Everyone’s rain dances are working. The Thanksgiving week weather forecast for the San Francisco Bay Area looks more likely for the first precipitation in a month, as California is ravaged by the deadliest wildfire in state history, raging through bone-dry foothills, and sending unhealthy pollution through the most populated regions.
The California Supreme Court will weigh in on whether environmental review is required for each new water well project. The issue of groundwater extraction heightened during California’s prolonged drought. All six justices during their weekly meeting Nov. 14 voted to review an appellate decision involving Stanislaus County.
Fast burning fires, aided by strong, east winds and low humidity, devastated the Butte County community of Paradise over the last week and sent hazardous smoke over the San Francisco Bay area. It’s a tragedy that’s becoming too frequent. Climate change is scorching California. It’s critical for water agencies to adapt to this hotter and drier future. Throughout the state, municipalities are diversifying their supplies by recycling wastewater into drinkable water.
Absent major changes to farming practices and an increase in water supply, Kern County’s farming juggernaut will have to shrink considerably to meet aggressive new targets for conservation. A study commissioned by the Kern Groundwater Authority suggests tremendous job losses are a possibility as water district managers and farmers work toward compliance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.
California voters have rejected Proposition 3, the $8.9 billion water bond, sending a message to politicians. But what is that message? It can’t be that the state’s water problems have been solved. They haven’t been. It can’t be that Californians don’t care about water. Poll after poll shows we do. And it certainly doesn’t mean that more money – and potentially a lot of money – isn’t still needed to modernize our water systems. It is.
Where are the rains of yesteryear? The wet winter of 2017 is a distant memory as the county, like a thirsty desert survivor, staggers into its eighth year of drought. As of this month, the water level at Lake Cachuma, once the main water supply for the Carpinteria Valley, Montecito, Santa Barbara, and the Goleta and Santa Ynez valleys, has dropped back to 31 percent of capacity, a mark the reservoir hit in October 2014, on the way down to a record low of 7 percent in October 2016.
California voters have rejected Proposition 3, the $8.9 billion water bond, sending a message to politicians. But what is that message? It can’t be that the state’s water problems have been solved. They haven’t been. It can’t be that Californians don’t care about water. Poll after poll shows we do. And it certainly doesn’t mean that more money – and potentially a lot of money – isn’t still needed to modernize our water systems. It is.
For all of his accomplishments, when it comes to water issues, Gov. Jerry Brown is leaving Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom with a mess. What’s needed is a paradigm shift — a change in the conversation that doesn’t pit Northern California vs. Southern California and environmentalists against farmers and urban dwellers. Consider: What if Newsom borrowed a page from Brown’s climate change playbook, which called for a big move away from coal and oil in favor of renewable and green energy?
Local water officials went back to the drawing board Wednesday, looking for a way to fund needed repairs to the Friant-Kern canal. The canal is damaged and requires an expensive project to repair. Farmers and water districts hoped voters would authorize the state to foot the bill by approving Proposition 3. They didn’t. The Friant-Kern is like a big water highway. It delivers water from Millerton Lake to farms all over the south valley. An Eyewitness News analysis found that the canal is directly involved in the production of approximately $2 billion of crops every year.
Backers mourned the loss of Proposition 3 on Wednesday, the nearly $9 billion bond measure that would have modernized old dams, restored tainted watersheds and created desalination plants, among dozens of other water projects throughout the state. Prop. 3 — backed by state water agencies, farming organizations, social justice advocates and environmentalists, but not the Sierra Club — lost by 52 to 48 percent, a difference of 320,000 votes out of nearly 7 million ballots cast.
