Department of Water Resources
A daily compilation for DWR personnel of significant news articles and comment
April 25, 2007
1. Top Items
Senate panel rejects governor's plan to build more dams - Associated Press
Defeated dams still supported; Governor isn't backing away from $4 billion in bonds after negative vote by Senate panel - Sacramento
State Senate panel rejects water-storage bill -
Senate panel's Dems vote down water bond over proposed reservoirs - San Francisco Chronicle
Bill for dams, water storage stalls - Stockton Record
Democrats dismiss governor’s dam proposal - Marysville Appeal Democrat
Governor's dam proposal stuck in committee; GOP VOWS TO REVIVE WATER STORAGE PLAN - San Jose Mercury News
Dam plans held up; Bills to build dam at Temperance Flat rejected by Senate - Visalia Times Delta
Senate panel rejects governor's plan to build more dams
Associated Press – 4/24/07
By Samantha Young, staff writer
SACRAMENTO- Senate Democrats on Tuesday rejected Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's $4.5 billion proposal to build two dams, saying the projects were premature and lacked commitments from local water users to help pay for them.
The hearing before the Senate Natural Resources Committee was the first public vetting of the governor's proposal, which both sides acknowledged was likely to resurface during negotiations on the budget later this year.
Schwarzenegger in January proposed $4.5 billion in bonds to build two dams and groundwater storage as part of the state's response to a growing population and projected water shortages from global warming.
Tuesday's 4-3 party line vote was largely expected, with both sides staking out long-held positions about whether the state should build more dams as Republicans favor or pursue other strategies advocated by Democrats such as conservation and water recycling.
"No one here is absolutely rejecting surface storage as part of
It remains to be seen whether the Democratic-controlled Legislature will again defeat dams, as they did last year during negotiations over a package of infrastructure bonds that was included on the November ballot. Lawmakers instead directed $4.1 billion to upgrade levees, which voters approved.
Assembly Republican leader Mike Villines, R-Clovis, vowed to make dams a central issue of the budget talks between the four legislative leaders and the governor.
"If the Legislature isn't willing to deal with one of the most pressing problems in
Schwarzenegger said he was not prepared to modify his bond proposal, telling reporters at a press conference Tuesday he was optimistic it would eventually win approval.
"I don't think that we will have to scale back," Schwarzenegger said. "I think that the people of
Lawmakers have been warned by scientists that the state's water supplies are the most vulnerable of the
An estimated two-thirds of Californians depend on the Sierra Nevada snowmelt for drinking water while
Schwarzenegger has said the state, in partnership with local communities, should build more reservoirs to capture water that today is stored through the summer months in the mountain snowpack. The Department of Water Resources is advocating for dams to be built above the existing Friant Dam north of
Sen. Dave Cogdill, R-Modesto, who is carrying the governor's proposal in the Legislature, said the dams were the best way to ensure long-term water supplies.
"They give us the most opportunity and are the best from a cost-effective standpoint to deal with the needs that we have," Cogdill said.
If approved, the bond would go to voters on the November 2008 ballot.
Schwarzenegger's plan also includes $1.5 billion to manage the delta, restore rivers and enhance water conservation.
"We have everything on the table from groundwater to conservation to waste water recycling," said Department of Water Resources director Lester Snow. "We happen to think to deal with the climate change issue, you have to do everything you can."
Environmentalists have criticized Schwarzenegger's plans, pointing to what they describe as much more cost-effective ways to meet state water needs.
Cogdill said would try to get the bond on the November 2008 ballot through a voter initiative if the Legislature rejects the plan. #
http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_5740744
Defeated dams still supported; Governor isn't backing away from $4 billion in bonds after negative vote by Senate panel
Sacramento
By Judy Lin, staff writer
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Tuesday he has no plans to scale down his $4 billion proposal for building two new dams in the state despite watching Democrats reject his bill earlier in the day.
The Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee killed the governor's plan to put bonds for two dams -- one on the west side of the
Schwarzenegger will now have to negotiate with Senate leader Don Perata, who is advocating a blend of water conservation and efficiency for sustaining the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta --
The Republican governor noted that politically charged topics like water take time to resolve. The bill was held for reconsideration, and Schwarzenegger says he remains optimistic about reviving his plan.
"I don't think we will have to scale back," Schwarzenegger said during a news conference after the vote. "I think the people of
Perata has said he would support new dams only if they are scientifically proved to be the best fit for the state.
SB 59 called for voters to approve a $3.95 billion plan to build one dam at Temperance Flat just above Friant Dam near Fresno, and the other on Sites reservoir in Colusa and Glenn counties. Together the dams would yield up to 3.1 million acre-feet of water. By comparison, Folsom Dam holds about 1 million acre-feet.
If passed, $2 billion in general obligation bonds would be used to partially fund construction of the two reservoirs while $1 billion would be allocated for Delta sustainability. Another $500 million would be earmarked for groundwater storage, while $250 million would be set for environmental restoration and $200 million for water efficiency programs.
Opponents led by environmental groups argue that the dams aren't needed as long as Californians continue to conserve. They say the projected cost of constructing the two dams has already increased by 10 percent, from $4 billion to $4.4 billion, and noted that some of the water would be lost due to evaporation.
Republicans from the
Cogdill said continued population growth coupled with environmental changes in the Sierra Nevada have made it critical for the state to build dams to endure long periods of drought and high risks of flooding.
"It used to be we could rely on the Sierras. That's no longer the case," Cogdill said after the hearing. "There's going to be more precipitation -- more rain, less snow. That means more runoff and the chances for flooding."
Sen. Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, who chairs the Natural Resources and Water Committee, questioned whether the bond is financially feasible because the bill would have capped the state's share of project costs at 50 percent. The other half -- $2 billion or more -- would have to come from revenue bonds to be paid off by water contractors -- including local governments and water agencies.
Steinberg suggested it would have been better to secure commitments from local governments and water agencies first. #
http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/160607.html
State Senate panel rejects water-storage bill
By E.J. Schultz, staff writer
Rejecting one of Gov. Schwarzenegger's big agenda items, a Democratic-led committee on Tuesday voted down a bill that would ask voters to spend $2.5 billion on water storage, including a dam east of
The defeat by the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Water -- on a partisan 3-4 vote -- marked the second time in two years that the Legislature has killed a proposal to spend state money on a dam at Temperance Flat, upstream of Friant Dam.
While it is possible that the issue could re-emerge in state budget negotiations, dam supporters said they are considering taking the issue straight to voters in a ballot initiative.
"A rebellion and a revolution has started and it's going to start in
Senate Bill 59, by Sen. Dave Cogdill, R-Modesto, would have put a $3.95 billion water bond on the 2008 ballot, including $2 billion for two dams: Temperance Flat and one proposal on the west side of the Sacramento Valley called Sites Reservoir. The remainder is for ground-water storage, environmental restoration, water conservation and improvements to the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.
Democrats, for environmental reasons, have long opposed dams. They also want feasibility studies to be completed before spending money.
Still, dam supporters were hopeful because of the backing of two political heavyweights. Schwarzenegger made the plan a priority, even touring the state a few weeks ago to push for more water storage. Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein also endorsed the proposal.
But committee Democrats held their ground, arguing that local water users -- such as the Valley's agricultural community -- should commit to pick up some of the cost before a bond is put before voters.
A dam at Temperance is estimated to cost about $2 billion. Under SB 59, users would not be asked to chip in until after the bond passes.
"It seems to me to be backwards," said committee chairman Sen. Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento.
But Cogdill said users are waiting for the state to take the first step. "This bill provides them some assurance," he said.
Democrats also argued that the state should spend more on conservation before building new storage. In the past 40 years, the state's per capita water consumption has been cut in half, according to a coalition of 58 environmental organizations, which argued against the bill.
Building dams is "so yesterday," said Sen. Sheila Kuehl, D-Santa Monica.
Schwarzenegger -- who has included water storage along with prison expansion and health care as his top priorities -- said the fight is not over.
"Yes, it has stalled," he said at a news conference. "But, in the end, I think the momentum is gaining in
The governor has argued that new dams are needed to supply water to a state whose population is expected to jump 30% in the next 20 years. He also has cited global warming, which could reduce snowpack. That could lead to more wintertime flooding and fewer opportunities to capture slow-melting snow.
Also, supporters of the Temperance Flat dam say it is needed to replace water supplies that could be lost in the restoration of the
But environmentalists say there isn't much additional water to capture, and extra water from the new reservoir would only be available in the wettest of years. At most, average annual water deliveries from Friant would increase by 10%, or 128,000 acre-feet, they say.
Steinberg, in an interview after the hearing, said he is not against dams. But he said he favors sites closer to the Delta that could store more Delta water should Delta pumps be slowed down for environmental reasons.
"I would not take the vote today to be a vote against water storage," he said. "It was a vote that essentially says these two projects are premature and the proponents have not demonstrated that they are the best locations in connection with what ought to be our highest priority -- fixing the Delta."
At present, Friant Dam is mostly used to supply water to east Valley cities and growers. But a new reservoir upstream of Friant could allow for water to be sent across the state -- northward using the
"We're in a very unique position where we can help the broader spectrum of
http://www.fresnobee.com/263/story/43812.html
Senate panel's Dems vote down water bond over proposed reservoirs
San Francisco Chronicle – 4/25/07
By Greg Lucas, staff writer
(04-25) 04:00 PDT
The governor pledged to keep pushing for their construction despite the defeat in the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee.
"Yes, it has stalled now. But in the end I think the momentum in
Democrats and environmentalists have opposed Schwarzenegger's water bond since he proposed it in his
Backers of the proposal, which also calls for yet-to-be-determined spending on improvements to the delta, say population increases and global warming will reduce
Opponents counter that more flexibility in moving water to where its needed and refilling underground aquifers is a smarter strategy than attempting to construct two expensive reservoirs that may not be completed for decades.
The bond calls for state taxpayers to contribute $2 billion for the reservoirs. The plan envisions farmers and water agencies receiving water from the reservoirs paying another $2 billion in construction costs, but so far no agreements for the water have been secured.
"Why would we not seek the commitments before asking the state taxpayers to foot $4 billion of indebtedness? It seems backward," said Sen. Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, chairman of the committee.
The two reservoirs proposed by Schwarzenegger are located at sites in Colusa County 55 miles northwest of Sacramento and at Temperance Flat where a dam would be built above Lake Millerton on the upper San Joaquin River near Fresno.
"I am extremely disappointed but not surprised by the Senate Democrats who voted against this critical measure," said the bill's author, Sen. Dave Cogdill, R-Fresno, after the committee's vote. "They are taking issues off the table and opting to address
Many of the Republican supporters who cite global warming as the need for new reservoirs, including Cogdill, voted against last year's landmark bill curbing greenhouse gas emissions from refineries and power plants.
The testimony of several witnesses was sharply different from their normal positions.
At Tuesday' hearing Dominic Di Mare, a lobbyist for the California Chamber of Commerce, which opposed last year's greenhouse gas bill, cited climate change as the reason more dams are needed. He was ribbed by other lobbyists for sounding like an environmentalist.
Environmentalists, on the other hand, said construction of a new dam on the
After two hours of testimony, the eight-member committee defeated the governor's plan on a party line vote. Four Democrats opposed the bill and all three of the committee's GOP members voted in favor.
Approved by Democrats was a nearly $900 million spending bill that appropriates money from five water-related bonds passed over the past six years to a variety of purposes, including water recycling, water conservation, emergency preparedness in the delta and projects to reduce the amount of water imported by different parts of the state to meet their water needs.
The measure, SB1002 by Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, also includes $15 million to continue studies of above-ground reservoirs, which the state has been studying since 2000. #
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/04/25/BAG4QPEU3O1.DTL
Bill for dams, water storage stalls
By Hank Shaw, staff writer
SACRAMENTO - Democrats in the state Senate have stymied - for now - an attempt to borrow $6billion for new dams, underground water storage and conservation efforts.
While the Senate Natural Resources Committee rejected the legislation on a 4-3-1 vote Tuesday, the proposal is far from dead. It is expected to play a role in September's legislative endgame.
The lone abstention Tuesday came from Sen. Michael Machado, D-Linden. He said he did not want to see the bill die but was not comfortable voting for the measure when no local source of funding for the projects is in sight.
A lack of local funding is only one of many political and policy-related obstacles the effort faces.
The bill's author is Sen. Dave Cogdill, R-Modesto, whose district includes part of
It is not prominent on the Democratic majority's agenda, however, largely because those legislators say dams are an inefficient, expensive way to hold water compared with underground storage and conservation; the bulk of the money in Cogdill's proposal is for dams.
That makes it ripe for the political horse-trading that marks the end of each year's legislative session: If Schwarzenegger is still willing to go to the mat for the proposal in September, and the Democrats really want something else - say, their version of universal health care - they might strike a deal late one night in the governor's smoking tent.
Until then, outside supporters, such as the newly created California Latino Water Coalition, will pressure lawmakers to support the bill.
Schwarzenegger applied some pressure of his own in recent days during face-to-face meetings with Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, and Senate Resource Committee Chairman Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento. But these early lobbying efforts failed.
Undeterred, Schwarzenegger likened Tuesday's move to a stylized Japanese Kabuki dance.
"It always starts out, 'I want this, and I want that,'" Schwarzenegger said in a news conference after the vote. "I'm very optimistic, ... but it takes time."
That
Republicans and their agricultural allies, bolstered by the state Department of Water Resources, say reservoirs are part of the state's water "tool kit" and can help control flooding the way underground storage cannot.
The debate is whether a dam's place in the tool kit is more like a screwdriver or an expensive belt sander - and whether the state can afford to buy new tools.
Steinberg, a newcomer to water politics, says he's not yet convinced
"What does it cost? What do we get? How soon do we get it, and how does it compare with other alternatives?" Steinberg asked during the hearing. "What is the best use of the money?"
Cogdill said he's all for increased conservation and underground water storage, but he noted that the only reason
"We've been able to conserve our way out of our problem, but we quite frankly are at a point where we need to do more," he said. "All we're asking is to put the question before the folks who will ultimately pay the bill."
The text of the legislation, SB59, is at www.leginfo.ca.gov. #
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070425/A_NEWS/704250329
Democrats dismiss governor’s dam proposal
Marysville Appeal Democrat – 4/25/07
By staff and wire reports
SACRAMENTO – Senate Democrats on Tuesday rejected Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s $4.5 billion proposal to build two dam projects – one of them planned for Colusa County’s far west – saying the projects were premature and lacked commitments from local water users to help pay for them.
The hearing before the Senate Natural Resources Committee was the first public vetting of the governor’s proposal, which both sides acknowledged was likely to resurface during negotiations on the budget later this year.
Schwarzenegger in January proposed $4.5 billion in bonds to build two dams and groundwater storage as part of the state’s response to a growing population and projected water shortages from global warming.
Tuesday’s 4-3 party line vote was largely expected, with both sides staking out long-held positions about whether the state should build more dams as Republicans favor or pursue other strategies advocated by Democrats such as conservation and water recycling.
“No one here is absolutely rejecting surface storage as part of
Schwarzenegger has said the state, in partnership with local communities, should build more reservoirs to capture water that today is stored through the summer months in the mountain snowpack. The Department of Water Resources is advocating for dams to be built above the existing Friant Dam north of
The Sites project – the latest in a string of similar plans over 50 years – would create a reservoir to store up to 1.8 million acre-feet of water, mostly from winter flows of the Sacramento River 15 miles east, and release the water for delivery south. An acre-foot of water equals 325,851 gallons, a year’s supply for a family of four.
The plan includes a pair of 300-foot dams, a pumping station and either a canal or pipeline to the
It remains to be seen whether the Democratic-controlled Legislature will again defeat dams, as they did last year during negotiations over a package of infrastructure bonds that was included on the November ballot. Lawmakers instead directed $4.1 billion to upgrade levees, which voters approved.
Assembly Republican leader Mike Villines, R-Clovis, vowed to make dams a central issue of the budget talks between the four legislative leaders and the governor.
“If the Legislature isn’t willing to deal with one of the most pressing problems in
Schwarzenegger said he was not prepared to modify his bond proposal, telling reporters at a press conference Tuesday he was optimistic it would eventually win approval.
“I don’t think that we will have to scale back,” Schwarzenegger said. “I think that the people of
Lawmakers have been warned by scientists that the state’s water supplies are the most vulnerable of the
An estimated two-thirds of Californians depend on the Sierra Nevada snowmelt for drinking water while
Sen. Dave Cogdill, R-Modesto, who is carrying the governor’s proposal in the Legislature, said the dams were the best way to ensure long-term water supplies.
“They give us the most opportunity and are the best from a cost-effective standpoint to deal with the needs that we have,” Cogdill said.
If approved, the bond would go to voters on the November 2008 ballot.
Schwarzenegger’s plan also includes $1.5 billion to manage the delta, restore rivers and enhance water conservation.
“We have everything on the table from groundwater to conservation to waste water recycling,” said Department of Water Resources director Lester Snow. “We happen to think to deal with the climate change issue, you have to do everything you can.”
Environmentalists have criticized Schwarzenegger’s plans, pointing to what they describe as much more cost-effective ways to meet state water needs.
Cogdill said would try to get the bond on the November 2008 ballot through a voter initiative if the Legislature rejects the plan.
Despite the setback on Tuesday,
“I think it’s surmountable,” he said about opposition to the Sites reservoir. “I have no doubt this project will go forward eventually; it’s a question of how many years. Unless the state stops growing, the state is going to need more water, and this is one of the only logical places to store more water.” #
http://www.appeal-democrat.com/onset?id=47525&template=article.html
Governor's dam proposal stuck in committee; GOP VOWS TO REVIVE WATER STORAGE PLAN
By Steven Harmon, staff writer
Schwarzenegger has returned to water politics with a renewed vigor, thrusting dams into the center of what may become highly contentious upcoming budget negotiations.
In the past week, Schwarzenegger has made several trips around the state casting the legislation, SB59, in stark terms, saying it would be a hedge against such ills as global warming, droughts and other disasters.
"With shrinking snowpacks from a changing climate, above-ground water storage will be a central part of
Republican lawmakers, who are especially interested in the dams, have the power of a required two-thirds vote on budgets, which gives them some leverage in forcing the dam proposal into negotiations. Schwarzenegger needs Republican votes on a number of budget issues - especially his health care reform, which includes fee increases on doctors, hospitals and businesses that Republicans have vowed to reject.
Sen. Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, the chairman of the Natural Resources committee, said the committee rejection "is not the end of the discussion." He indicated that deal-making with Democrats isn't out of the question, saying, "I would not take this vote to be a vote against water storage."
But Democrats, who rejected the bill in committee a year after they thwarted a similar bond proposal, scoffed at the Republican plan. They argued that building dams at two locations - Temperance Flat on the
"If science shows we need to have surface storage, fine," said Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, who offered his own $882 million bill - using existing bond money and focusing on underground water storage - as an alternative. "But find the best place to put it, so you don't destroy the habitat or enrich somebody who happens to have a bunch of land."
Republicans remained unbowed after the hearing, saying they would find a way to resuscitate the bill later, or recruit political allies to put it on the 2008 ballot.
Sen. Dave Cogdill, R-Fresno, who is carrying the bill for the governor, insisted that water storage is the issue of the future, particularly with California's population growing by 600,000 a year and with climate changes shrinking the snowpack.
"To sideline this and stop it one more time and make it as if this is a new idea that's just come out of the box is disingenuous," Cogdill said. "With the driest year on record in
Cogdill said the bond would do more than just build dams. Aside from $2 billion for the construction of the dams and $500 million to improve underground water storage, it would provide $1 billion for conservation efforts in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, another $200 million for water use and $250 million for resource stewardship and environmental restoration.
Lester Snow, the director of the state's Department of Water Resources, said Democrats were missing the big picture and allowing the debate to become too "storage-centric and storage-phobic."
"I find it's ironic," Snow said, "that some who were champions of climate change are now saying don't do this and do everything else."
Democrats say surface storage is not needed and is wasteful. Even with population increases, water consumption has been cut in half over the past 40 years, thanks to conservation and groundwater efforts.
They said both dam sites would produce less water than is lost through evaporation. The Department of Water Resources predicts the projects will produce about 470,000 acre feet of water annually. Another DWR study showed that the state's existing surface storage projects lose about 500,000 acre-feet in a year through evaporation.
Two major water surface storage projects - including the 192-foot Los Vaqueros dam in
Perata's bill, SB1002, approved on a party line, would use $882 million from several bonds already approved by voters to provide grants for water quality, flood management and groundwater improvements, among other natural resources issues. #
http://www.mercurynews.com/politics/ci_5745462
Dam plans held up; Bills to build dam at Temperance Flat rejected by Senate
By Jake Henshaw, Gannett
SACRAMENTO — Despite a high-energy push, advocates for two new dams, including one at Temperance Flat on the San Joaquin River, lost a key round Tuesday but vowed to continue their campaign — even to the ballot.
The Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee rejected Senate Bill 59 that would have approved $3.95 billion for a range of water projects, including $2 billion for the two new reservoirs.
"If they stop the bill this year, we'll enter it again next year," said Sen. Dave Cogdill, R-Fresno, the bill's author.
In case backers can't get their proposal through the Capitol, Cogdill said they already are working on a possible initiative to make sure that one way or the other, they have a measure on the November 2008 ballot.
"This battle in this building is not where it's going to happen," predicted Assembly Republican leader Mike Villines, R-Clovis. "It has to go out to the people."
But Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, speaking at a press conference after the bill was defeated, insisted that the Legislature will approve a water bond ballot measure that includes new water reservoirs.
"Yes, it has stalled now, but in the end I think the momentum is gaining in
The committee action on the two reservoirs left two
"It's a big water-quality issue with us," said Tulare County Supervisor Mike Ennis. "We can't keep punching holes in the ground [for water] if it's not there to start with. Surface water is what made
He and J. Paul Hendrix, general manager of the Tulare Irrigation District, said the biggest hurdles faced by advocates are persuading opponents that the proposal also will help address problems in the San Joaquin-Sacramento Delta and that there are water users willing to help pay for new dams.
"It has to be a win-win for everybody in
SB 59 anticipates that the future beneficiaries of the proposed two new dams would help pay another $2 billion for their construction and that there also would be some undetermined federal funding.
The bill also includes $1 billion for the Delta, $500 million for groundwater and additional funds to improve water efficiency and address environmental issues.
But the two reservoirs were the controversial part of the bill.
Temperance Flat on the San Joaquin has a potential capacity of up to 1.3 million acre-feet, and another called the Sites Reservoir is an off-stream dam in the
Together, the governor has estimated, they could provide up to 500,000 acre-feet a year.
Proponents put on a high-profile push that included a Monday press conference with the governor and a newly formed California Latino Water Coalition and a post-hearing press conference Tuesday led by Fresno Mayor Alan Autry, who called opponents "merchants of misery and destruction."
Proponents argued that major new dams are decades overdue — the state is growing at about 600,000 people annually. The dams are an essential part of a comprehensive plan to deal with an increasingly uncertain water future because of global warming, they said.
Temperance Flat also could play a role in putting the 2006 restoration agreement for the
"It's not a question of either/or," Lester Snow, director of the state Department of Water Resources, said of the dams versus other water projects.
Cogdill repeatedly stressed that all proponents were seeking was a chance to let voters decide whether they want new dams to be part of future water-management tools.
"This is a lot about getting in line, getting that question before the voters," Cogdill said.
Opponents said the dam question wasn't ready for prime time because studies about the two proposed sites weren't done and no water users had committed to buy their water and thus help fund them.
"It seems to me to be backward," Sen. Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, the committee chairman, said of push for a bond before commitment by water users to help pay.
Critics also argued that other steps such as water conservation and recycling are better ways to "increase" the water supply, charged that the new dams would result in net loss of electric power, questioned whether the dams could help combat global warming and said that they would lose water through evaporation.
Opponents also denied that Temperance Flat would help with the
"The solution is so yesterday, as the young generation in my family might say," said Sen. Sheila Kuehl, D-Santa Monica, of huge concrete dams.
"It's anti-flexible," she added. "It doesn't reflect the best solutions we have come up with over the last 10 years."
Cogdill called the opposition "disingenuous" for complaining that surface storage supporters haven't promised to pay given the state's many studies and failure to act on reservoirs for years.
As for evaporation, he added, "right now that water is running into the ocean, and we are talking about a little of it evaporating."
But supporters acknowledged that there is work to do.
"We are not in a position to leave a blank check on the table today," Hendrix said. "We know there is going to be significant money involved, but we don't know what the projects in particular will look like, yields, who will be the beneficiaries of the supplies.
"But we understand those things are will be worked out over time," he added. "We just don't have those answers today." #
http://www.visaliatimesdelta.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070425/NEWS01/704250353
####
No comments:
Post a Comment