4 Feb 2010

Need I say more?

JF send this:
Restore the Delta revealed this week that Phil Isenberg, chairman of the Delta Vision group - the supposedly objective group that recommended the Peripheral Canal - lobbies for a Southern California water district. In other words, the man tasked with finding a solution to the destruction of the Delta works for an agency that benefits from the destruction of the Delta.
Bottom Line: It's hard to remain objective (or be perceived as objective) when you are getting paid by one side of a dispute that you are mediating.


  1. I couldn't agree more. Unfortunately this kind of problem is still so common, and so unrecognized. In my own (former) field, Environmental Impact Assessment, it was systemic. Assessors are invariably paid by those companies whose activities they must evaluate. To pretend that this doesn't have an impact on the quality of their work is laughable.

  2. Hey guys, the Delta was butched by hydraulic mining and later by the actions prompted by the Arkansas Act of 1850 (better known as the drainage and reclaimation act). Waht about the impacts of the Sac and Stockton sewer discharges, the invasive species, delta ag diversions and discharges? Have they no impact? Are you guys science based or emotional BS? Get with it before we collapse this State!


Read this first!

Make sure you copy your comment before submitting because sometimes the system will malfunction and you will lose your comment.

Spam will be deleted.

Comments on older posts must be approved (do not submit twice).

If you're having problems posting, email your comment to me