For many years, the California Department of Water Resources has claimed the purpose of the Delta Tunnel is to “provide, restore and protect the reliability of State Water Project (SWP) water deliveries,” as noted in the Environmental Impact Statement for the Delta Conveyance Project (DC) (static1.squarespace.com/…)
But testimony by a Department of Water Resources engineer reveals that the Delta Tunnel, if built, would increase water deliveries to state water contractors by 22 percent.
On April 3, the latest Delta Conveyance Project update from the Department of Water Resources claimed that it is a “myth” that it intends to increase increase water exports from current levels.
Myth: DWR intends to increase deliveries through the Delta from current levels, even during droughts.
Fact: What this myth conveniently omits is that the State Water Project is facing a reduction in delivery capability and supply reliability by as much as 23% over the next 20 years. We will lose much more over the life of the system due to climate change, sea level rise, and wild swings in precipitation patterns. The purpose of the Delta Conveyance Project is to minimize these future losses and protect reliability for 27 million Californians. State Water Project deliveries have declined, and will continue to decline, yet with the DCP the declines will be lessened and all Delta water quality and fishery protections will continue to be sustained. To call this an “increase” is simply untrue and misleading. Additional Myths/Facts can be found here.
However, written testimony from a Department of Water Resources engineer submitted to a State Water Resources Control Board hearing on the DCP tells a much different story. His testimony reveals that the project will indeed maximize deliveries from the Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta, “accelerating the death spiral of the already beleaguered estuary,” according to an analysis by the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN).
The testimony of DWR engineer Amardeep Singh states that the DCP will increase water deliveries from the Delta by 22%.
“DCP operation will not decrease water supply for Central Valley Project (CVP) contractors and will increase water supply for SWP Table A contractors by 22 percent,” he states on page 2 of his testimony.
Then on page 20 of his testimony, Singh again clearly states, “Finally, DCP operation will not decrease water supply for CVP contractors and will increase water supply for SWP Table A contractors by 22 percent.”
Moreover, during drought periods when fish are already strained by low flows and high temperatures, the DCP would increase deliveries by 24%: static1.squarespace.com/...
“This project is a blatant attempt to maximize exports from the Delta for the benefit of large development and agricultural interests in Southern California and Kern County,” said Max Gomberg, a California Water Impact Network board member and Senior Policy Advisor. “Delta communities, tribes, local farmers and our iconic salmon are already suffering from inadequate freshwater flows. Jacking up exports by 22% would be the estuary’s death knell.”
Gomberg characterized the DCP as a classic “bait and switch.”
“Governor Newsom and his lieutenants have touted the DCP as necessary to reduce risk to water delivery infrastructure, and that message taps into our fears about water scarcity,” Gomberg said. “But what the project is really about is ensuring the SWP will deliver more – much more – water. And as that fact and the tremendous ratepayer burden becomes clear, opposition to the Delta Tunnel will grow.”
“The Newsom administration is well aware that there are more cost-effective ways to ensure water supply reliability than building a $20+ billion tunnel,” said Gomberg. “But those options do not line the pockets of corporate agriculture and suburban sprawl developers and produce campaign contributions.”
State Water Resources Control Board hearings on the Delta Tunnel began in April and are expected to run through the summer months. The California Water Impact Network and an array of other organizations will provide testimony in opposition to the project
Opponents of the 45-mile long tunnel say it would dramatically raise water rates, further degrade the Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta, result in the extinction of Central Valley salmon and Delta fish populations, and foreclose investments in more sustainable options, including conservation, recycled water, and retirement of marginal agricultural land,
Court blocks Delta Tunnel drilling once again
Then in the latest legal battle in the fight to stop the Delta Tunnel, a Sacramento judge rejected another attempt by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) to lift an injunction that blocks DWR from conducting geotechnical investigations that DWR claims are essential to planning for the proposed Delta Conveyance Project (DCP).
“The court issued the injunction in June 2024 based on DWR’s admission that it had not complied with the 2009 Delta Reform Act as required by law,” according to a press release from Restore the Delta. “DWR later sought an order modifying the injunction to allow it to proceed with a smaller subset of the planned geotechnical work. The court denied that request in 2024.”
“DWR appealed, and that appeal is pending. DWR also attempted to demonstrate Delta Reform Act compliance by certifying a portion of the geotechnical work in a submission to the Delta Stewardship Council (DSC). That effort resulted in an opinion from the DSC to the effect that proceeding with the proposed work would not violate the Delta Reform Act,” the group stated.
Armed with the DSC’s opinion, DWR returned to the Superior Court in March 2025, again requesting that the injunction be modified or dissolved to allow drilling and other exploratory activities to proceed in the Delta.
The petitioners – the San Francisco Baykeeper, Restore the Delta, Delta counties and agencies, among others – vigorously opposed DWR’s motion.
On April 9, Sacramento Superior Court Judge Stephen Acquisto denied DWR’s request, explaining:
"[DWR] is now asking again for permission to proceed with some of the geotechnical work even though it has not yet certified the DCP. Proceeding in this manner would conflict with the terms of the preliminary injunction, as well as the legal analysis on which it is premised."
The court declined to stay its injunction order based on reconsideration of the same issues now pending before the Court of Appeal, and it underscored DWR’s failure to comply with the Delta Reform Act:
"[A]lthough the geotechnical work will yield additional data that will provide further specificity to the project, [DWR] has not satisfactorily explained why any additional data and specificity is required to satisfy Delta Reform Act standard. . . . Given all the data, studies, explanations, and project specifications contained in the EIR, it would appear that [DWR] should already have the means to comply with injunction and proceed with the geotechnical work anytime it chooses by self-certifying the DCP as a whole."
Attorneys Osha Meserve and Tom Keeling, who represent the Counties of San Joaquin, Contra Costa, Yolo, and Solano, among other agencies, slammed DWR’s failure to obey the law.
“DWR’s obstinate refusal to comply with California law and its squandering of public resources to avoid compliance with the injunction are unconscionable,” said Meserve and Keeling. “Rather than attempting to resuscitate this zombie project, an ill-fated 19th-century approach to a 21st-century crisis in the Delta, DWR should pursue rational, cost-efficient and readily available solutions. Californians deserve much better that this environmentally destructive, legally deficient, and economically untenable tunnel project.”
The news of the court decision comes as Valley salmon and Delta fish populations are now in their worst crisis-ever, due to massive water exports to corporate agribusiness and Southern California water agencies, combined with other factors including pollution, drought and the impacts of climate change.
Fish advocates say increased water exports from the Sacramento River through the construction of the Delta Conveyance Project would only hasten the extinction of Sacramento River fall, winter and spring-run Chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead, Delta and longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail, green sturgeon and other fish species.
On April 15, the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) recommended a complete closure of California’s commercial salmon fisheries for the third year in a row. It also recommended an extremely limited ocean recreational fishing season.
The data from the PFMC documents the abysmal situation that Sacramento River Chinook salmon, once the driver of the West Coast salmon fishery, are now in.
Between 1996-2005 the average return for fall-run Chinook on the mainstem Sacramento River was 79,841 spawning salmon. In 2023 that number fell drastically to only 3,560 salmon – a 95% decline, according to an analysis by the Golden State Salmon Association.
Spring-run Chinook have also experienced a staggering 95% decline due to a lack of cold water flows in Central Valley salmon rivers. The average wild and hatchery spring-run return plummeted from 28,238 fish in 2021 to just 1,231 salmon in 2023.
The Delta Conveyance Project features a 45-mile long tunnel that would take water from the Sacramento River at Hood, bypassing the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and taking water to Bethany Reservoir, then to the California Aqueduct. The project would cost over $20 billion to build.
Polling Data reveals voters support local solutions over tunnel
Then on April 4, Restore the Delta released new polling data on California voters' attitudes on the Delta Conveyance Project finding that California voters overwhelmingly favor investing in affordable and sustainable local water solutions over the Delta Tunnel.
“As a result of devastating climate change-fueled events over the past decade, Californians are particularly concerned about the risk of fires and droughts, and they see local water supplies as the best way to prepare for future disasters,” the group wrote in a press statement.
“With fish populations declining and ceremonial practices being impacted by polluted waters, Tribes are already struggling to maintain their livelihoods and cultural identity,” said Malissa Tayaba, Vice Chair of the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians. “The Delta Tunnel Project would further devastate the environment and Tribal communities that have depended on the Delta since time immemorial.”
“These polling results are a clear mandate from voters across the state,” stated Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta. “Californians want water solutions that protect the environment, are economically feasible, and prepare us for the challenges of climate change. The Delta Tunnel simply does not meet those needs and would devastate local Delta communities and ecosystems.”
Key findings from the polling include the following:
-
A significant majority of voters (62%) favor investing in local water infrastructure over the Delta Tunnel project (24%).
-
After hearing arguments for and against the Tunnel, 58% of voters oppose the Tunnel—24 points higher than the 34% who favor building it.
-
92% of voters across the political spectrum see the Bay-Delta as important to California’s economy and quality of life, including for communities near the Delta.
-
The economic and social costs (including the negative impact to Delta Tribes and communities), along with environmental damage are voters’ top reasons for opposing the Tunnel.
Representatives of Tribes and organizations in the coalition opposing the Delta Tunnel commented on the release of the poll.
The tunnel opponents say the poll “highlights the growing awareness among Californians about the dangers of focusing on distant, expensive water projects like the Delta Tunnel, while ignoring the potential of local water solutions—especially in the wake of climate-change fueled disasters like the Los Angeles fires. The results show overwhelming support for development of local water sources to ensure long-term water resilience as the state faces ongoing droughts and increasingly frequent fires.”
“We must shift our priorities to meet the real needs of California’s communities. By focusing on sustainable, local water solutions like wastewater recycling and stormwater capture, and by rejecting boondoggles like the Delta Tunnel, we can enhance water security without risking the health of our ecosystems and communities,” said Caty Wagner, Water Campaign Manager at Sierra Club California.
Restore the Delta and its allies are calling on elected officials to reconsider their support for the Delta Tunnel project in light of this polling data. They say the results “make it clear that it’s time to rethink water priorities, and put resources toward local projects that will ensure tangible, affordable solutions for California communities and the environment.”
In response to Restore the Delta’s poll, Californians for Water Security, a coalition of water agencies and organizations promoting the Delta Tunnel, released a statement claiming that “Restore the Delta’s own data from their so-called poll shows California voters support the Delta Conveyance Project by a 2 to 1 margin.”
But the organization doesn’t cite one bit of evidence supporting that statement. Here’s what the Restore the Delta’s poll actually states:
At the outset of the poll (and with minimal information), a plurality of voters favor the Tunnel (46% favor to 24% oppose) in the Initial Vote—although nearly a third (29%) are unsure. Notably, support for the Tunnel is driven primarily by a perceived need to divert more water to Southern California in the wake of the devastating wildfires in Los Angeles County.
Once voters learn more about the Tunnel and its costs, however, opposition to the Tunnel increases significantly (43% favor to 40% oppose in the Informed Vote). Learning more about the Delta itself drives much of this opposition, and 77 percent of voters say the Delta is very or extremely important to California after a brief description.
In the poll’s Final Vote—after hearing messaging on both sides—58 percent of voters oppose the Tunnel compared to only 34 percent who favor it. Opposition is especially high among women (66% oppose), Hispanic voters (66%), and Black voters (62%). Voters who move to oppose are especially concerned that the Tunnel will increase costs for ratepayers and worsen conditions for people living in Delta communities.
So the bottom line here is that after hearing messaging on both sides of the issue, 58% of voters oppose the Tunnel—24 points higher than the 34% who favor building it.
Californians for Water Security goes on to claim, “As climate change continues to threaten California’s water supply, broad support from both voters and water agencies signals the urgency and necessity of the Delta Conveyance Project to secure California’s water future.”
The key phrase here is “secure California’s water future,” thus repeating the false narrative repeated again and again by Governor Gavin Newsom and corporate agribusiness interests that the purpose of Delta tunnel is “water security” — rather that stating the real purpose of the project — to increase water deliveries to State Water Project contractors.
Take Action: Testify Against the Delta Tunnel on May 19!
Join Restore the Delta at the upcoming Delta Conveyance Project hearing on Monday, May 19th!
After the March 24 hearing was disrupted by a Zoom-bombing attack, a new hybrid hearing has been scheduled. The public can now participate in-person or via Zoom to speak out against the Delta Tunnel Project.
Element removed
How to get involved:
- Choose if you'll be attending in person or online
- Use our one-pager and templates to craft a 5-minute public statement
Meeting details:
Element removed
Monday, May 19, 2025 at 9:00 AM
In person: Joe Serna Jr. CalEPA Building, Sacramento
Online: Virtual links will be sent the morning of the hearing
