RIVERS
Story
From Merced Sun-Star - Saturday, March 9, 2013
Coalition response...Tell the more than 400 individuals who could lose their jobs that their
sacrifice might result in a "reasonable expectation" that salmon
numbers will increase in the San Joaquin River. Add the $60 million hit to the
local economy and the results are decisions based on assumptions that
protecting species are necessary at any cost. Yet, the benefits of those
decisions are anything but firm.
Agricultural and urban water
users have improved their efficiency tremendously over the years. They are
required by law to produce water management plans and, like a student in school,
they have to "show their work." Those same requirements don't apply
to environmental efforts. The time has passed when environmental water managers
can get away with guessing about the benefits of their actions. Like the rest
of us, they should be required to document how a water supply cut will help
fish before water supplies are taken away from the people who depend on them
for jobs, our food supply and the economy.
WATER SUPPLY
TV news
From KFSN 30 - Sunday, March 10, 2013
Story
From Modesto Bee - Friday, March 8, 2013
Story
From Contra Costa Times - Friday, March 8, 2013
Press release
From USBR - Friday, March 8, 2013
RIVERS
Press release
From SJTA - Monday, March 11, 2013
Press release
From USBR - Friday, March 8, 2013
WATER BOND
Story
From ACWA - Friday, March 8, 2013
REGULATIONS
Story
From Marysville Appeal-Democrat - Sunday, March 10,
2013
DELTA
Story
From Modesto Bee - Sunday, March 10, 2013
No comments:
Post a Comment