This is a site mirroring the emails of California Water News emailed by the California Department of Water Resources

[Water_news] 1. DWR'S CALIFORNIA WATER NEWS - Top Item for 9/8/08

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation for DWR personnel of significant news articles and comment

 

September 8, 2008

 

1.  Top Item

 

 

The Public Eye: Resources' new digs aren't green, but the lease sure is

The Sacramento Bee- 9/4/08

 

Study finds California can cut farm water use

The San Francisco Chronicle- 9/8/08

 

Study: California farmers can profit by saving water

The Associated Press- 9/7/08

 

Delta-based farms can curb water use, study says

The Contra Costa Times- 9/8/08

 

San Joaquin proposal part of big public lands bill

The Sacramento Bee- 9/7/08

 

Drought relief loans available to farmers but not yet needed

The Patterson Irrigator- 9/5/08

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

 

The Public Eye: Resources' new digs aren't green, but the lease sure is

The Sacramento Bee- 9/4/08

By Terri Hardy

THE MONEY TRAIL

It's a $22 million question: Why are Water Resources Department workers being moved out of their state-owned building and into a leased West Sacramento office during a budget crisis?

Not only is the state looking to foot a $22 million bill over 15 years to house 325 employees, but the under-construction digs aren't necessarily green-friendly, despite the governor's push to make state buildings an example of energy efficiency.

Jim Libonati, the agency's business operations deputy director, said the department wanted to consolidate employees scattered in four locations (three privately owned and one state-owned) and provide an on-site lab and storage for boats.

Besides, Libonati said, the Department of General Services advised that the state-owned Bonderson Building – an office occupied by a majority of the resources workers – is due to be renovated.

"DGS told us to move out," Libonati said. He couldn't provide documentation on the forced relocation.

That explanation had General Services folks scratching their heads. "There aren't any plans to renovate the Bonderson," said Eric Lamoureux, a DGS spokesman. "That isn't even on our radar."

General Services selected 3500 Industrial Blvd. as the new home for Water Resources by the end of the year. A state summary said the site, owned by a partnership headed by developer Joe Benvenuti, was "the clear favorite due to its location, site size, economics and well known/experienced lessor."

The building was too far along in the construction phase to obtain an energy-friendly LEED certification.

In a survey, obtained by The Bee, workers said the more isolated West Sacramento location would force them to drive rather than walk, bike or take public transportation to work.

Regardless, Lamoureux said "there are no specific environmental requirements for leased buildings."#

http://www.sacbee.com/626/story/1208766.html

 

 

Study finds California can cut farm water use

The San Francisco Chronicle- 9/8/08

By growing less thirsty crops and investing in more efficient irrigation technology, California farmers could save billions of gallons of water each year - the equivalent of three dams to 20 dams, according to a controversial new report by an influential water policy think tank.

 

Iraq confirms cholera outbreak south of Baghdad 09.08.08

In a study to be released today, researchers at Oakland's Pacific Institute say that before Californians take on costly new dam and reservoir projects, state and federal policymakers need to build on existing methods for reducing agricultural water use.

 

The report, titled "More with Less: Agricultural Water Conservation and Efficiency in California - A Focus on the Delta," stresses that agriculture remains an important part of California's economy. However, with farmers using about 80 percent of the water drawn from the critically ill Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, researchers said agricultural water conservation must expand - and quickly.

 

"No one has ever evaluated the potential for improving the efficiency of agricultural water use," said Peter Gleick, president of the Pacific Institute and co-author of the report. "We found there is a lot of potential for savings ... and they're extensions of things farmers are already doing."

 

Farmers who shift away from water-intensive crops, invest in high-tech watering systems and irrigate only at precise times in the growing cycle could save between 600,000 and 3.4 million acre-feet of water each year, Gleick said. One acre-foot is roughly 326,000 gallons, and represents the amount of water needed to cover 1 acre of land to a depth of 1 foot.

 

The study is part of a larger report to be released by the nonpartisan research group next year and was funded by the David and Lucile Packard Foundation and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.

 

While water use in California has been a historical source of conflict between urban and agricultural consumers, the issue has taken on new urgency in recent years amid predictions of a drier climate, booming population growth and ecological damage to the delta - the hub of the state's water system.

 

The agriculture industry, however, bristles at the notion that its operations are wasteful.

 

"The idea that farmers are not seeking more efficient ways to do business is an insult to California agriculture," said Mike Wade, executive director of the California Farm Water Coalition, a group aimed at helping farmers boost water efficiency. "Changes are occurring when it's cost-effective and when the technology is available."

 

Though Wade said conservation has a role to play in the state's water crisis, he said additional water storage is also necessary. Several state water bond proposals vying for a place on the November ballot include billions for building new dams and reservoirs.

 

The Pacific Institute researchers suggest that dams, or a proposed peripheral canal - which would route water around the delta, where certain fish populations are crashing - may be necessary. But first, researchers said, the state must create a better system for tracking water use.

 

"Wouldn't it be best to know exactly how much water we need to deliver so we don't overbuild (dams) or spend more money than we need to spend?" Gleick said.

 

The report suggests several other practical solutions, including boosting outreach programs to help teach farmers about new techniques and giving farmers tax breaks for water-saving irrigation systems.

 

The report also recommends broader changes to state and federal policies that are sure to draw sharp criticism from farmers.

Gleick said policymakers should reduce or realign federal subsidies that encourage the growing of low-value, water-heavy crops such as alfalfa and cotton.

 

But Wade said the market - not policymakers - drives crop choices.

 

"It's like saying to a restaurant, 'You have to be a shoe store because it uses less water,' " Wade said.

 

Finally, the study recommends that the state develop a more rational water rights system aimed at cutting waste. Under the law, users with the earliest water claims have the highest priority for receiving water. But with the dire situation in the delta, a record-breaking dry spell and some communities under mandatory restrictions, experts say it may be time to re-evaluate how and to whom water is allocated.

 

"We're at an extremely important point where climate change, looming drought and the worsening, deepening ecological problems are all coming together," said Cynthia Koehler, senior consulting attorney at the Environmental Defense Fund. "People realize that 19th century and even 20th century solutions to water problems are not the solutions for the 21st century. We need to look at how we move water around, how we allocate it, how we allocate it for the environment."#

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/08/BA7H12PDTU.DTL

 

 

 

Study: California farmers can profit by saving water

The Associated Press- 9/7/08

By DON THOMPSON

 

California farmers can grow more food more profitably if they switch to water-saving crops and change their irrigation practices in response to the state's ongoing drought, according to a study released Monday.

A report issued by the Oakland-based Pacific Institute says farmers in the Central Valley could save enough water to fill up to 20 new reservoirs by making several changes to curb wasted water.

About a quarter of the state's water-intensive crops like rice, cotton, corn, wheat and alfalfa should give way to fruit and nut trees and row crops like tomatoes, lettuce, cucumbers and melons that can be more selectively irrigated, according to the report

Farmers should use drip or sprinkler irrigation systems instead of flooding grain fields, and crops should only be watered when they need it, a practice requiring more intensive soil and plant monitoring.

Farmers are trending toward many of the practices already, said Pacific Institute president Peter Gleick. But Gleick said the nonpartisan research organization's report is the first comprehensive look at how much water farmers could save.

"It's been a missing piece of the information in the California water debate," he said.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a statewide drought in June because of two years of below-average rainfall, low snowmelt runoff, shrinking reservoir levels and a court-ordered water restrictions to protect crashing fish populations.

Even if the rain and snow returns this winter, global warming could mean less water in the future even as the state's population creeps toward 40 million.

Rising sea levels and earthquakes also threaten earthen levees that channel water through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta east of San Francisco, a primary source of water for agriculture.

State water officials last week announced they will begin buying water from farmers in Northern California to sell to parched southern growers if supplies dry up next summer.

Against that backdrop, the institute's report estimates its recommendations could save up to 3.4 million acre-feet of water each year. An acre-foot of water is enough to cover an acre of land with a foot of water, or the amount of water used annually by an average family of four.

Just one of the proposals ---- watering crops only when they need it ---- would save enough water to fill Hetch Hetchy reservoir in Yosemite National Park 10 times over, Gleick said.

Some of the report's recommendations have merit while others are unrealistic, said Mike Wade, executive director of the Farm Water Coalition, a Sacramento-based nonprofit education group.

"Farmers choose crops that they know they can sell," Wade said. "They shouldn't be arbitrarily asked to switch to different crops merely because they use less water."

Wade also feared the institute wants to change historical water rights laws that protect farmer's supplies, though he welcomed the report's call for financial incentives for farmers who save water.

Gleick said the institute was careful to make recommendations that use readily available methods and technology and wouldn't harm the state's farmers. The report predicts that growing more high-value fruit and vegetable crops that consume less water could boost growers' productivity and profits.

Meanwhile, legislators are considering a bipartisan proposal made by Schwarzenegger and Democratic U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein along with agricultural and business groups to restructure the state's water system.

The $9.3 billion plan includes building more reservoirs and possibly a canal routing fresh water around the brackish delta. The proposal has stalled as legislators remain stuck in budget negotiations more than two months into the fiscal year that began July 1.

The Pacific Institute study argues that the emphasis should be on saving water instead of new water projects that place a greater financial burden on the public. Changing farm practices would mean less need for groundwater or water that flows through the environmentally fragile delta to two-thirds of the state's population.

The report suggests the state could avoid planting 10 percent of its fields as one drought response. And it says California should consider retiring 1.5 million acres of poorly drained land in the San Joaquin Valley to save water and pollution cleanup costs.

But a representative of a 3,000-member trade group said that California could not effectively conserve water without also shoring up the state's water infrastructure, particularly in the delta.

"We're just not going to be able to crop-shift our way out of water shortages," said Wendy Fink-Weber, a spokeswoman for the Western Growers Association. "We think it's irresponsible to suggest it."#

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2008/09/07/news/state/zb54df31ea9bda62d882574bd0077c2eb.txt

 

 

 

Delta-based farms can curb water use, study says

The Contra Costa Times- 9/8/08

By Mike Taugher, Staff Writer

 

If farmers who rely on the Delta watershed made greater use of weather sensors and other technology to more efficiently irrigate crops, they could reduce their water use by 13 percent — an amount equal to more than half of all the water pumped out of the Delta, a study to be released today suggests.

 

And farmers could further cut water use in the beleaguered watershed by planting less pasture and more fruits and vegetables, the study says.

 

The Oakland-based Pacific Institute concluded in the report that farms in the regions of the state that depend on the Delta and its upstream tributaries — the Sacramento Valley, the San Joaquin Valley and the Tulare basin — could use significantly less water and still maintain a healthy agricultural economy.

 

"There are lots of these things that farmers are already doing, but they have to happen faster because the Delta is collapsing," said Peter Gleick, director of the Pacific Institute.

 

Although there is dispute over the degree to which water pumped from the Delta is to blame for the environmental crisis, those problems are forcing water managers to reduce deliveries. The cutbacks have especially hurt farms, which use four times more water than cities and industries combined.

 

Gleick said that despite pressure for a proposed canal to carry water around the Delta and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's push to build more dams, decisionmakers should first look at how much water could be saved by maximizing efficiency.

 

"They're moving fast without all the information they need," he said. "It's irresponsible to make decisions about infrastructure when you don't know how much infrastructure you need."

 

State water and agriculture representatives said that improved conservation is important but that alone will not solve the Delta's water supply and ecosystem problems.

 

"We strongly support conservation, both agriculture and urban," said Lester Snow, director of the state Department of Water Resources. "It's got to be part of the solution. We don't think conservation replaces the need to deal with storage as well as fixing Delta conveyance."

 

A California Farm Bureau water attorney agreed.

 

"The magnitude of the problem is just too big to fool people into thinking ag conservation can get us out of having to debate (a possible peripheral canal)," said Chris Scheuring, adding that the farm bureau is still neutral on the canal.

 

"The more drip (irrigation) we can put in, where it pencils out, the better," he said. "That compares to the more low flow toilets and the less swimming pools, the better."

 

The report is the latest of several from the Oakland-based environmental research group on California water use. In 2003, the institute reported on ways to improve water use efficiency in California cities.

 

The report released today recommends a series of changes to financial incentives, regulations and education to improve the efficiency of water use on the farms that take water upstream of the Delta, in the Delta and from pumps that draw water out of the Delta.

 

Among the recommendations:

n"‚Grant rebates or tax exemptions for purchases of efficient irrigation equipment;

n"‚Reduce farm subsidies for low-value crops that use a lot of water;

n"‚Implement new water rate structures and require farmers in the federal Central Valley Project to fully repay the cost of the project; increase regulation of groundwater;

n"‚Require greater water use efficiency through stiffer regulations;

n"‚Better monitor and track how water is used in California.

 

The report is available on the Pacific Institute's Web site, www.pacinst.org.#

http://www.insidebayarea.com/entertainment/ci_10409155

 

 

San Joaquin proposal part of big public lands bill

The Sacramento Bee- 9/7/08

By Michael Doyle

 

Ambitious San Joaquin River restoration plans are part of a huge public lands bill whose national scope brings both risk and reward.

 

Senators returning to work next week will confront a 760-page package that wraps together more than 90 separate bills. One would restore water flows and salmon runs in the San Joaquin River below Friant Dam.

 

The river bill is big just by itself, with an estimated price tag of several hundred million dollars.

 

The rest of the legislation is even bigger, covering everything from a new West Virginia wilderness to a proposed William Jefferson Clinton Birthplace Home National Historic Site in Hope, Ark.

 

"A large package like this will draw more bipartisan support," noted Democratic Rep. Jim Costa of Fresno. "You have more collective interest, and it's bipartisan."

 

But the same size that attracts multiple sponsors can also make measures like the Omnibus Federal Land Management Acts Bill a big, fat target.

 

With only a few weeks remaining in the congressional session, lawmakers will have to balance the bill's benefits against its potential political costs.

 

"You're facing an unbelievable threat that only you can defeat," Charles Cushman, president of the American Land Rights Association, warned his followers in a recent mass e-mail.

 

While some individual provisions in the big bill may be worthwhile, Cushman said, "a lot are bad."

 

He is attempting to rally conservatives and private property advocates against a bill that he calls "no way to run a government."

 

In truth, omnibus bills are precisely the way Congress often operates. In 1992, for instance, canny authors of the controversial Central Valley Project Improvement Act included it in a package of more than 30 other bills. Even lawmakers leery of the CVPIA, which devoted more of the region's water to protecting the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, found other reasons to accept the overall bill.

 

"I resent, as have others, the fact that we are here held hostage to … the Central Valley Project while we tried to attend to other legitimate projects," Republican Sen. Malcolm Wallop of Wyoming said at the time, "but we were unable to break that."

 

A staunch conservative, Wallop nonetheless voted for the 1992 Western water projects package, which passed the Senate by an overwhelming 83-8 margin.

 

Some of the same environmental activists who backed the 1992 law are now supporting the San Joaquin River restoration effort.

 

This time, though, they are joined by some farm and water organizations, including the Friant Water Users Authority.

 

"Congress, sometimes when they are having difficulty passing individual bills, will package them up together, warts and all," said Ron Jacobsma, the authority's general manager.

 

The San Joaquin River restoration bill is designed to implement a lawsuit settlement first filed in 1988.

 

The bill authorizes $250 million for channel improvements and other work needed to return salmon to the San Joaquin River by 2013.

 

Some lawmakers, including Republican Rep. Devin Nunes of Tulare, and some farmers, including those in the Chowchilla Water District, have raised concerns about potential loss of irrigation water.

 

In part because of the conflict, the Chowchilla Water District has withdrawn from the Friant Water Users Authority.

 

"We are about to start an aggressive ad campaign to educate farmers about the settlement," said Tal Cloud, a Republican political activist who has been rallying opposition to the river deal.

 

The San Joaquin River portion spans 35 pages, about 5 percent of the Omnibus Federal Land Bill's total verbiage. It is the most expensive of the California provisions.

 

The Senate package also includes up to $23 million for a proposed underground storage project in Madera County.#

http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/1216153.html

 

 

 

Drought relief loans available to farmers but not yet needed

The Patterson Irrigator- 9/5/08

By James Leonard

 

A federal loan program designed to help farmers who have suffered losses because of this summer’s declared drought has gone largely untapped, especially by local farmers.

Not one farmer from Stanislaus County has applied for one of the emergency loans, which offer up to $500,000 at low interest rates to family-sized farm operators who can prove they have been directly impacted by the drought, declared earlier this year by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

According to U.S. Farm Service Agency regional spokesman Paul Lehman, 12 loans totaling $1.78 million have been granted in California since the fiscal year began on March 4. John Oosterman, loan manager for the FSA covering Stanislaus and Tuolumne counties, said none have come from the West Side or anywhere else in the county.

“At this point, nobody has applied,” Oosterman said. “It can benefit a number of people, but so far, apparently there’s not been a need for the loan program, at least in Stanislaus County.”

That doesn’t mean local farmers aren’t feeling the drought. They’re just finding ways to deal with it.

Oosterman said droughts damage crops in different ways than freezes or excess rain during bloom. While those unexpected events can cause sudden, major damage, droughts can typically be planned for and worked around if they are not too severe.

Stanislaus County Supervisor Jim DeMartini, himself a farmer, said some have let ground go fallow this season to conserve water. And while water allocations have mostly been cut back, they are not yet low enough to cause too much alarm.

“You’d have to have some kind of economic disaster of some sort (to qualify for an emergency loan),” DeMartini said. “And I don’t know if you can make the case that you’ve got that for most people. Water supplies are tight, but I think everybody has enough to get by.

“We all wish we had more than we have, but we can get by with less.”
Ed Perry, director and farm adviser with the agriculture office of the University of California Cooperative Extension in Modesto, said the current drought isn’t nearly as bad as those that hit California in the 1970s. He said the impact of a drought is different now, though.

 

 “The major difference today is there are more demands on the available water than in the ’70s,” Perry said. “That’s a huge concern, especially for agriculture. (The county’s population) is many timeslarger, so the demand for water has gone up tremendously. Any drought today is relatively more severe because of the competition for water.”

Perry and DeMartini both noted the added negative impact of a court decision to shut down some pumps in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta — a major source of water for local farmers — to protect the Delta smelt, a tiny fish believed to be endangered by the pumps.

For now, it appears farmers are making due with less water. They’re more than a little nervous about the coming winter, though.

“I think everyone is concerned about next year,” DeMartini said. “If the drought continues, there would be a problem.”

For information: www.fsa.usda.gov/pas/disaster/assistance1.htm.#

http://pattersonirrigator.com/content/view/2107/42/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No comments:

Blog Archive