Whether Peripheral Canal or Subterranean Tunnel,
Plan to Export Massive Amounts of Delta Water a Bad Idea

In 1982, Governor Jerry Brown and the state legislature approved the Peripheral Canal, an aqueduct to export vast amounts of water out of the San Francisco Bay Delta. The Canal’s biggest supporters included Southern
California water agencies and Central Valley agribusiness corporations. Citizens of the Bay-Delta region saw a
water grab and feared the canal would decimate the Bay-Delta environment. Immediately following the canal’s
approval, over 1 million voters signed a petition to force a statewide referendum on the canal. That November,
Californians rejected the Peripheral Canal with parts of the Bay Area voting 90% against the bond.
Now the Peripheral Canal has reemerged in subterranean form. Last December, the state proposed
constructing two tunnels to export water from the Bay Delta at a cost of $15-$30 billion. The tunnels are being
crafted by corporate agriculture interests such as the Westlands Water District and by Southern California
water agencies such as the Metropolitan Water District. While the details of the proposal are still being worked
out, battle lines are being drawn as a coalition of environmental, consumer, fishing, and taxpayer groups are
preparing to defend the Bay-Delta once again. Just like their Peripheral Canal predecessor, these tunnels have
three main problems.
FIRST, the tunnels could worsen environmental conditions in our already beleaguered Bay Delta. California’s salmon populations have recently plummeted from over-pumping the Delta. The population of Chinook salmon dropped from over 800,000 in 2002 to 20,000 in 2000, while water exports rose to a record high 6.3 million acre-feet in the same period. As a result, the salmon fishing seasons in 2008 and 2009 were cancelled for the first time in history, taking a $2 billion toll on the Bay Area’s local fishing economy. Tunnel or canal, taking more water from the Delta will decimate our scarce fish populations and the jobs that depend on
them.
SECOND, these tunnels could lead to greater privatization of our state’s water. Paramount Farms, owned by Beverly Hills billionaire Stewart Resnick, controls a massive underground aquifer known as the Kern County Water Bank, which receives Delta water. The water bank holds approximately 1 million acre-feet of water, which is more water than San Francisco and Los Angeles combined use in a single year.
While Paramount specializes in almonds and other specialty crops that are largely exported out of California, current law allows companies like Paramount to sell their taxpayer-subsidized wate at a profit and skip farming altogether. The buyers
of this water are often real estate developers, who are required to demonstrate an adequate water supply before new projects can be built. Last year, a San Joaquin Valley farm water district sold rights to approximately 14,000 acre-feet of water to the Mojave Water Agency in San Bernardino County for $73 million for use towards new developments. In another complex scheme, housing developer DMB has purchased water from a Kern County farm to supply a proposed 8,000- unit housing development on Bay marshes in Redwood City.
FINALLY, like the canal, the tunnels threaten our public services and leave taxpayers footing the bill to subsidize private water. Footing a $15-$30 billion cost would likely require a bond, placing the state in even greater debt. California, now in a $28 billion deficit, has already made drastic cuts to public services such as education and housing. Paying for tunnels would only make things worse. Rather than wasting $15 billion on new tunnels to shuttle more water to special interests, California needs to invest in rebuilding and upgrading our public water infrastructure, to the benefit of all. Perhaps with the 1982 defeat of the Peripheral Canal in mind, tunnel sponsors are looking for a way to approve their project and avoid a vote of the people. Will the people of the Bay Area again rise up to demand a vote of the public and protect our state’s environmental and fiscal health?

SAN FRANCISCO TOMORROW was founded in 1970 by neighborhood activists who joined together to fight the neighborhood zoning battles of the 1960s. A city-wide urban environmental organization, SFT is dedicated to promoting environmental quality, neighborhood livability and good government in San Francisco.