Court ruling restores right to limit Russian River water use [San Francisco Chronicle]
A
state appeals court has restored the authority of California water regulators
to direct reductions in cold-weather sprays by grape growers and other
waterfront farmers along the Russian River that have led to deaths of endangered
species of salmon….The growers could ask the state Supreme Court to review the
case. Attorney Jack Rice of the California Farm Bureau Federation, which filed
arguments in the growers' support, said the ruling was an unwarranted expansion
of the state water board's authority to impose regulations, an issue that is
"particularly important given this drought year. "It's a real blow to
folks working collaboratively to find good solutions," Rice said.
Congress tackling
drought relief to aid California [Fresno Bee]
Lawmakers
working both above and below the surface on California drought relief are
making explicit progress this week. While insisting on secrecy for key
deal-making, House of Representatives and Senate members are also publicly
moving legislation. A $34.2 billion energy and water funding bill approved
Tuesday by a Senate panel, and related movement on the House side expected
Wednesday, showcase the overt side of the ledger. "The purpose is to help
mitigate the impact of severe drought," Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein,
D-Calif., said of the Senate bill Tuesday.
Rally planned in
Modesto against state effort to limit river water diversions [Modesto Bee]
Stanislaus
County farmers and politicians will rally Thursday in opposition to a state
effort to regulate water rights. Because of water shortages caused by the
drought, California’s Water Resources Control Board next month will consider
curtailing how much more can be diverted from the state’s rivers. That includes
limiting the century-old water rights relied on by many northern San Joaquin
Valley irrigation districts and landowners.…To sink the water board’s efforts
to limit river diversions, Stanislaus’ Farm Bureau and several elected
officials will host a gathering at 7:30 p.m. Thursday about what’s being
proposed.
California soda
labeling bill fails in Assembly committee [Sacramento Bee]
Casting
doubt on the effectiveness of food labels as a public health tool, California
lawmakers on Tuesday turned back legislation that would require warnings on
sugary beverages. “It’s an honorable effort, but I feel it’s ineffective,” said
Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, D-San Diego, who acknowledged that soda
manufacturers are prominent job generators in her district. “I think this bill
creates as much confusion as it does information. A label which will appear on
soda and sports drinks with no labels appearing on chocolate milk, juices or
alcoholic beverages sends the wrong message.” Senate Bill 1000 slipped out of
the Senate last month with the bare minimum 21 votes needed to advance.
Legislators on the Assembly Health Committee halted its progress, with two
Democrats voting against the measure and four others abstaining. The measure
fell three votes short of the 10 needed to pass.
Supervisors change
stance on Paso Robles groundwater district [San Luis Obispo Tribune]
In
a major departure from its previous stance, the county Board of Supervisors on
Tuesday conditioned its support for a bill in the state Legislature to form a
Paso Robles water district on changing the bill so that the district is formed
by a majority of landowners in the basin. The bill has already been approved by
the state Assembly and has moved to the Senate, where the Senate Governance and
Finance Committee recommended making some changes. In two separate votes on
Tuesday, county supervisors voted 3-2 to oppose those Senate committee changes
unless the bill also is amended to change how the district is formed.
Editorial: Congress shouldn't muddy the waters on the EPA's Clean
Water Act rule [Los Angeles Times]
The
Clean Water Act, which has been on the books since 1972,, has slowed the
degradation of the nation's lakes, rivers and streams by blocking polluters
from using waterways as sewers. Careful oversight by the Environmental
Protection Agency has brought many damaged rivers back to health, restoring
them as safe drinking water sources and wildlife habitats and allowing them to
continue bringing fresh water to environmentally sensitive wetlands. A pair of
U.S. Supreme Court rulings over the last 15 years found some EPA
interpretations of the act overly broad, but the court failed to offer clear
guidance on what was permissible and left it to the agency to craft rules
governing just which waters the act covers. After considering scientific
studies demonstrating the interconnection of waterways, and after a long and
painstaking rule-making process, the agency proposed a sensible rule and put it
out for public comment in March. The comment period remains open through the
middle of October.
Ag
Today is distributed by the CFBF Communications/News Division to county Farm
Bureaus, CFBF directors and CFBF staff, for information purposes; stories may
not be republished without permission. Some story links may require site
registration. To be removed from this mailing list, reply to this
message and please provide your name and e-mail address. For more
information about Ag Today, contact 916-561-5550 or news@cfbf.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment