A "temporary" barrier for the Delta?

Submitted: May 10, 2015
By: 
Badlands Journal editorial board

 

 

 The last of the permits was received earlier this week. In addition to a levee modification permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and a California Endangered Species Act permit from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, DWR sought and received a Temporary Urgency Change Permit renewal from the State Water Resources Control Board.

In addition, DWR must consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service on protections for Delta smelt, Chinook salmon and other listed species. All of these agencies have worked cooperatively on the Real-Time Drought Operations Management Team for the past year. -- California Department of Water Resources, May 8, 2015.

 

 

 

 

 

 

We have a problem with this "temporary barrier." We don't think --just because the executive branch of the state of California says so -- that this is a temporary dam, at least in the sense that it might be removed after a wet winter. We have this unpleasant opinion because the need the dam serves of preventing salt intrusion due to lack of upstream freshwater flow will be a permanent need once the peripheral tunnels are in place diverting Sacramento River water around the Delta to the existing north-south water supply canals near Tracy. So, we think "temporary" in this instance means "until something more permanent can be built at this site."

 

 

 

However, in the meantime, how are fish supposed to get around the barrier? The consultants' solution is that there are "less than significant impacts." Yet a 4-foot diameter pipe in a 750-foot rock dam doesn't sound on its face to mitigate the impact.  And, as people living on adjoining islands are noting, the impacts of increased flows in other channels do not seem to have been "significantly" examined. (see articles from Central Valley Business Times added on 5-11-15)

 

 

 

Where is the incentive at all for the state to remove this "temporary" dam once they get it established?  We can easily imagine that it will be strengthened and perhaps others like it will be built elsewhere in the Delta to complete the brackish pond once the greater part of the fresh water has been removed. The great underlying issue in state's peripheral-tunnels plan is how it squares with the state's own Fish & Game Code and the Public Trust Doctrine. 

 

  We also think it's entirely imaginable that the governor's rude remarks to the public may have been designed to incite people to anger against him and divert their attention from looking at what this "temporary" project or others in other Delta channels might become.

 

It looks like Jerry Brown's quest to complete his father's legacy of terribly environmentally damaging decisions regarding water includes dismissing Section 5937 of the state Fish & Game Code. -- blj

   

 

5-6-15

Capital Weekly

Brown: Water woes have deep roots

John Howard

http://capitolweekly.net/brown-roots-water-historic-caloiforniarologue/

Gov. Jerry Brown went back to the future Wednesday, saying water problems have confronted him, his father’s governorship and their predecessors as they sought ways to get northern water to the south.

Brown, who supports a plan to ship water through the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, said delta-linked proposals had been studied for decades, with perhaps a million personnel-hours spent looking at the plan.

“Until you put a million hours into it, shut up!” Brown, defending the proposal, told a gathering of hundreds of people at a statewide at a conference of the Association of California Water Agencies. Brown’s comment drew applause.

“For 50 years, people have been trying to figure out how do we deal with fish, how do we deal with the conveyance of water, what’s the most efficient way to do it.” he said. “The drought is very much a part of California’s past and future. We get droughts. We’ve had droughts before, but now we have droughts and higher temperatures and the fire season is so much longer than it used to be.”

The Brown administration has proposed a pair of tunnels through the delta to carry water southward to the California aqueduct, plus environmental  protection and restoration projects. The final plans have not yet been approved.

During his first terms governor in the 1970s and early 80s, Brown faced a historic drought and approved the multibillion-dollar Peripheral Canal to move water to central and southern California in a 42-mile canal along the edge of the delta east of San Francisco. The delta is the source of about half the state’s drinking water. Voters rejected the canal in a 1982 referendum.

His father, Pat Brown, served as state attorney general in the 50s, then served two terms as governor from 1959 to 1967.  Brown succeeded Goodwin Knight. All studied water delivery problems, Brown said.

“I’ve been hearing about water for most of my life and I’ve had the opportunity to deal with it as governor now for many years,” Brown, 77, told several hundred people at a conference of the Association of California Water Agencies. “These things are deja vu all over again. They are the same kinds of issues.”

 

   

5-8-15

California Department of Water Resources 

 

Contacts:

Doug Carlson, Information Officer

(916) 653-5114

Elizabeth Scott, Information Officer

On-site mobile number:  (916) 712-3904

https://bay167.mail.live.com/?tid=cmTbNcoK315BGE_wAhWtbrwA2&fid=flinbox   

Construction Begins on Emergency Drought Barrier in Delta

Temporary Barrier Will Deter Saltwater and Protect Delta Water Quality

 

SACRAMENTO — The Department of Water Resources (DWR) has begun construction on a temporary emergency drought barrier on West False River in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta after receipt of all necessary state and federal permits for the project. The barrier will help block saltwater from flowing into the central Delta and contaminating water supplies for millions of Californians during a fourth consecutive summer of drought.

 

“California’s four-year drought is one of the worst in our recorded history,” said DWR Director Mark Cowin. “With 2015 turning out to be warmer and drier than normal, water conservation is crucially important. The rock barrier in the Delta is an undesirable but necessary tool for freshwater conservation.” 

 

State and federal water and wildlife officials, working as a Real-Time Drought Operations Management Team, determined that the barrier will help deter the tidal push of saltwater from San Francisco Bay into the central Delta. The approximately 750-foot-wide barrier – essentially a pile of rocks with a 48-inch pipe embedded within it parallel to the river’s flow – will span the river but still allow limited water flow upstream and downstream, depending upon tides.

 

Keeping saltwater from the central Delta is a priority, as a large portion of the state’s fresh water for urban and agricultural use goes through this part of the Delta. The barrier would help prevent saltwater contamination of water supplies used by 25 million people who rely on the Delta-based federal and state water projects for at least some of their supplies, including residents of the Delta and Contra Costa, Alameda and Santa Clara counties.

 

Typically when saltwater threatens to encroach deeper into the Delta, water project operators repel it either by slowing the pumping of water from the Delta or increasing the amount of water flowing into the Delta from upstream reservoirs.

 

In this fourth year of drought, Delta pumping by the state and federal water projects is already negligible, and it takes three to five days for fresh water released from Lake Oroville or Shasta Lake to reach the Delta. An emergency barrier will provide an additional tool to help limit salinity intrusion should high winds or another unexpected event push salt farther west than expected this summer.

 

The emergency barrier also will help mitigate a worst-case circumstance this summer in which upstream reservoirs lack sufficient water to meet the minimum outflow requirements to limit Delta salinity intrusion.

 

The last of the permits was received earlier this week. In addition to a levee modification permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and a California Endangered Species Act permit from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, DWR sought and received a Temporary Urgency Change Permit renewal from the State Water Resources Control Board.

 

In addition, DWR must consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service on protections for Delta smelt, Chinook salmon and other listed species. All of these agencies have worked cooperatively on the Real-Time Drought Operations Management Team for the past year.

 

With permits in hand, DWR on May 4 authorized the Dutra Group of San Rafael to begin construction at the site, 0.4 miles from where West False River flows into the San Joaquin River. Installation will last several weeks using basketball-sized rocks transported by barge to the barrier’s location between Bradford and Jersey islands. The barrier will be removed by mid-November.

 

The trapezoid-shaped barrier, about 12 feet wide at the top, will block boat passage on West False River until its removal and will be marked by warning signs, lights and buoys. DWR notified marinas and individuals in the Delta about these restrictions. Alternative routes between the San Joaquin River and interior Delta, including Bethel Island marinas, are available (see attached map). 

 

Emergency barrier removal will finish no later than mid-November to avoid the traditional flood season and potential harm to migratory fish. Removal is expected to take 45 to 60 days.

 

Design, installation, monitoring, mitigation and removal are estimated to cost roughly $22 million; the cost for removal is set at $18 million. Costs are to be paid with a mix of funding from Proposition 50, a $3.4 billion water bond approved by voters in November 2002, and General Fund dollars.

 

Earlier Consideration of Emergency Barriers

 

The West False River site raises fewer concerns for threatened and endangered fish than other potential barrier sites considered by DWR. Last year, DWR studied the potential impacts of potential temporary barriers at three locations: Steamboat Slough, Sutter Slough and West False River. The analysis found anticipated impacts could be mitigated to a less-than-significant level.  DWR received and reviewed considerable public comments on the Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, available here. DWR is not pursuing installation of temporary emergency barriers at Sutter Slough or Steamboat Slough in 2015. 

 

The April 1, 2015 Executive Order by Governor Brown helped expedite installation of the West False River barrier in time to address emergency drought conditions this year. DWR last used emergency drought barriers to reduce salinity intrusion in 1976-77. DWR considered the installation of emergency drought barriers in 2014 but determined in late May of last year that they would not be needed, in part because February and March storms improved water supply conditions. Planning for future emergency drought barriers continued after last year’s decision, with a focus on West False River, Steamboat Slough and Sutter Slough.

 

Earlier this year, based on the input of Delta residents, the Department also considered the feasibility and effectiveness of barriers on Miner Slough in the western Delta and on Steamboat Slough downstream of its confluence with Sutter Slough.

 

Emergency drought barriers on Miner Slough and Steamboat Sloughs were eliminated from consideration because of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concerns about potential effects on threatened Delta smelt.

 

Current Drought Emergency

 

The three-year period from 2012 through 2014 was the driest three-year period on record in California, and 2015 opened with the driest January in the state’s recorded history. The Sierra Nevada snowpack typically peaks by April 1; this year, the snowpack was measured at five percent of historic average on April 1, the lowest measurement in recorded history.

 

Governor Brown declared a drought State of Emergency on January 17, 2014 and directed state officials to take all necessary actions to prepare for water shortages. The State Water Resources Control Board on March 17, 2015 announced new restrictions on water use, including limiting outdoor watering to two days per week and prohibiting lawn watering during rainfall and during the next two days. 

 

In April, Governor Brown directed the State Water Board to implement mandatory water reductions in cities and towns across California to reduce water usage by 25 percent. On May 5, the State Water Board established water conservation standards for communities throughout the state, ranging from a low of 4 percent to 36 percent as compared with a community’s 2013 water use and depending on per capita water use in each community.

 

To learn about all the actions the state has taken to manage our water system and cope with the impacts of the drought, visit Drought.CA.Gov.

 

Every Californian should take steps to conserve water. Find out how at SaveOurWater.com.

 

Conservation – the wise, sparing use of water – remains California’s most reliable drought management tool. Each individual act of conservation, such as letting the lawn go brown or replacing a washer in a faucet to stop a leak, makes a difference over time.

The last of the permits was received earlier this week. In addition to a levee modification permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and a California Endangered Species Act permit from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, DWR sought and received a Temporary Urgency Change Permit renewal from the State Water Resources Control Board.

 

In addition, DWR must consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service on protections for Delta smelt, Chinook salmon and other listed species. All of these agencies have worked cooperatively on the Real-Time Drought Operations Management Team for the past year. -- California Department of Water Resources, May 8, 2015.

 

We don't think the state does have the endangered species permits its needs, because those are federal rather state permits. Nor do we think --just because the executive branch of the state of California says so -- that this is a temporary dam. We have this unpleasant opinion because the need the dam serves -- preventing salt intrusion due to lack of upstream freshwater flow -- will be a permanent need once the peripheral tunnels are in place diverting Sacramento River water around the Delta to the existing north-south water supply canals near Tracy.

The federal, rather than the state, Environmental Protection Agency (initiated by Governor Jerry Brown during his first two terms 1975-83), has jurisdiction over the fish affected by this "temporary" dam and has already commented negatively last year on the tunnel project. Words like "consult" and "worked cooperatively" mean that great political pressure is being applied to the federal resource agencies with jurisdiction over the endangered species and habitat to approve the tunnels and allow the Delta to become a stagnant slough above such a "temporary" porous rock dam.

So, we don't see any incentive at all for the state to remove this "temporary" dam once they get it established. However, we can easily imagine that it will be strengthened and perhaps others like it will be built elsewhere in the Delta to complete the brackish pond once the greater part of the fresh water has been removed.

We also think it's entirely imaginable that the governor's rude remarks to the public, which contains members of families that were living on the Delta farming and fishing when the governor's grandfather operated a cigar store in San Francisco, may have been designed to incite people to anger against him and divert their attention from looking at what this "temporary" project or others in other Delta channels might become. -- blj    

 

5-6-15

Capital Weekly

Brown: Water woes have deep roots

John Howard

http://capitolweekly.net/brown-roots-water-historic-caloiforniarologue/

Gov. Jerry Brown went back to the future Wednesday, saying water problems have confronted him, his father’s governorship and their predecessors as they sought ways to get northern water to the south.

Brown, who supports a plan to ship water through the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, said delta-linked proposals had been studied for decades, with perhaps a million personnel-hours spent looking at the plan.

“Until you put a million hours into it, shut up!” Brown, defending the proposal, told a gathering of hundreds of people at a statewide at a conference of the Association of California Water Agencies. Brown’s comment drew applause.

“For 50 years, people have been trying to figure out how do we deal with fish, how do we deal with the conveyance of water, what’s the most efficient way to do it.” he said. “The drought is very much a part of California’s past and future. We get droughts. We’ve had droughts before, but now we have droughts and higher temperatures and the fire season is so much longer than it used to be.”

The Brown administration has proposed a pair of tunnels through the delta to carry water southward to the California aqueduct, plus environmental  protection and restoration projects. The final plans have not yet been approved.

During his first terms governor in the 1970s and early 80s, Brown faced a historic drought and approved the multibillion-dollar Peripheral Canal to move water to central and southern California in a 42-mile canal along the edge of the delta east of San Francisco. The delta is the source of about half the state’s drinking water. Voters rejected the canal in a 1982 referendum.

His father, Pat Brown, served as state attorney general in the 50s, then served two terms as governor from 1959 to 1967.  Brown succeeded Goodwin Knight. All studied water delivery problems, Brown said.

“I’ve been hearing about water for most of my life and I’ve had the opportunity to deal with it as governor now for many years,” Brown, 77, told several hundred people at a conference of the Association of California Water Agencies. “These things are deja vu all over again. They are the same kinds of issues.  

 

 

5-8-15

California Department of Water Resources 

 

Contacts:

Doug Carlson, Information Officer

(916) 653-5114

Elizabeth Scott, Information Officer

On-site mobile number:  (916) 712-3904

https://bay167.mail.live.com/?tid=cmTbNcoK315BGE_wAhWtbrwA2&fid=flinbox   

Construction Begins on Emergency Drought Barrier in Delta

Temporary Barrier Will Deter Saltwater and Protect Delta Water Quality

 

SACRAMENTO — The Department of Water Resources (DWR) has begun construction on a temporary emergency drought barrier on West False River in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta after receipt of all necessary state and federal permits for the project. The barrier will help block saltwater from flowing into the central Delta and contaminating water supplies for millions of Californians during a fourth consecutive summer of drought.

 

“California’s four-year drought is one of the worst in our recorded history,” said DWR Director Mark Cowin. “With 2015 turning out to be warmer and drier than normal, water conservation is crucially important. The rock barrier in the Delta is an undesirable but necessary tool for freshwater conservation.” 

 

State and federal water and wildlife officials, working as a Real-Time Drought Operations Management Team, determined that the barrier will help deter the tidal push of saltwater from San Francisco Bay into the central Delta. The approximately 750-foot-wide barrier – essentially a pile of rocks with a 48-inch pipe embedded within it parallel to the river’s flow – will span the river but still allow limited water flow upstream and downstream, depending upon tides.

 

Keeping saltwater from the central Delta is a priority, as a large portion of the state’s fresh water for urban and agricultural use goes through this part of the Delta. The barrier would help prevent saltwater contamination of water supplies used by 25 million people who rely on the Delta-based federal and state water projects for at least some of their supplies, including residents of the Delta and Contra Costa, Alameda and Santa Clara counties.

 

Typically when saltwater threatens to encroach deeper into the Delta, water project operators repel it either by slowing the pumping of water from the Delta or increasing the amount of water flowing into the Delta from upstream reservoirs.

 

In this fourth year of drought, Delta pumping by the state and federal water projects is already negligible, and it takes three to five days for fresh water released from Lake Oroville or Shasta Lake to reach the Delta. An emergency barrier will provide an additional tool to help limit salinity intrusion should high winds or another unexpected event push salt farther west than expected this summer.

 

The emergency barrier also will help mitigate a worst-case circumstance this summer in which upstream reservoirs lack sufficient water to meet the minimum outflow requirements to limit Delta salinity intrusion.

 

The last of the permits was received earlier this week. In addition to a levee modification permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and a California Endangered Species Act permit from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, DWR sought and received a Temporary Urgency Change Permit renewal from the State Water Resources Control Board.

 

In addition, DWR must consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service on protections for Delta smelt, Chinook salmon and other listed species. All of these agencies have worked cooperatively on the Real-Time Drought Operations Management Team for the past year.

 

With permits in hand, DWR on May 4 authorized the Dutra Group of San Rafael to begin construction at the site, 0.4 miles from where West False River flows into the San Joaquin River. Installation will last several weeks using basketball-sized rocks transported by barge to the barrier’s location between Bradford and Jersey islands. The barrier will be removed by mid-November.

 

The trapezoid-shaped barrier, about 12 feet wide at the top, will block boat passage on West False River until its removal and will be marked by warning signs, lights and buoys. DWR notified marinas and individuals in the Delta about these restrictions. Alternative routes between the San Joaquin River and interior Delta, including Bethel Island marinas, are available (see attached map). 

 

Emergency barrier removal will finish no later than mid-November to avoid the traditional flood season and potential harm to migratory fish. Removal is expected to take 45 to 60 days.

 

Design, installation, monitoring, mitigation and removal are estimated to cost roughly $22 million; the cost for removal is set at $18 million. Costs are to be paid with a mix of funding from Proposition 50, a $3.4 billion water bond approved by voters in November 2002, and General Fund dollars.

 

Earlier Consideration of Emergency Barriers

 

The West False River site raises fewer concerns for threatened and endangered fish than other potential barrier sites considered by DWR. Last year, DWR studied the potential impacts of potential temporary barriers at three locations: Steamboat Slough, Sutter Slough and West False River. The analysis found anticipated impacts could be mitigated to a less-than-significant level.  DWR received and reviewed considerable public comments on the Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, available here. DWR is not pursuing installation of temporary emergency barriers at Sutter Slough or Steamboat Slough in 2015. 

 

The April 1, 2015 Executive Order by Governor Brown helped expedite installation of the West False River barrier in time to address emergency drought conditions this year. DWR last used emergency drought barriers to reduce salinity intrusion in 1976-77. DWR considered the installation of emergency drought barriers in 2014 but determined in late May of last year that they would not be needed, in part because February and March storms improved water supply conditions. Planning for future emergency drought barriers continued after last year’s decision, with a focus on West False River, Steamboat Slough and Sutter Slough.

 

Earlier this year, based on the input of Delta residents, the Department also considered the feasibility and effectiveness of barriers on Miner Slough in the western Delta and on Steamboat Slough downstream of its confluence with Sutter Slough.

 

Emergency drought barriers on Miner Slough and Steamboat Sloughs were eliminated from consideration because of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concerns about potential effects on threatened Delta smelt.

 

Current Drought Emergency

 

The three-year period from 2012 through 2014 was the driest three-year period on record in California, and 2015 opened with the driest January in the state’s recorded history. The Sierra Nevada snowpack typically peaks by April 1; this year, the snowpack was measured at five percent of historic average on April 1, the lowest measurement in recorded history.

 

Governor Brown declared a drought State of Emergency on January 17, 2014 and directed state officials to take all necessary actions to prepare for water shortages. The State Water Resources Control Board on March 17, 2015 announced new restrictions on water use, including limiting outdoor watering to two days per week and prohibiting lawn watering during rainfall and during the next two days. 

 

In April, Governor Brown directed the State Water Board to implement mandatory water reductions in cities and towns across California to reduce water usage by 25 percent. On May 5, the State Water Board established water conservation standards for communities throughout the state, ranging from a low of 4 percent to 36 percent as compared with a community’s 2013 water use and depending on per capita water use in each community.

 

To learn about all the actions the state has taken to manage our water system and cope with the impacts of the drought, visit Drought.CA.Gov.

 

Every Californian should take steps to conserve water. Find out how at SaveOurWater.com.

 

Conservation – the wise, sparing use of water – remains California’s most reliable drought management tool. Each individual act of conservation, such as letting the lawn go brown or replacing a washer in a faucet to stop a leak, makes a difference over time.

 

Information on DWR’s website about emergency drought barriers is available here.

 

3-22-11

California Water Blog

  

Dammed fish? Call 5937.

Posted on  by 

cathrynlawrence

Peter Moyle, Professor of Fish Biology, UC Davis
Brian Gray, Professor of Law, UC Hastings School of Law
http://californiawaterblog.com/2011/03/22/dammed-fish-call-5937/
 

 

 
 
 

 

“The owner of any dam shall allow sufficient water at all times to pass over, around, or through the dam, to keep in good condition any fish that may be planted or exist below the dam.” California Fish and Game Code § 5937.

The simple language of Section 5937 makes it one of the clearest laws in California. Versions of this law have been around since the 19th century and it was repeatedly strengthened until the present version became law in 1957. Section 5937 seems to provide clear protection for California fishes below dams. So why are we still wrangling over issues of how dams affect fish more than 120 years after the first version of the Code was written?

The answer is simple. Dam owners had more clout than fishermen, so it was easiest for the Fish and Game Commission over the decades to just ignore the law, especially after being slapped down the few times that attempts were made to use it. Let’s look at the example of the San Joaquin River.

Historically, the San Joaquin and its tributaries supported the southernmost Chinook salmon run in North America—of perhaps 500,000 fish. By the 1940s, water development in the basin and overfishing had reduced the run to 40,000-50,000 fish. Then U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) built Friant Dam on the upper San Joaquin River to divert water for farming in the San Joaquin Valley and Tulare Basin.

The dam closure and diversion of water from the river channel dewatered the river’s middle reaches except for a small section just below the dam. Within a few years, the remnant run of spring Chinook salmon was extinct because there was not “sufficient water at all times” below the dam to keep the fish in “good condition”—a clear violation of the Fish and Game Code § 5937.

Attorney General Pat Brown declared in 1951 that Code § 5937 was advisory only and refused to allow the Department of Fish and Game to sue USBR to keep sufficient water in the river to support the fish. In addition to the extinction of salmon from the river, thousands of acres of riparian and wetland habitats were lost, and the river channel became reduced to a regional drain and flood channel, contributing to degradation of downstream water quality.

Finally, in 1988, a coalition of environmental groups, led by the Natural Resources Defense Council, filed a lawsuit challenging the right of USBR to continue operating Friant Dam without providing water for fish, especially salmon (Natural Resources Defense Council v. Rodgers).

 

 

 

 

 

 

After 18 years of squabbling in court, the parties reached a court-ordered settlement agreement in 2006 with two major goals: 1) restore and maintain fish populations in “good condition” in 150 miles of the San Joaquin River down to its confluence with the Merced River; and 2) minimize loss of water to long-term water contractors affected by the settlement. The federal and state governments appropriated about $400 million to restore lost river channels and provide infrastructure to reduce effects of the settlement on irrigators.

   

 

In his 41-page decision, U.S. District Judge Lawrence K. Karlton wrote that before the dam, "So many salmon migrated up the San Joaquin River during the spawning season that some people who lived near the present site of Friant Dam compared the noise to a waterfall. Some residents even said that they were kept awake nights by the myriad salmon heard nightly splashing over the sand bars in the River. A fisherman who lived downstream recalls that, in the 1940s, the salmon were still 'so thick that we could have pitch-forked them. One almost could have walked across the River on the backs of salmon when they were running.'"

The settlement established an ambitious schedule to restore Chinook salmon runs and reestablish other fish in the river. The first experimental restoration flows were released from the dam in 2010. Under the supervision of a restoration administrator, Rod Meade, major planning efforts are well under way for a range of activities, including determining the environmental flow regime, designing new diversions and channels, and choosing stocks of fish for reintroduction. The first salmon are scheduled for release by December 31, 2012.

The post-settlement process has been highly contentious, but progress toward settlement goals is being made. The settlement illustrates the potential of a lawsuit-disciplined consensus process to resolve important water management issues, as well as the ability of state laws and policies to “nudge” changes in federal water project operations.

However, the restoration efforts are now in peril because of a provision inserted by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Visalia) in the 359-page federal spending bill, approved by the House of Representatives in February 2011.  Rep. Nunes’ measure would essentially reverse current settlement processes by removing all funding for the San Joaquin settlement agreement. The fate of this measure within the spending bill remains to be seen.  Ironically, even if Rep. Nunes’ measure is successful, it is possible that the legal agreement could still result in the release of water from Friant Dam for salmon, only without the protection for farms the funds would buy.

Section 5937 is an old, tested, and clearly written state law that applies to all dams in the state unless they are specifically exempted.  In the San Joaquin case, water users got a free pass from the law’s enforcement for over 60 years. By signing the settlement agreement, the Bureau of Reclamation, the participating water districts, and the farmers they represent all recognized that it was finally time to live within the requirements of the law. Water will flow down the San Joaquin again one way or another, creating a living stream for fish, wildlife and people to enjoy. Once everyone in the valley gets used to the idea of a living river in their backyard, most will wonder why it took so long to get the water flowing again.

Fish and Game Code § 5937 is a powerful fish and stream protection law and will likely be increasingly used to help reconcile human activities with protection of fish and their ecosystems.  Indeed, application of § 5937 to achieve ecosystem reconciliation might allow at-risk fish species to become abundant enough to avoid being listed as endangered species, or even to be delisted, through careful management of regulated systems where restoration to more ‘pristine’ conditions is an unrealistic goal.

For a more thorough discussion of the concept of reconciliation vs. restoration, see boxes 1.3 and 9.1 in the recently released book Managing California’s Waters: From Conflict to Reconciliation, by the Public Policy Institute of California. (Download free as a pdf or purchase in paper or e-reader formats from amazon.com.)

KQED radio’s Forum show on February 18 focused on Delta issues and discussed Congressman Nunes’ proposal in the House to budget to block Endangered Species Act protections for the Bay-Delta.

References and Further Reading:

Baiocchi, J. C. (1980), “Use it or lose it: California Fish and Game Code 5937 and instream fishery uses,” U. C. Davis Law Review 14:431-460.

Firpo, R. (2005),  “The Plain “Dam!” Language of Fish & Game Code Section 5937: How California’s Clearest Statute Has Been Diverted From Its Legislative Mandate,” Hastings W.-N.W. Journal of Environmental Law and Policy, vol. 11, issue 2, pp. 101-120.

Marchetti, M. P., and P. B. Moyle (2001), “Effects of flow regime on fish assemblages in a regulated California stream,” Ecological Applications 11:530-539.

Matthews, N. (2007), “Rewatering the San Joaquin River: A summary of the Friant Dam litigation,” Ecology Law Quarterly 34:1109-1135.

Moyle, P. B. (2002), Inland Fishes of California. Revised and expanded. Berkeley: University of California Press. 502 pp.

Moyle, P. B., M. P. Marchetti, J. Baldrige, and T. L. Taylor (1998,) “Fish health and diversity: justifying flows for a California stream,” Fisheries (Bethesda) 23(7): 6-15.

Palmer, T. (2010), Rivers of California: natures lifelines in the Golden State, Berkeley: Heyday Books, 186 pp.

Rose, G. (2000), The San Joaquin: A River Betrayed, Clovis Ca: Quill Driver Books. 150 pp.

Schmitt, M. (2010), Workshop presentation to the State Water Resources Control Board, Natural Resources Defense Council.

Warner, G. (1991), “Remember the San Joaquin,” pages 61-69 in A. Lufkin, editor.California’s salmon and steelhead: struggle for an imperiled resource, University of California Press, Berkeley.

Yoshiyama, R. M., E. R. Gerstung, F. W. Fisher and P. B. Moyle (2000), “Chinook salmon in California’s Central Valley: an assessment,” Fisheries 25(2):6-20.

 

 

 

 

5-8-19

Central Valley Business Times

Cattle company owner questions validity of False River barrier 
by Gene Beley, CVBT Delta Correspondent

BRADFORD ISLAND 
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
<!--[endif]-->

http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=28300

This barrier will allow limited water flow upstream and downstream, depending upon tides, according to the California Department of Water Resources.

California Department of Water Resources began installing a salt water barrier on False River the week of May 4, 2015 from Gene Beley onVimeo.

Construction began earlier this week and DWR had scheduled a media tour Friday for state credentialed media on the Jersey Island side. The last time emergency drought barriers were utilized to reduce salinity in the Delta was 1976-77.

The cost of this project is estimated at $40 million and DWR has promised to remove the False River barrier in November.

The barriers are located between Bradford Island and Jersey Islands an the San Joaquin River and Fisherman’s cut close to Frank’s Tract and Bethel Island. DWR.

But how necessary are the barriers? And will they work?

A landowner and cattle company owner on Bradford Island, Karen Cunningham, questions the validity of DWR’s purpose. She says there has not yet been any salinity problem around Bradford Island or her cows would be getting sick.

“I think they are doing it because they want to get the sheet piles into the levee and the permanent abutment in to have a big gate that they will hang in the next few years,” she says. “That will go along with the Three Mile Slough Gate. The DWR just wants the abutment. As long as they have the abutment installed, they can come along with the permanent gate and have that step already done.”

Thanks to Mrs. Cunningham, Central Valley Business Times got a sneak preview of the construction site Thursday. Small warning signs were posted at the entrance to False River to turn away boaters and jet skiers. Large barges were shuttling rock into the barrier site on both sides with cranes lifting basketball size rocks off the barges into the water. Two jet skiers claimed they did not see the small signs in the water closing the river that is considered a traditional short cut “freeway” for anyone going back and forth from east to west in the Delta.

“In about 2005 this whole barrier started out as a gate called Frank’s Tract Project when they were proposing two gates — one in Three Mile Slough and this one (False River),” Mrs. Cunningham told this reporter Thursday on her tour to the construction site. “At that time, they got shelved but I was told they would be back. After DWR first came out in 2005 with their proposal, we attended meeting after meeting to see what impacts would be to us, which are great, obviously.

“We’re worried about salt coming in and effecting our irrigation, where we draw the water for the cattle. One impact is whether the irrigation water is going to be tainted with salt. DWR won’t give us a baseline to establish whether the salt is there or not.

“Increased flows around Bradford Island are obviously going to increase. DWR told us it will be borderline dangerous to boaters when the project was proposed in 2005 and 2006,” she said.

Mrs. Cunningham said her other properties have boat docks. “DWR has told all boaters to use Fisherman’s Cut as an alternate route. Fisherman’s Cut is barely 200’ wide in some spots. There’s no speed control there. It sounds like a risky water disaster to me,” she said.

Mrs. Cunningham said False River is the main waterway for boaters coming in from San Francisco who want to take a tour into the Delta. “Everybody uses it to get into the Delta quickly instead of seven extra miles around Bradford Island and down a very narrow, dangerous channel. I think this will cut off the economy of Bethel Island who depend on boaters going by there. Now boaters will bypass all the way around Webb Tract and skip Bethel Island entirely. It is a sad, sad thing,” she said.

A DWR employee showed this reporter, our Bradford Island host, and two others how they were building a barrier to keep out certain native protected species snakes that live in Delta levee areas. Two low profile barriers stretched across the road to the levee for this purpose.

DWR’s official information on its website

“In this fourth year of drought, Delta pumping by the state and federal water projects is already negligible,” DWR’s website information claims. “It takes three to five days for fresh water released from Lake Oroville or Shasta Lake to reach the Delta. An emergency barrier would provide an additional tool to help limit salinity intrusion prior to arrival of fresh water from upstream reservoirs.

“Other proposed barriers on Steamboat Slough and Sutter Slough have been cancelled for this year. However, the Governor’s Executive Order for installing barriers declared more barriers can be installed if necessary for public safety. Other salinity drought barriers have also been considered for Miner Slough in the Western Delta.”

Mrs. Cunningham and her husband, Smith Cunningham, worry about the faster currents that will now be channeled by their home’s boat dock on Fisherman’s Cut. She said fast boaters last summer caused such bad waves that it would rip the ropes from their boat tied to the dock. This channel is relatively narrow and boat traffic tends to be too fast even before this change.

Installation of the barriers may provide an easy testing method to test any differences of salinity on both sides of the barrier to know how valid this expensive action is for the California water management plan.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5-10-15

Bethel Island leader says river barrier could destroy his town’s economy 
by Gene Beley, CVBT Delta Correspondent

BETHEL ISLAND 
May 10, 2015 9:01pm

   http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=28305


Tony Berzinas, president of the Bethel Island Municipal Improvement District Board, said the new West False River barrier the state Department of Water Resources is building threatens his community’s safety and economics.

There will be increased flows that will take place to the north of Bethel Island on Fisherman’s Cut slough caused by the massive rock dam, he said...

 

“When this [West False River] barrier is in place the DWR has estimated the increased flows will be at least five times the norm. That particular Fisherman’s Cut slough slams into the weakest part of our levee identified by both DWR and the Coast Guard as Horseshoe Bend. It is already a scoured portion of the levee and it is very weak,” Mr. Berzinas said.

“We have 2,500 permanent residents residing on Bethel Island plus in the summer it grows the population to about 6,000. If we lose that portion of the levee, we lose the island.”

And that, he said, nullifies any good the barrier might be to blocking salt water from getting further into the California Delta.

“On top of that, it also punches back pressure on the San Joaquin River and forces water down the slough called Dutch slough. That parallels False River. It will also increase the flows up Dutch Slough where they haven ‘t even estimated those increases. That will also cause scouring and problems on Dutch Slough,” said Mr. Berzinas.

He also points to DWR estimates showing the water levels around all the islands behind the barrier to increase anywhere from 12 percent to 40 percent. “This means all year long our levees are going to be super saturated. We count on the dry periods for doing observation, repairs and actual maintenance. Those will be minimized if not eliminated,” the levee district executive said.

“Now we’ve got a three-fold health and safety problem that will impact life, health and safety on Bethel Island,” he said.

The parallel to Route 66

Mr. Berzinas compares the blockage of West False River to when Route 66 was bypassed or paved over by the interstate highway system and small businesses along the old Route 66 died. “The economy on our island relies on the boat river traffic down False River to come into our northern economic areas like the Rusty Porthole, Bethel Harbor, Sugar Barge, and all the other inlets and fishing outlets along the island,” said Mr. Berzinas.

He said the way DWR has put the barrier in place forces boaters to go down the San Joaquin River and fears they won’t take the effort now to go out of their way to visit Bethel Island’s “sawdust” type bars like the Rusty Porthole that have made the Delta waterfront restaurant-bars famous.

He’s not alone in his worries.

"At the Delta Chambers we are extremely concerned about the blockage of False River,” said Bill Wells, executive director of the California Delta Chambers and Visitor's Bureau. “We are expecting a huge influx of boaters this year from lakes and reservoirs that don't have enough water for boating. These people will rely on maps and NOAA charts that do not show the barrier, GPS navigation devices likewise will not show the barrier. Hopefully the warning signs and buoys will be enough to stop boaters. It will be a tragedy if a family of boaters hits the barrier at high speed.”

The state fields a special team

At a DWR press briefing held for credentialed media only on the Jersey Island side of the barrier construction zone on Thursday, Bill Coyle, California’s drought manager, said in 2014 a new management team comprised of the highest level policy makers was formed. It is called Real Time Drought Operations Management Team (RTDOT) and meets every Monday at 4 p.m.

 

“This team has been brought together so that we can really look at our current drought conditions and decided how to manage them on our limited water resources. We look at both our urban, agricultural and environmental resources’ needs through this RTDOT to help us make policy calls and decisions—and look for opportunities to have some synergy to get multiple benefits from some of the decisions we’ve been making,” he explains.

Paul Marshall, the Delta office chief, said presently there is no salinity in West False River and the $40 million project is a preventive measure for the continuing drought.

“The emergency barrier is not something we take lightly,” said Mr. Coyle. It is a significant action and in some cases one of the huge tolls we have when water resources get this tight.” He said the low snow pack and reservoir conditions were at a point this year where the RTDOT had to make the decision to begin installing the barrier this past week. They hope to finish it by the first week in June.

“We’ve started construction on the West False River barrier as one of the ways to try and ensure that the Delta water quality remains fresh and manage the salt water intrusion that we get from the bay and ocean,” he said.

It’s temporary, says the state. T-e-m-p-o-r-a-r-y

“This measure is a temporary barrier,” Mr. Coyle promised repeatedly. “It is designed to be removed (in November). That is a critical part of our overall management of our water project and in-Delta water quality and protection of environmental resources.”

A reporter from KPIX-TV in San Francisco asked Mr. Coyle after the initial press briefing why critics are protesting the barrier.

“I think some people think it is more than what it is,” Mr. Coyle replied. “This is a temporary barrier. The governor is absolutely committed to this is temporary. We have funding in place for the install and to remove it later in November. We are working with our permitting agencies to make sure it is all put back together the way it was designed. We may delay pulling out the sheet piles because of the potential for a five or six year drought. Eventually, we will come back and pull out the sheet piles.”

CVBT asked Mr. Coyle and Paul Marshall, DWR chief of the bay Delta office during the press briefing if there was any chance the sheet piles will be left in to make it easier to install a permanent gate later? They replied that definitely is not the case and kept repeating the barrier is temporary.

“This is about an emergency action trying to make sure we protect the Delta resources. Let’s say you have a 50-year drought and you don’t have the hydrologic resources to keep the Delta clean. You fill up this part” — as he pointed to a large map of the area— “you won’t get this clean. This will stay salty until you have a huge hydrologic event like a flood. Once it is salty, you can’t desalt it. That means you have local and statewide impacts.”

Mr. Coyle said when he’s not dealing with droughts; he deals with floods and earthquakes. “These kind of barriers are important to protect the Delta resources in a big earthquake. But we would be doing it in multiple places to prevent salt water going back and forth during the earthquake when you have damage to one or more of the levees.

He said originally the state planned three barriers — the other two at Sutter and Steamboat sloughs. “Through the permitting process the concern was those were in the vicinity of Delta smelt habitat. Through the RTDOT and regulatory agencies, we took those off the table and went with just this one at False River. We have water quality monitoring on both sides. We have fish monitoring. The idea is to have this as transparent as possible. We know what’s going on. No one is surprised by anything. We all will do what we said we were going to do.”

If you’re not a member, you can’t get in

Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Restore the Delta, tried to attend the DWR media event, but was turned away because she lacked a state press credential. The California Highway Patrol even searched her car, she said, but she was allowed to stay on the other side of the gate where a DWR employee ushered in credentialed press members through a gate with a CHP guard.

.

Last week Gov. Edmund Brown Jr. told critics of his twin tunnels plan to “shut up” if they hadn’t invested one million man-hours in studying the water problems of California. Ms. Barrigan-Parilla said, “We refuse to shut up” and added, “It isn’t that we are just protesting the False River Barrier.”

“The problem is the DWR has mismanaged this system early in the drought. They didn’t hold on to enough water to allow flows to keep the system healthy to manage the estuary as a whole. So what we have happening now is the installation of what they call a drought barrier. We think it is really to protect water for exports during the drought,” she said. “The sad part is it’s going to have a negative impact on Bethel Island, Bradford Island, and communities on this end of the Delta. What we resent is the system has to be tinkered with island by island because they do not manage the estuary properly as a whole with fresh water flows.”

Ms. Barrigan-Parilla said another reason she was at the construction site on Jersey Island “is the pounding and shaking of the levee and excavation of a levee. If levees are as fragile as the DWR claims, why aren’t things crumbling out here as they shake that levee during construction of this project? That’s because levees are in better shape than they have been historically for 30 years of good levee work done,” she said.

“However, that’s not to say they are perfect. We do believe there are needed upgrades. It makes much more sense if you look at the infrastructure, the gas lines, utilities, electricity, water pipe lines, railroads, highways, it makes much more sense to upgrade those levees and water supply for California,” she said. “The twin tunnels won’t solve those problems. If the tunnels are built, we still have millions of people in harms way without adequate levee protection. DWR is not planning for what the impacts will be during 10 years of construction with trucks coming down these levee roads constantly shaking levees and doing excavation work. There is no flood protection component for construction of the Delta tunnels. Governor Brown is picking winners and losers in California. He’s pushed the project to favor large agriculture business growers on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. He’s not concerned about protecting Delta communities, fisheries or the estuary.”

The "This Old Levee Hour"

“What you are seeing is modifications to the Delta levee here on Jersey Island,” said Mr. Marshall at the press conference. “The modifications started last year. We put this stability berm on this portion of the levee in preparation for this type of work. In addition we are doing some emergency rock stabilization out in the river. That’s what you see with the clamshell. They are driving sheet piles down the middle of the levee. The sheet pile is really a cutoff wall to help stabilize the levee that much more during this whole process.

"We will be dumping rock and working out to some sheet pile walls that will be teeing into the center of the levee. That will probably be done by this weekend. We will continue to construct this barrier until about June 30. It will take 150,000 tons of rock to create the barrier. We will start the deconstruction process in October and pull out the rock portion of this barrier by Nov. 15.

 

 

 

 

8-6-13

SALON.COM

“The definition of insanity” is the most overused cliché of all time

Attention all writers! You're all writing the same thing over and over again. Now that's insanity

DANIEL D'ADDARIO  Follow

http://www.salon.com/2013/08/06/the_definition_of_insanity_is_the_most_overused_cliche_of_all_time/

It’s often said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Very, very, very often said.

The old saw, which has been most commonly attributed to Albert Einstein by folks who tend to imply he may not have said it (it’s not actually attributed anywhere), comes up again and again in journalism. Not least because it’s a favored phrase of the Clintons, it’s most commonly used to describe political news — after all, by the third time a minority party in Congress tries unsuccessfully to obstruct a bill, there aren’t very many new things to say about it, and that column won’t write itself.

Even so, journalists for the publications we skimmed through (and yes, Salon is hardlyimmune) ought to heed their own adage. No matter how many times, over and over, the same aphorism crops up, it’s not going to suddenly become perceptive.

ADVERTISEMENT

“If the definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting a different result, then House Republicans might look potty.” –”Why Republicans Can’t Relax,” Slate, Aug. 2, 2013

“On the Democratic side, Rep. John Dingell (Mich.) responded by saying, ‘Einstein observed that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again with the full expectation that the results are going to be different.’ Actually, the quote is probably apocryphal — but Einstein didn’t live to see the 113th Congress.” –”On Obamacare, Republicans Test the Limits of Insanity,” the Washington Post, July 17, 2013

“They say that the essence of futility is to keep doing the same thing while expecting a different result. But is that what key government forecasters are doing in determining their outlook for the economy?” –”Forecasters Keep Thinking There’s a Recovery Just Around the Corner. They’re Always Wrong,” the Washington Post, Feb. 19, 2013

“Are you familiar with the definition of insanity? It’s doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Jackpot. A man agrees to let Palma come over tomorrow evening. He’s been trying to sell his house for $375,000. If Palma has his way, it will be cheaper.” –”It’s Their Default Position,” the Los Angeles Times, Feb. 13, 2013

“They say the definition of insanity is repeating the same action, and expecting a different result. By that measure, Congress has lost its mind.” –”Over the Cliff and Back,” the New York Times, Jan. 4, 2013

“If doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is a definition of insanity, expecting people whom we overwhelmingly rewarded for acting in one manner to change that behavior is more than a bit naïve, as any parent knows or finds out quickly.” –”A Lesson in Accountability as U.S. Goes Over Fiscal Cliff,” the Huffington Post, Jan. 1, 2013

“Increasing the debt ceiling should be part of any year-end deal. After all, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result.”–”Fiscal-Cliff Deal Done Now,” the Daily Beast, Dec. 19, 2012

“They say doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is a definition of crazy. But Ann [Coulter] and her many, many imitators and predecessors made life easier for Obama.” –”The Five People Who Won the Election for Obama,” Slate, Nov. 9, 2012

“George Joseph must think that the old saw defining insanity as doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result doesn’t apply to him — or at least that it’s amenable to tweaking.” –”Prop. 33 is Billionaire’s Attempt to Manipulate Public Policy,” the Los Angeles Times, Oct. 21, 2012

“The Definition of Insanity… Is doing the same thing over and over again …” –”The Definition of Insanity,” the New York Times, Aug. 31, 2012

“Insanity is doing something over and over, but expecting a different result. That pretty well describes campaign finance reform in America.” –”The Only Way to Fix Campaign-Finance Regulation Is to Destroy It,” the Atlantic, July 30, 2012

“Holding that vote once makes sense. Republicans had promised that much during the 2010 campaign. But 33 times? If doing the same thing twice and expecting a different result makes you insane, what does doing the same thing 33 times and expecting a different result make you?” –”14 Reasons Why This Is the Worst Congress Ever,” the Washington Post, July 13, 2012

“‘The definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing over and over, and then expecting different results,’ Einstein famously proclaimed. In Cheerful In 3 ½ Months, spotted last week at the NY Art Book Fair, author Gerard Jansen invites you to do precisely the opposite…” –”Exploring Your Creative Side: 7 Playful Activity Books for Adults,” the Atlantic, Oct. 4, 2011

“If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result, then these polarized picks show just how crazy Congress has gotten in its echo-chamber isolation.” –”Gang of 6′s Supercommittee Diss,” the Daily Beast, Aug. 10, 2011

“First of all, Einstein had it wrong. Not his theory of relativity. That seems to be holding up quite well (not that I would know). But he’s also the guy who said that the definition of insanity was doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Too often, I think that’s really the definition of small business.”–”Insanity Redefined,” the New York Times, July 21, 2011

“Not on the table are the sorts of investments in infrastructure or education that would make us competitive over the longer term. It sounds exactly like what we have just done for 30 years. As Albert Einstein said, insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.” –”America Undone,” Slate, Nov. 15, 2010

“Do you think my references to insanity are too much? I use them deliberately. Einstein said, ‘The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.’ Have another look at Devine’s and Broder’s pieces, and tell me these men are other than by definition insane.” –”The Definition of Insanity,” the Huffington Post, Nov. 1, 2010

“Someone wise once said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Under that definition, Americans must be pretty crazy.” –”Americans Think Stimulus Didn’t Work, Want More,” the Atlantic, June 22, 2010

“In the wake of their health care defeat, Republicans in Washington would be wise to remember one famous definition of insanity as repeating the same behavior again and again but expecting different results.” –”Senate Republicans Want Another Benefits Filibuster?,” Time, March 26, 2010

“I’ve been thinking recently about the definition of insanity attributed to Albert Einstein: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. The way I was treating obesity definitely qualified as insane.” –”Strong Medicine,”Newsweek, March 13, 2010

“Albert Einstein had an unkind label for those who do the same thing over and over again expecting a different result. Yet that has been the strategy of McConnell, and congressional Republicans generally, as they have labored over the past several months to defeat any health-care plan proposed by the White House and congressional Democrats.” –”A Speech Stuck on ‘Repeat,’” the Washington Post, Oct. 22, 2009

“It’s often said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing while expecting a different result. Yet here we are again, talking about another stimulus bill that somehow would produce a result different from the first.” –”Billions More of the Same Isn’t a Solution,” Politico, July 16, 2009

“The definition of insanity is repeating the same actions over and over again and expecting different results. What exactly do the Young Republicans expect to achieve by electing a 38-year-old woman who thinks racial epithets are acceptable? Also, did I mention that she’s 38?” –”Do NOT Elect a Racist,” the Daily Beast, July 10, 2009

“Insanity has been defined as doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. I’ve been hearing about the advent of a new “transformational” politics ever since I reached voting age (which is longer ago than I care to remember).” –”The Age of Reagan,” Slate, June 3, 2008

“One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result. But what do you call it if you do the same thing over and over, and keep achieving different results? Is that sanity?” –”Is Anybody Necessary?,” the New York Times, Jan. 14, 2006

“Benjamin Franklin once remarked that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.” –”Sony Gets Caught With Slipped Discs,” Newsweek, Dec. 4, 2005

“One definition of insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly, expecting a different result. Start by planting at the right time of year.” –”Garden Q.&A.,” the New York Times, April 4, 2002

 

<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
<!--[endif]-->

 

 

 

 

| »

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Copy the characters (respecting upper/lower case) from the image.

To manage site Login