Editorial: Make the Case Don't build canal without public buy-in

A panel of the governor's top advisers recently recommended getting started on a peripheral canal to carry water around the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, even if it means going without approval from voters or the Legislature.

That would be a mistake.

Even if the legal opinion of the state's Attorney General is correct -- that the Department of Water Resources has the authority to build a canal -- and even if water users, not taxpayers, foot the bill, it would be foolish to circumvent the public or its legislative representatives.

Such a move would only enrage voters at a time when ever more of them are being persuaded of the value of such a canal.

The 1982 vote that rejected building a canal on the eastern edge of the Delta pitted Southern California, which needed the water, against Northern California, which controlled it. Under normal circumstances, the sheer number of voters in the southern part of the state might have carried the day.

But southern voters weren't united, while northern voters were. Some 90 percent of the latter rejected the canal, believing that, without it, water would not be shipped south.

It didn't turn out quite that way. Water continued flowing to the southland. Maybe not as much as would have passed through the originally proposed canal, but enough to make the Delta the state's key water source.

But the Delta isn't faring well these days. The 19th century levee system is crumbling. One good earthquake could prove catastrophic. Drought is reducing the amount of fresh water entering the system, allowing salt water to intrude further upstream, threatening drinking supplies.

There are concerns that global warming could cause a rise in sea levels that would mean further saltwater intrusion.

Fish populations -- one sign of the area's ecological health -- have been dropping, so much so that federal courts have intervened to protect endangered species, such as delta smelt. The pumps that push water south now must be turned off at key times and the amount of water taken from the delta, reduced -- a decision that also affects Solano County's ability to draw water from that source.

For the past two years, at least two state panels have been working to develop a comprehensive solution to these problems. If they have accomplished anything, it has been to get people throughout the state to recognize the severity of the situation.

Solving the problems is another matter. More than 200 agencies have a say in what goes on in the Delta, and no two interests are exactly alike. The most recent panel to weigh in, made up of members of the governor's Cabinet, supported most of the recommendations made by the Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force.

Those recommendations range from reducing per capita water use, to increasing water storage capacity, building a peripheral canal and shoring up some levees while allowing others to fail in an attempt to restore habitat while protecting water supplies.

The proposals are controversial, to be sure, but they're steeped in science and expertise.

And they are gaining traction. Just last week, The Nature Conservancy endorsed the concept of a peripheral canal, saying it could help restore the region's natural habitat.

Support for this project is building and the governor would be foolish to try an end run around the public or the Legislature by building a canal without their input.

Fixing the Delta will require everyone's buy-in. The governor should not jeopardize the entire project just to expedite one piece of it. Rather, he should work to educate the public and policymakers and persuade them of the merits of the entire plan.