A Water Agenda for Gov. Brown – Tapping into the Virtual River
Blog
from NRDC – Thursday, Dec. 2, 2010
By Barry Nelson
Coalition viewpoint...Several points need to be recognized:
1. Conservation, recycling, increased efficiency are all part of the solution to California’s water future but left out of the equation is additional storage and an improved conveyance to deliver the water.
2. You’re confusing developed water with applied water. Your use of the term ‘developed water’ implies that all water stored in reservoirs is used and that is not true.
a. California’s Water Plan reports applied water use to explain where the water is being used. Here are the numbers for the last three Water Plans:
i. 1998---46% environmental; 43%/agricultural/ and 11% urban.
ii. 2005---48%/environmental; 41% agricultural; and 11% urban.
iii. 2009---49.7%/environmental; 39.8%/agricultural; and 10.4%/urban.
3. Farm water interests are engaged in implementing SB7X 7 guidelines in a manner that is reasonable, practical and cost effective.
4. Establishing water application and consumption rates for principal crops and soils borders on a socialist approach to telling farmers what they can grow and not grow and must be carefully evaluated.
Plan best way to meet state’s important goals
Commentary
From The Signal – Friday, Dec. 3, 2010
By Dan Masnada/Dirk Marks, Castaic Lake Water Agency
Viewpoints: Water wars hinder sound decision-making
from Sacramento Bee – Friday, Dec. 3, 2010
by Stan Dean, Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District engineer
Is It a Water-Rights Fee or a Backdoor Tax? Calif.'s High Court Will Decide
Story
from NYTimes – Thursday, Dec. 2, 2010
No comments:
Post a Comment