The recent decision to delay Proposition 18 for two years was inevitable, since backers of the $11.1 billion water bond measure correctly perceived that it could not win voter approval in November. But California cannot wait until 2012 to begin restoring the health of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the supplier of half of Silicon Valley’s water.

The next governor and the Legislature must use that time to improve the delta’s aging levees, fix its ecosystem by improving the water flow throughout the estuary, and reduce the amount of the bond — by removing some pork-barrel spending — to make the 2012 bond more palatable to voters.

Gubernatorial candidates Meg Whitman, who supports the bond measure, and Jerry Brown, an opponent, should spend considerable time explaining to voters how they plan to attack the water issue.

Republicans and Democrats agree something must be done to restore the delta’s ecosystem and provide a more reliable water supply. The water crisis presents an ideal opportunity for the candidates to demonstrate how they would use the governor’s office for a breakthrough.

Lawmakers and the key players in the debate have demonstrated, through their agreement to place the bond measure on the ballot, that compromise is possible. The goal should be to use the months ahead to build up enough goodwill that an even better measure can be presented to voters in 2012.

The best place to start is for agribusiness to acknowledge what everyone already knows: Water flow through the delta must be increased — end of story. Added water flow may not increase the delta smelt population, but it is a key element to improving the estuary’s health. It shouldn’t take yet another study to prove the obvious: When you divert 50 percent of the water from the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers before it circulates through the delta, it’s going to wreak environmental havoc.

In exchange for that concession from farmers, environmentalists and the fishing industry should be willing to work on finding more reliable sources of water for Central Valley farmers.

That doesn’t have to mean more dams or water storage facilities. But it should include some sort of guarantee that farmers will have enough water to manage their crops with a higher degree of predictability. Any business owner, whether in Silicon Valley, Los Angeles or San Diego, understands the importance of predictability in the supply chain, and a reliable water supply is the single most important requirement for farmers’ success.

We have long argued that the users who benefit from an increased supply of water — primarily the farmers — should pay for the privilege. And we continue to believe that if mandatory water conservation efforts are going to be imposed on urban dwellers, they should also be imposed on farmers. In a perfect world, those elements should be incorporated into a final deal.

But a pragmatic, reasonable compromise is better than nothing at all. Lawmakers and delta water users should use the next two years to improve the health of the delta and work toward an agreement that can win legislative and voter approval in 2012.