Are the words "peripheral canal" moving back into the politically correct lexicon of water affairs in California? After the thumping the idea got from voters in 1982, the phrase has rarely been uttered.
But times change, and although the same environmentalists who opposed the canal then are likely to fight it anew, there are other dynamics at work. One is the continued deterioration of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. Another is the fact that the Bay Area, once a bastion of anti-canal sentiment, is much more affected by what happens in the Delta than before. And growth has pushed demand for water well above what it was in the 1980s.
So don't be surprised if an updated version of the classic North-South water wars surfaces in earnest. Although this time, the sides may look a little different, and the outcome could change, too.
This comment is neither support nor opposition to the proposed
"peripheral canal". I don't even remember any of the detail such as where, when, why. But the root of all evil is us. Too many of us for the available resources in this semi-arid region.
Let the developers go and develop the Gobi Desert. I am sure they could
use more people, more supermarkets and what have you.
I hope the editors stay on this issue like watchdogs. The occasional Lloyd Carter letter aint enough.
Speaking of Lloyd Carter, is there any chance of persuading him to write a regular column on water issues? We need more well-informed perspectives like his around here.
yeah, a "cadillac desert" revisitation, serialized.