559-286-7795
facebook twitter you tube
 

Newsletter

 

How Much for S.J. River Restoration? Part 2

So, is it $400M, $800M, $892M, $1B or $2B?

Nov 29, 2012

In September we published a newsletter called "How Much For S.J. River Restoration?" in which we quoted various sources and their differing prices for the cost of the restoration. The confusion continues. Today there is a story in several newspapers around the state about chinook salmon being released into the river,"a small but pivotal act in the boldest plan ever devised to restore a depleted California waterway and bring back native fish that vanished decades ago."

In the S.F
. Chronicle article it says Congress approved "the $400 million restoration project as part of a landmark wilderness bill sponsored by California Democratic Sens. Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein." The Stockton Record says the salmon release is "part of complex, $800M restoration project." The Fresno Bee is wise not to mention a price in today's article, but they haven't been shy about using different numbers in different articles. From our September newsletter:
"On June 30th of this year the Fresno Bee reported this story "San Joaquin River Restoration Will Cost $900M" and in the story the actual number was said to be $892M. But, they added that the price could range up to $2B "with the inclusion of lower-priority projects." Then last Saturday in a story with the headline "Climate Change Spawns Salmon Dilemma for SJ River" the Bee reports "Skeptical farmers often ask a big key question about the $2 billion revival of the San Joaquin River."

So, is it $400M, $800M, $892M, $1B or $2B?

In the end it might not matter as Congressman Devin Nunes emphatically stated "I have news for them: They are cut off," he said. "Not a penny of additional federal dollars is going to this ill-conceived venture. They should spare the fish the suffering."

 

FamiliesProtectingtheValley September Newsletter:

How Much For S.J. River Restoration?

On June 30th of this year the Fresno Bee reported this story "San Joaquin River Restoration Will Cost $900M" and in the story the actual number was said to be $892M. But, they added that the price could range up to $2B "with the inclusion of lower-priority projects." Then last Saturday in a story with the headline "Climate Change Spawns Salmon Dilemma for SJ River" the Bee reports "Skeptical farmers often ask a big key question about the $2 billion revival of the San Joaquin River."

So, it looks like the Bee knows when the government says something will cost $900M and maybe $2B, it means it will cost $2B. Our interpretation would be that if they say $900M, but maybe $2B, it will actually be $3B or $4B. But, that's just us. Maybe it's because of this story: "San Joaquin Restoration: $70M Goes Down River" where the Bee reports "A new federal analysis reveals $70 million has been invested in the San Joaquin River restoration since 2007, but no major projects have been completed." This led Congressman Devin Nunes to comment "I have news for them: They are cut off," he said. "Not a penny of additional federal dollars is going to this ill-conceived venture. They should spare the fish the suffering."

Hey, what's a billion or two when the county can't afford to keep criminals in jail, when the city has to ask the police to give back some pay to balance the budget, when the Governor has to threaten school disasters to get a tax increase, and when we have a $16 trillion national debt. Government's new motto: Spend now, ask questions later.

 

Valid RSS FeedGet the 10 most recent items from our RSS feed.

helpdonate
helpdonate