Drought
From: Staff, Los Angeles Times
Masquerading as a response to
California's drought, a bill to waive environmental protections and divert more
water to Central Valley agriculture passed the Republican-controlled House in
February and is now going to conference to be reconciled with a competing bill
by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) that the Senate adopted last month.
Coalition response... Water diversions have been far below the amount allowable under the
Endangered Species Act. Senator Feinstein's bill requires federal fishery
managers to operate the system at the upper end of the allowable range rather
than the lower end, as they have been doing.
Sadly, California's water supply
system is being operated with anything BUT science and expertise. Water
diversions have been cut numerous times this year because of an arbitrary date
on the calendar, not based on whether water operations would harm endangered
fish. At the time exports pumps have been slowed to protect fish, virtually
none of the fish that the ESA is intended to protect were detected near the
pumps. The regulatory agencies couldn't say where the fish were for sure, or if
they were even in the Delta. But they dried up farms...just to be on the safe
side.
The House bill is an attempt to
bring some sanity to the ESA so adequate water can be delivered to grow food
and meet the domestic needs of 25 million people while still protecting the
threatened and endangered fish the ESA is supposed to protect. Chinook salmon
continue to suffer (although a recent rebound is encouraging) despite the fact
that we are delivering LESS water to farms this year than we did in 1977-78,
California's worst recorded drought year.
Drought
From: Richard Foss &
Brittany Woolsey, Orange County Register
Growers at farmers markets these
days all voice the same one-word concern: water. Those who buy their water from
municipalities are paying much more for it, and some of those who are dependent
on state allocations can't get it at any price. The most fortunate are those
who have wells on their property, but even they aren't resting easy.
From: Dan Charles, NPR
Imagine if a gallon of milk cost
$3 in your town, but 100 miles away it cost $100, or even $200.
Something similar is happening
right now in California with water that farmers use to irrigate their crops.
Some farmers are paying 50 or even 100 times more for that water than others
who live just an hour's drive away. The situation is provoking debate about
whether water in California should move more freely, so that it can be sold to
the highest bidder.
From: Sharon Bernstein,
Reuters
With California facing its worst
drought in decades, farmers, environmentalists and government officials begged
lawmakers Monday to invest in projects to shore up the state's water supply.
The demands from Sacramento Mayor
Kevin Johnson, The Nature Conservancy and Northern California water districts
are an effort to help break a deadlock in the state legislature over how to
prevent future water shortages.
Water Bond
From: Matt Weiser, Sacramento
Bee
Cynical observers of California
politics sometimes assume the real reason for a new statewide water bond is to
pay for projects that take water from the north and ship it south. But on
Monday, a number of Northern California leaders made it clear they are prepared
to support a water bond for the November ballot - under certain conditions.
Water Supply
From: John Holland, Modesto
Bee
The City Council could take
another step Tuesday evening on a proposal to sell treated wastewater to West
Side farmers.
The council will consider
contributing $666,810 toward the next stage of planning for the project, which
would supply the Del Puerto Water District with reclaimed water from Turlock
and Modesto. Modesto would pay $745,258 and the district would kick in $156,897
under a 2010 agreement for sharing the planning costs.
From: Peter Gleick & Kate
Poole, Sacramento Bee
California has reached "peak
water." We've far exceeded the limits of our renewable and sustainable
supply. The current severe drought has highlighted these limits and shown us
the stark reality of a water system in need of new thinking, new strategies and
new answers.
From: Jay Lund, UC Davis
California WaterBlog
Removing sediment from reservoirs
is often suggested as a potentially better way to expand storage capacity than
raising dam heights or building new reservoirs. This is a natural notion to
explore given the cost and likely environmental impacts of traditional
expansions.
No comments:
Post a Comment