Water supply
Editorial
From Chico Enterprise-Record - Tuesday, Dec. 4, 2012
Coalition response...It is always important to remain vigilant over existing water rights.
Safeguards have been put into the State Constitution and the California Water
Code in recent decades that have strengthened these rights. The law clearly
states that existing water rights cannot be negatively impacted by new water
projects. Water transfers are allowed only when certain requirements are met,
such as the agreement between a willing buyer and a willing seller. Also, it
must be demonstrated that the proposed transfer will not harm existing water
users in the area of origin and local environmental and human impacts are
minimal.
Rivers
Editorial
From Stockton Record - Monday, Dec. 3, 2012
Coalition response...People may be exuberant over the reintroduction of salmon into the San
Joaquin River but they must realize that this effort comes with a price. When
the restoration plan was drafted, thousands of farmers gave up a portion of
their water for a promise that their water would be restored. They are still
waiting for the assurances that their water is not lost forever. Farmers along
the river have experienced flooding in their fields as experimental flows have
increased the amount of water sent down the river. A loss of water supply and
flooding of fields mean a reduced food supply produced by California farmers.
Consumers will likely feel the financial impact of higher food prices caused by
the restoration efforts unless these impacts are resolved as the law
requires.
WATER SUPPLY
Story
From USA Today - Tuesday, Dec. 4, 2012
From Fresno Bee - Monday, Dec. 3, 2012
Story
From Oroville Mercury-Register - Monday, Dec. 3, 2012
Story
From Capital Press - Monday, Dec. 3, 2012
Opinion
By Steve Knell
From Modesto Bee - Monday, Dec. 3, 2012
DELTA
Story
From ACWA - Monday, Dec. 3, 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment