California drought: High-bidding farmers battle in water auctions [San Jose Mercury News]
One
of the worst droughts in state history is pushing water prices to record levels
-- fraying nerves, eroding bank accounts and stress-testing the state's
"water market," an informal and largely hidden network of buyers and
sellers. Water is essential to life. But it's also a commodity, like oil or
gold, and its prices swing in response to supply and demand, geography and
decisions out of Sacramento. Market-driven "water trading" is helpful
in a drought, say experts, because it is an agile way to move water from the
haves to have-nots, and from lower-value to high-value uses. For those with
water, it may be more profitable to sell it than grow crops; in fact, it may be
their only way of paying their bills….But the contentious water market can pit
neighbor against neighbor, favoring those with the oldest rights to water, the
most underground water or the deepest pockets.
Stanislaus
County irrigation districts pumping record amounts of groundwater [Modesto Bee]
Despite
widespread concerns about declining groundwater levels, some Stanislaus County
irrigation districts have dramatically increased well pumping this year.
Modesto Irrigation District wells pumped 311 percent more groundwater this January
through June than they did during the same months last year….The Oakdale
Irrigation District’s wells also are being pumped at what appears to be a
record-breaking pace…. Increased agricultural pumping is part of a statewide
trend to help farmers cope with the drought by substituting groundwater for
reduced rainfall and the subsequent declines in stored water supplies….There’s
a serious downside to pumping all that groundwater: Underground water tables
are dropping and increasing numbers of shallow domestic wells are going dry.
Commentary: Coalition forms to
manage California's groundwater [Los Angeles Times]
So
let me get this straight: The state government is telling us we can't hose down
the driveway and should feel guilty about watering the lawn. But it's OK for
somebody to pump all the groundwater he wants? The policy-makers are padlocking
flush toilets and shutting off showers at some state parks. But they're too
lazy or cowardly to regulate people's wells?...Pavley and Dickinson are
sponsoring separate bills that would essentially do the same thing: Command
local governments to manage groundwater so it becomes sustainable. And if they
don't, the state could step in and regulate. The senator tried something like
this five years ago when legislators adopted a broad water package that contained
an $11-billion bond — since shelved because voters undoubtedly would have been
repulsed by the pork stench — and a plumbing makeover for the Sacramento-San
Joaquin River Delta. But the groundwater regulation was blocked by interests
objecting to bureaucrats messing with folks' wells.
Editorial: Spending on the
Delta a sticking point in the water bond [Sacramento Bee]
If
Gov. Jerry Brown and lawmakers want voters to weigh in this year on a
multibillion-dollar water bond – a big if – they will need to compromise on
what may seem like an arcane point: Who controls the money earmarked for the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta?...The size of the bond might be relatively easy
to settle, assuming legislators can limit their wish list. Perhaps more
complicated would be how to spend whatever money is earmarked to aid the Delta
ecosystem. The reason has to do with Brown’s proposal to build twin
35-mile-long, 40-foot-diameter tunnels, even though none of the bond money
would directly be used to pay for the water diversions. All sides in the
discussion claim they want the bond to be “tunnel neutral.” But what that means
depends on who is using the term.
Cap-and-trade
could aid preservation of California farmland [Sacramento Bee]
…More
money of the type Port tapped into will soon be available, per an obscure
section of this year’s budget agreement that will offer millions to protect
California farmland from the forces of urbanization….Also tucked into the
legislation are directions to set aside agricultural land on the periphery of
cities. It is meant to shield farmland from urban development, allocating a new
source of money for a decades-old concept. Proponents believe the idea meshes
with a broader vision for urban planning: a California where more people live
in compact urban centers, commuting without relying on cars that percolate
greenhouse gases into the air….Compared to transit and housing, farmland
preservation will draw a small amount of funding…. But if the overall revenue
from auctions of carbon permits grows, so too could that annual outlay.
Influx
of young women changes the face of California farming [Sacramento Bee]
…The
2012 USDA census found that the number of new farmers between the ages of 25
and 34 had grown 11 percent since the previous census was taken in 2007. The
number of women farming in California has steadily increased over the past
three decades. The 1978 USDA census counted 6,202 women who listed farming as
their main occupation. By 2012, there were 13,984. These new farmers are
embracing different delivery methods that don’t involve bulk commodity sales to
food processing companies. They’re peddling produce directly to consumers
through farmers’ markets, farm stands and subscriptions for produce boxes.
Those sales methods increased 8 percent from 2007.
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