UC Da vis projections**  **based on 0% allocation 60,000**  **– 80,000 jobs and $2.2 billion**  **in lost income**



### – **2009 State W**  **ater Pr oject**  **allocation for**  **all contr**  **actor s**  **– 30%**  

## • **Since 1992 water supplies f** **or ag and urban water agencies that depend**  **on the CVP and SWP ha**  **ve been r educed**  **not by h yd**  **ro logy**  **, but by r**  **egulations that ha**  **ve re**  **allocated water to environmental uses**  **and that pr**  **event the movement**  **of wate**  **r from stor ag**  **e fa**  **cilities to ar**  **eas wher e**  **the demand f or water exists.**  • **The narr ow**  **- minded f** **ocus on the**  **export pumps while**  **ignoring OT**  **HER F AC**  **TO RS**  **has, by all measur**  **es, not been**  **of benefit to the ESA listed fish.** • **Solutions**

– **Bay -**  **Delta Conserv ation Plan**  **– A comprehensive**  **pr ogr**  **am to address multiple**  **factors that affect the abundance**  **of species in the Delta** 

– **New Delta conveyance facilities –**  **An isolat ed conveyance facility would:**  • **Eliminate conflict**  **between efforts**  **to recover**  **at -**  **risk species and to supply water;**  • **Restore water**  **supplies f or ag and urban**  **agencies that depend on CVP and SWP;**  • **Improve water quality;**  **and,** • **Eliminate risk to water supply resulting from**  **seismic risk and sea level rise.**



### – **Wa te**  **r Agencies that would benefit**  **fr om f**  **acility willing to**  **pay costs of design, envir**  **onmental review**  **, and construction.**

– **New Surface Stor age**  **– Five feasibility studies nearing completion.** 

– **Fe der**  **al agencies must play an active r**  **ole. Implementation of these solutions will**  **require participation of Bureau of R**  **eclamation, Fish and Wildlif e**  **Service, NOAA Fisheries, and Army Corp of Engineer**  **s.**