Final Draft of My Paper on Fixing the Delta

...is now under review at the Journal of Contemporary Water Research and Education.

You can read it here [PDF].

For those in a hurry, I consider four scenarios:

1. Business as usual/paralysis
2. Fortify the Delta
3. Peripheral Canal
4. Radical ecology

You can probably guess who is in favor of (2)-(4), but I say that politicians and bureaucrats are in favor of (1). Why? Because they get campaign contributions and wield power while the Delta's fate is unresolved. (In the same way as the military-industrial complex loved the Cold War.)

OTOH, I agree with Jonas Minton [pdf] that DWR is pushing the PC because it's captive to SWP interests. DWR, he says, gets 90 percent of its revenue from the SWP. Why bother with citizens or the legislature when your sugar daddy is paying the bills? (Recall that Minton was Deputy Director @ DWR until 2004.)

I also propose a "market" method of reconciling competing proposals for the Delta's future that relies less on lawsuits and bribing politicians and more on "put your money where your mouth is." It works this way:

1. Get costs of plans for plans (2)-(4).
2. People pledge money ("vote") for their preferred plan.
3. The "winning" choice is the one that gets the most votes after deducting the project's costs.
4. The winning plan is thus paid for, and remaining money pledges are then divided among the losers -- in proportion to their "net" votes.

Read Section 5 if you want to a longer version of this market solution, with my cost estimates for plans and the per capita transfers that would result. The numbers are big, but the numbers for radical ecology are VERY big.

Thanks to all of you who commented on earlier drafts AND all of you who have engaged in the Delta debate. I've learned a lot from you.

Bottom Line: The Delta will not be fixed unless the stakeholders negotiate directly. Stop arguing through your politicians; they just LOVE the attention and have no incentive to resolve the issue!