California regulators defend farmers' access to water in drought [Reuters]
The
administration of California Governor Jerry Brown hit back on Thursday against
criticism that its drought conservation mandates apply to consumers but do not
include the state's $45 billion agriculture business. Pushback from top water
regulators came in response to complaints from environmentalists that
agriculture, which accounts for 80 percent of water used by humans in the most
populous U.S. state, should also be required to conserve. "Agriculture in
California produces the food we all rely on," said Secretary for Natural
Resources John Laird at a briefing on the drought in Sacramento. "Folks
want to point fingers, but we're all in this together."…Making water even
harder for farmers to get could damage the state's economy and force up food
prices, he said.
California
farmers mount PR campaign to counter backlash over water use [Sacramento Bee]
When
Gov. Jerry Brown announced his unprecedented water use reduction order last
week, California farmers were largely spared. They quickly developed another
problem: Bad PR. At issue was the apparent disconnect between Brown’s focus on
urban water use and the fact that agriculture – not cities or towns – accounts
for roughly 80 percent of all water used by people in California. Newspaper and
television stations hammered on the statistic, while critics counted gallons of
water required for different foods. The almond, an especially profitable and
water-heavy crop, became a national symbol of California’s water problems,
forcing growers to fight back by promoting the nutritional value of their
food….In an effort to push back, industry officials began meeting in recent
days with politicians, business people and journalists….Farmers argue that
so-called “environmental water” should be taken into account when calculating
total water use, putting agriculture’s consumption at closer to 40 percent.
Paul Wenger, president of the California Farm Bureau Federation, made this case
to reporters outside a drought forum in Sacramento on Thursday.
'Almond
shaming' targets California growers for water use [KCRA-TV, Sacramento]
Northern
California farmers are defending themselves from people criticizing how much
water they use to irrigate their crops in the ongoing drought. It's called
"almond shaming" and it started when this statistic was released to
the public: "It takes one gallon of water to produce one
almond."…That's when the media discovered California's $11 billion almond
crop was drinking up about 10 percent of the state’s agricultural water and the
finger-pointing began, sparking the Almond Board of California to release what
it referred to as a "fact sheet" containing eight items about
almonds, agriculture and the drought….The Almond Hullers and Processors
Association believes almond growers are being unfairly targeted. President
Kelly Covello insisted the industry has decreased its water usage by 33 percent
in the past two decades and is now using other methods to do its part to
conserve.
Stanislaus
River pact would end local defiance [Modesto Bee]
The
Oakdale and South San Joaquin irrigation districts are optimistic that state
water officials on Friday will approve a compromise that should satisfy local
farmers and fish advocates and keep Tulloch Lake high enough for recreation
until fall. If terms are finalized Friday, the irrigation districts would end
this week’s defiant snatch of Stanislaus River water meant to help fish, and a
surge of higher-than-normal flows would resume. A deal would guarantee that
farmers near Oakdale, Riverbank, Escalon, Ripon and Manteca get the amount of
snowmelt captured behind New Melones Dam that they’ve been counting on….The
districts for a short time Wednesday channeled extra water, released by federal
agencies, to Woodward Reservoir near Oakdale rather than letting it run down
the Stanislaus, where it would help propel young steelhead trout toward the
ocean.
Sites
Reservoir not alone on water bond project list [Marysville Appeal-Democrat]
When
it comes to public money for water storage projects, there's just not enough to
go around. The California Water Commission, which will ultimately select the
storage projects that will be funded by the water bond voters passed in
November, recently completed a survey to gauge the level of interest for
storage projects. In all, 147 potential projects responded seeking more than $6
billion in public funding. The water bond carved out $2.7 billion for funding
water storage projects, which means that many of the projects will not receive
the full amount of funding requested, said Ajay Goyal, manager of the statewide
infrastructure investigations branch for the Department of Water
Resources….Sites Reservoir is one of the largest storage projects proposed, and
could cost around $3.5 billion. The water bond can fund a maximum of 50 percent
of that cost, although, given the competition, that appears unlikely, said Thad
Bettner, general manager of the Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District. But Bettner
is still confident that Sites will be awarded a portion of the bond money,
because about 75 percent of the projects that responded to the survey don't
meet the criteria for receiving funding.
Opinion: Please don’t tell us
how to farm [Marin Independent Journal]
The
Local Coastal Plan (LCP) update is Marin’s opportunity to revisit the original
— 1981 — edition of its Coastal Act policy. Over the six-year update process,
ranchers have shared the realities of present day farming with county planners
and state Coastal Commission staff in a sincere effort to ensure that the
environment is protected and family farms remain viable in coastal Marin.
Throughout this process, the actions and attitudes of certain environmental
activists towards our agriculture has been disappointing….Stringent coastal
permit requirements for production changes would especially punish young
farmers struggling to start new ventures and producers on modest farm incomes
trying to adapt to a changing marketplace. For those who care about local
agriculture, please urge our county supervisors and the Coastal Commission to
leave the business of farming up to the farmers and to support the longstanding
precedent to adapt production without permit processes.
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