Blockbuster plan by the governor and new co-star

Seeker -

I think you missed the point.  The Southland WILL be getting their water no matter what you or I have to say about it.  It will be the farmers in the middle (Tracy to Bakersfield) who will be drying up.  Growers are already making choices on which crop to water and which crop to dry up.  Fresno County already projects a $100 Million hit to their economy so far from crops not being planted and the eventual trickle-down (no pun intended) effect - and that was in early June.  For instance, one grower dried up 725 acres of processing tomatoes in bloom to save enough water for his 550 acres of almonds to survive - not necessarily raise a crop - just not to die and lose a 30 year investment.  They've been drilling wells for the last 18 months and you can't find a driller anywhere.  Growers in Merced County are already having wells dry up, so now they'll have to go deeper.  The only winner when that happens is the driller and PG&E.

Our choice will be how to get the best deal for Northern California and the Delta and how to get it there.  The US Fish & Wildlife Service is considering listing the Delta Smelt as an endangered species.  That will stem the tide for only so long.  We need the dams because the politicians want their canal.  The dams must come first.

The Delta interests will continue to say "Hell NO!"  to any form of dual conveyance or peripheral canal facility without storage.  What they might listen to is some form of conveyance with "DEDICATED" storage - a canal with a single dam that supplies it.  This way the Delta flows will be uninterrupted by a canal siphoning off an already limited supply of fresh, Sacramento River water.  This can keep the species alive and the saltwater at arms length.  What the politicians aren't facing reality about is the cost of a canal.  They'll tell you $10 Billion or less.  Get REAL!  Maybe they can keep a 42 mile long cement-lined facility with multiple pumping stations etc... under $100 Billion!  Especially if they do it the California way - at prevailing wage!   

Remember the mid 70's and "If it's brown, flush it down; it it's yellow, let it mellow?"  The South got their water for their swimming pools and we took water with us to flush our friends' toilets in the Bay Area because they were under severe rationing.  THE SOUTH WILL GET OUR WATER (California "waters of the state") and the main thing to remember is SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CAN OUTVOTE US!  This is not what Mr. Perata wants and our Senator - Mr. Cogdill - is one of the major power brokers in this deal.  That's why they're calling it a Bi-Partisan agreement - Democrats (DiFi etal..) and Republicans (Arnie & Dave).

You still have the right to vote and I hope that you do - you just need 5 or 10 million friends to join you.  There's going to be a high voter turnout and I'm sure that's part of the calculation - especially in the south.  The MET is already praising this.  And guess what - the date for qualifying initiatives for the November ballot is already passed!  Unless you're the Governator or Senator DiFi!

Dedicated storage from one storage facility may go south - that's why we need two new facilities.  The problem will be getting politicos to agree on quantities that are hardline.  If the tank runs dry, then so be it - don't be allowed to rob from another tank because you ran yours dry.  Politicians don't like any hard and fast lines in the sand.  It's not conducive to getting votes by saying no to someone.  The current system was only supposed to draw water that was excess - yeah right!  So much for the paper those assurances were written on - you couldn't use it to wipe your ... you get the picture.

We could also build Temperance Flat east of Friant Dam and that could supplement Madera, Fresno, Tulare, Kings and Kern counties - where the crop problems are really in full bloom.  As for certain crops - those kinds of things are already being taken care of by market forces - water costs, oil prices (fertilizer, crop protection materials & fuel costs) and market price.  What you don't see yet is that by wiping out cotton and some of the other crops, you seriously effect your milk supply.  The dairy industry is the great recycler of harvest by-products - especially from canneries and cotton gins.  If you want to talk water use, you also need to look at corn and alfalfa > see dairy, ethanol and almost every processed food imaginable.  This is a vicious circle and the choices we make here about our water directly affect our food supply and food safety.  If we don't grow it here, it has to come from somewhere else - another state or even another country.  Then who do you trust?

I would like one addition to the bond - mandated new water supply creation of 20-25% by 2025 for all municiplaities within 30 miles of the coastline.  Let's mandate something that is achievable if they have the political will.  Desalination would also provide increased power production because it would need power plants to fuel the process.  Yes - it will demand more fuels (natural gas, oil or nuclear).  If we're going to look for oil off the coast, we might as well install salt discharge pipes 3 miles out while we're doing it.  Try getting one of those permits from the Coastal Commission!  If we're going to be comprehensive, then let's lay all of our cards on the table.

First, the farmers in the southern San Joaquin valley are the major water users from the central valley project. In the original legislation they were not suppose to plant perminant crops such as trees. They did and they they had the legislation changed so they could still get water. They don't tell you that. Second, the enviromental movement has done more harm to calif water system than any thing. We have not been able to build new facilities for many years now. Its just selfishness on there part. I think both of these special interests need to share some of the blame for the situation were in. If were going to grow and provide more then were going to have to develope more water systems.

Very interesting... keep blogg'n.

You are correct.  Only surplus water was supposed to leave the Delta, but somehow the law changed.  DWR Bulletin 160 is also a good place to look for more knowledge.  Now Westlands is the the major player along with Paramount Farms and they want "THEIR" water.  They created this out of a desert.  Now they are upside down on the water pyramid - 2008 version: fish, people, food; Old version: Food, people, fish.  WWD has also talked about a nuke for desal in western Fresno county - GOOG LUCK!  CA law states that CA needs a waste repository before another nuke can be built.  I don't see one anytime soon.

All of them should be required to provide hatchery's on the rivers. Ill tell you it would be cheeper than if the state does it and its the only way your going to get fish back in the river. Quit waisting tax payers money doing the rehabilation of the streams its not doing any good.

The fall run of salmon on the tributaries was barly more than last year.400[+ or -] on the stan.200 on the tuolumne and about 300 on the merced.We still have enviro groups saying we still have native fish in the system and that they oppose hatcherys.They need to take a look at the dna studies.