Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Democrats oppose new dams in California, favor conservation
AP on Bakersfield Californian ^ | 1/25/07 | Don Thompson - ap

Posted on 01/25/2007 5:39:38 PM PST by NormsRevenge

Democrats in the state Senate on Thursday said California does not need to build new reservoirs as it tries to cope with the expected consequences of global warming.

Instead, the state should rely on conservation, underground storage and boosting the height of existing dams.

Their plan, outlined in a series bills, runs counter to Republicans' desire for new reservoirs to help California address the changes anticipated from global climate change.

It sets up a potential clash in the coming months with Republicans and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who proposed $4.5 billion for two new reservoirs and underground water storage in his state of the state speech earlier this month.

"We do not believe that dams at this point are needed. They cost billions of dollars and take years to build," Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, said during a news conference.

Democrats also said California should wisely spend the $9.5 billion in flood-control and water bond money approved by voters in November before it spends more for new dams. Despite the disagreement, Perata predicted lawmakers and the governor will be able to negotiate.

California's average temperature is projected to rise 3 degrees Fahrenheit by 2050 and 5 degrees by 2100, state climatologist Michael Anderson said.

Scientists say the warmer weather will lead to more rain than snow in the Sierra Nevada, the 400-mile-long range that acts as a giant ice box for the state. Its snowpack stores much of the state's water supply, releasing it throughout the spring and summer when it's most in demand by farmers and cities.

Climate-change models say that pattern will change. The snowpack is expected to be smaller and will melt earlier in the year, conditions that could lead to spring flooding and summer drought.

"We all agree these are big challenges to ensure the water supply and to use it efficiently," Perata said. "But we need to get beyond the old and tired maxim that the best way to do that is to build a dam."

Some scientists say additional reservoirs are needed to capture the heavier runoff. Schwarzenegger proposed building one of the reservoirs in a valley about 60 miles north of Sacramento and the other near Fresno.

Sen. Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, said the proposal is premature, in part because studies of the two dam sites won't be completed for two years.

Reacting to the Democrats' proposals, Schwarzenegger said boosting surface storage must be part of the state's long-term water planning. He also advocates desalination, among other measures, said a spokesman, Darrel Ng.

"We must carefully consider all of the possible actions to ensure water supplies, including surface storage - an important part of a responsible overall water management system," Ng said.

Legislative Republicans and farmers are among those saying new reservoirs must be part of any response to global warming. Using water more efficiently and boosting conservation efforts are important but do not go far enough, said Senate Republican Leader Dick Ackerman of Fullerton.

"I think it's pretty clear: If you want to solve the water problems for the state long-term, you have to look at above-ground storage," Ackerman said. "You can't depend on enough groundwater storage and rainfall to take care of it."

Perata introduced a bill that would require the state to "conserve, reuse and recycle where possible. We have not even begun to make a dent in that," he said.

The Democrats' legislative package also includes three other bills. They would speed levee repairs, revamp the state board overseeing flood protection and clarify who's responsible when developers build in flood plains.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: california; conservation; dams; democrats; favor; oppose; perata

1 posted on 01/25/2007 5:39:40 PM PST by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
"We do not believe that dams at this point are needed. They cost billions of dollars and take years to build," Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, said during a news conference.

IOW, we'd have to spend the people's money on projects that benefit the people, rather than putting it directly into our pockts.

2 posted on 01/25/2007 5:42:02 PM PST by AntiKev ("No damage. The world's still turning isn't it?" - Stereo Goes Stellar - Blow Me A Holloway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Conservation? Fine: cut off the Dems' water and electricity.


3 posted on 01/25/2007 5:46:17 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

California should stop stealing so much water from the Colorado River and from Nevada's Owens Valley.

They should put in de-salination plants to be self-reliant.


4 posted on 01/25/2007 5:51:04 PM PST by george76 (Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
California is a desert state and needs to collect and store water for prolonged drought periods. Conservation is essential but you also have to make sure there are adequate water reserves for the future. This means building new dams and upgrading existing ones. The Democrats' aversion to common sense is mind-boggling, to say the least.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

5 posted on 01/25/2007 5:53:32 PM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Their plan, outlined in a series bills, runs counter to Republicans' desire for new reservoirs to help California address the changes anticipated from global climate change.



That would be right in line with the Democrat Governor's wishes.


6 posted on 01/25/2007 5:58:51 PM PST by saganite (Billions and billions and billions-------and that's just the NASA budget!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
I always enjoy headlines from the past. The 60s, to be exact.
The fruitcakes have been influential a long time.
Occasional flooding is good for you!
7 posted on 01/25/2007 6:06:00 PM PST by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
"We all agree these are big challenges to ensure the water supply and to use it efficiently," Perata said. "But we need to get beyond the old and tired maxim tried and true method that the best way to do that is to build a dam. What that might be, I haven't a clue!"

There.

I fixed it.

8 posted on 01/25/2007 6:08:44 PM PST by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961

Time to bring back

If it's yellow, it's mellow
If it's brown, flush it down


9 posted on 01/25/2007 6:11:06 PM PST by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ...... California 2007,, Where's a script re-write guy when ya need 'em?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
this people are all crazy. they all want to plan for a phony dnc / environmental scam ? who the hell can plan for weather in the future ?
10 posted on 01/25/2007 6:53:52 PM PST by BurtSB (the price of freedom is eternal vigilance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

No news here. They've been against new dams since the 1970's. "Environmental concerns." Meaning hippy backpackers would rather look at a river than a lake.


11 posted on 01/25/2007 7:09:55 PM PST by popdonnelly (Our first obligation is to keep the power of the Presidency out of the hands of the Clintons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
We don't need more water; we don't need more power; we don't need new highways; we don't need more housing.

But 15 million more illegal aliens? Yeah, we need those. ;)

12 posted on 01/25/2007 7:13:10 PM PST by Mr. Jeeves ("When the government is invasive, the people are wanting." -- Tao Te Ching)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson