(C) Daily Kos
This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .



Friends of the River submits expert testimony blasting Newsom's salmon-killing Delta Tunnel [1]

['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.']

Date: 2025-07-20

SACRAMENTO, CA – On Friday, July 11, Friends of the River submitted expert testimony in opposition to the petition from the California Department of Water Resources to permit the construction and operation of the proposed Delta Conveyance Project (Delta Tunnel).

“The testimony lays out a clear case that the project would cause serious harm to California’s rivers, fisheries, and communities while failing to provide the long-term water supply benefits claimed by proponents,” according to a press release from Restore the Delta.

“This isn’t just about the tunnel itself, concerning as that is. It’s also about reviving an old playbook — a vision that stretches back more than a century — of taking vast quantities of water from Northern California rivers to feed so-called ‘areas of deficiency’ in the south, leaving our rivers, and the fisheries and ecosystems they support, at risk while ignoring water supply alternatives that improve local self-reliance,” said Ron Stork, Senior Policy Analyst at Friends of the River. “We’ve seen this story before.”

Friends of the River’s expert testimony highlights:

How the project sets the stage for new upstream dams and diversions : “As Ron Stork’s testimony emphasizes, the Delta Tunnel is not an isolated facility — the additional capacity to export water from the Delta would catalyze further exploitation of Northern California rivers by incentivizing expanded storage and increased water transfers, repeating past patterns of environmental damage without meaningful safeguards.”

: “As Ron Stork’s testimony emphasizes, the Delta Tunnel is not an isolated facility — the additional capacity to export water from the Delta would catalyze further exploitation of Northern California rivers by incentivizing expanded storage and increased water transfers, repeating past patterns of environmental damage without meaningful safeguards.” How local water supply alternatives can better meet water supply needs: “As expert Heather Cooley of the Pacific Institute explains, Southern California already has significant opportunities to meet water needs through conservation, water reuse, and stormwater capture — alternatives cheaper, faster, and less damaging than a tunnel whose price tag is $20 billion and whose actual cost will probably be three times as much.”

“As expert Heather Cooley of the Pacific Institute explains, Southern California already has significant opportunities to meet water needs through conservation, water reuse, and stormwater capture — alternatives cheaper, faster, and less damaging than a tunnel whose price tag is $20 billion and whose actual cost will probably be three times as much.” What the long-term consequences are for public trust resources: “ As environmental scientist Christina Swanson testifies, the project underestimates the effects of climate change and overestimates the effectiveness of the giant fish screens that the tunnel relies on to prevent massive fish kills and impacts to migration, ensuring that impacts to Delta ecosystems and California’s rivers will be far worse than expected, at a time when those ecosystems are already in crisis.”

As environmental scientist Christina Swanson testifies, the project underestimates the effects of climate change and overestimates the effectiveness of the giant fish screens that the tunnel relies on to prevent massive fish kills and impacts to migration, ensuring that impacts to Delta ecosystems and California’s rivers will be far worse than expected, at a time when those ecosystems are already in crisis.” How the project threatens Northern California’s river economies: “As Charles Center’s testimony underscores, the Delta Tunnel would fuel new upstream dams and water transfers, degrading rivers and harming recreation-based communities across the upper watersheds.”

“The Delta Tunnel won’t solve California’s water challenges — it will just make new ones,” said Gary Bobker, Program Director for Friends of the River. “There are better solutions that don’t sacrifice rivers and fisheries to prop up an antiquated water management system of overallocated water rights and wasteful dams and canals, and that instead result in the more efficient use of our state’s finite water resources. That’s why the State Water Board should accept FOR’s protest, reject the Tunnel petition, and prioritize water management strategies that safeguard rivers, fish, and communities across California.”

For more than a half-century, Friends of the River (FOR) has been at the forefront of California’s environmentalist movement for a sustainable water future. FOR is dedicated to protecting and restoring California's rivers, streams, and watersheds, while advocating for water solutions that protect the environment. Healthy rivers are a critical component of California’s climate future, and FOR rejects the notion that the state must choose between healthy river ecosystems and having enough water. With the state’s water crisis approaching a breaking point, FOR is in its toughest fight yet as it works to stop the Delta Tunnel boondoggle while offering more practical and sustainable alternatives to protect and restore California’s rivers.

For more information on Friends of the River, visit https://www.friendsoftheriver.org

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/7/20/2334372/-Friends-of-the-River-submits-expert-testimony-blasting-Newsom-s-salmon-killing-Delta-Tunnel?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=latest_community&pm_medium=web

Published and (C) by Daily Kos
Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified.

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/

You are viewing proxied material from magical.fish. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.