|
Post by AztecWilliam on Aug 15, 2009 10:00:43 GMT -8
California is, or at least was, the most productive agricultural state in the union. Now, however, the vital Central Valley is becoming a dust bowl because of a federally mandated cutoff of water from the Sacramento Delta. 40,000 people, many very poor to begin with, are out of work. This is a disaster, but the feds seem ready to make it worse. I don't see how this cannot become a huge negative for the Democrats. It's already a huge negative for people out of work in the Central Valley. online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204619004574318621482123090.html?mod=djemEditorialPageAzWm
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Aug 15, 2009 10:34:45 GMT -8
Everybody loves to blame the fish, but the simple fact is that Socal wastes vast amounts of water on landscaping and golf courses that would otherwise be available for ag irrigation. And while many farmworkers have become unemployed, the fishing industry has been devastated by the decline in fish populations. And let's face another simple fact. The reason the Central Valley has so much ag is due to sweetheart water deals, some of which date back to the 1910s and farmers there often pay 10 percent of what farmers down here pay. And lastly, in certain areas of the Central Valley, the farm land has disappeared under houses as some of the cities have become bedroom communities for the Bay Area. The farm land was not converted due to lack of water since the beginnings of the conversions go back to the 1990s.
=Bob
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Aug 15, 2009 10:52:28 GMT -8
Everybody loves to blame the fish, but the simple fact is that Socal wastes vast amounts of water on landscaping and golf courses that would otherwise be available for ag irrigation. And while many farmworkers have become unemployed, the fishing industry has been devastated by the decline in fish populations. And let's face another simple fact. The reason the Central Valley has so much ag is due to sweetheart water deals, some of which date back to the 1910s and farmers there often pay 10 percent of what farmers down here pay. And lastly, in certain areas of the Central Valley, the farm land has disappeared under houses as some of the cities have become bedroom communities for the Bay Area. The farm land was not converted due to lack of water since the beginnings of the conversions go back to the 1990s. =Bob Why not send your response to the Democratic House members who represent the Central Valley? I'm sure it will play well with those out of work folks thereabouts. ;D Just so you don't misunderstand, I realize that the water situation in CA and other western states is a serous one with no easy solution. (However, I do doubt that the fishing industry in Northern CA has lost 40,000 jobs.) AzWm
|
|
|
Post by uwaztec on Aug 15, 2009 11:46:20 GMT -8
William...some things for you to ponder. I wonder what the congressman representing Monterey Co., Fort Bragg, San Fran and other marinas whose commercial salmon fisherman have lost their livelihoods are arguing? Impacts to rivers in California (especially the klamath) affects Oregon as well... you need to factor this into your impact analysis. Also, you may want to research what the total economic impact to commercial and sport fishing in California is due to salmon closures... it may be higher than you think. Also, to be Devil's advocate, how many of the 40,000 jobs are illegal aliens? I thought the Right objects to aliens working here and draining the economy? What are you advocating? Should we mirror China where anything goes regarding impacts to the environment? The "Wild Wild West" is over. A time that the west had unlimited resources is a thing of the past... a tough lesson that we are learning. Maybe a family of 2 living in a 5,000 square foot house on 4 acres in a desert and using the same amount of water as some 20 home subdivisions is impractical?... yes, I agree with "Freedom".... but I say our heritage includes the allowance of at least a few healthy salmon / steelhead tributaries in the north part of our State... I think the southern populations are basically dead and I'd rather put our efforts North.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Aug 15, 2009 12:10:16 GMT -8
William...some things for you to ponder. I wonder what the congressman representing Monterey Co., Fort Bragg, San Fran and other marinas whose commercial salmon fisherman have lost their livelihoods are arguing? Impacts to rivers in California (especially the klamath) affects Oregon as well... you need to factor this into your impact analysis. Also, you may want to research what the total economic impact to commercial and sport fishing in California is due to salmon closures... it may be higher than you think. Also, to be Devil's advocate, how many of the 40,000 jobs are illegal aliens? I thought the Right objects to aliens working here and draining the economy? What are you advocating? Should we mirror China where anything goes regarding impacts to the environment? The "Wild Wild West" is over. A time that the west had unlimited resources is a thing of the past... a tough lesson that we are learning. Maybe a family of 2 living in a 5,000 square foot house on 4 acres in a desert and using the same amount of water as some 20 home subdivisions is impractical?... yes, I agree with "Freedom".... but I say our heritage includes the allowance of at least a few healthy salmon / steelhead tributaries in the north part of our State... I think the southern populations are basically dead and I'd rather put our efforts North. As I said, it's a tough issue to solve. On the other hand, maybe that family of 2 is producing food for those 20 homes. I freely admit that I am not as familiar with the impact on the fishing industry as with the Central Valley dilemma. I travel up and down 5 and 99 once or twice a year, you see. It's going to be a real fight to figure out what to do. Maybe one half of all Californians should just move East and leave us native born to our own devices. AzWm
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Aug 15, 2009 12:16:31 GMT -8
William...some things for you to ponder. I wonder what the congressman representing Monterey Co., Fort Bragg, San Fran and other marinas whose commercial salmon fisherman have lost their livelihoods are arguing? Impacts to rivers in California (especially the klamath) affects Oregon as well... you need to factor this into your impact analysis. Also, you may want to research what the total economic impact to commercial and sport fishing in California is due to salmon closures... it may be higher than you think. Also, to be Devil's advocate, how many of the 40,000 jobs are illegal aliens? I thought the Right objects to aliens working here and draining the economy? What are you advocating? Should we mirror China where anything goes regarding impacts to the environment? The "Wild Wild West" is over. A time that the west had unlimited resources is a thing of the past... a tough lesson that we are learning. Maybe a family of 2 living in a 5,000 square foot house on 4 acres in a desert and using the same amount of water as some 20 home subdivisions is impractical?... yes, I agree with "Freedom".... but I say our heritage includes the allowance of at least a few healthy salmon / steelhead tributaries in the north part of our State... I think the southern populations are basically dead and I'd rather put our efforts North. Very tough issue. I wonder what the environmental impact of the del-sal plants is or will be. That could be a partial solution. I also think that grey water to your yard is long over due. I can't get comfortable with the "toilet to tap" idea even though it is surely safe. If we put as much effort into solving the water issue and in restoring the fisheries as the dunderheads in Washington are putting into trying to socialize health care it might be done by now.
|
|
|
Post by sportnlyf on Aug 15, 2009 14:23:01 GMT -8
Uwaztec, I think you are missing Azwm's general modus operandi, which is to try to paint a picture that points blame at Obama or the democrats. Not to suggest that his finger pointing is political and shallow, but he says he has become familiar with the central valley dilemma because he drives up and down 5/99 once or twice a year. To be honest, I don't think switching to Highway 1 would help him understand the impacts on the fishing industry as much as it has helped him to understand agriculture and water issues - which are indeed complex.
I won't stoop to blame a particular political party for the actions and in some cases greed that have contributed to the water dilemma that faces not only California, but the southwest and many other areas as well.
The fact is that most of the central valley was an enormous and highly valuable ecologically freshwater marsh that was dewatered through the damming, diking and diversion of rivers, mostly by "big government" (Bureau of Reclamation) in order to accomodate agriculture and development.
Over time, we have come to measure the benefits of these actions against their consequences, most of which were difficult to understand right away, because they are cumulative and they seemed tolerable until we passed a threshold of collapse or major impact.
We are pretty much screwed at this point and there is plenty of blame to go around, far too much and for far too long to blame a single political party, unless your aim is so shallow as to try to make a phony political point.
If you would like, you can blame:
Ourselves along with the developers and politicians who have continued to build in areas where there is not sufficient water in reasonable proximity. In San Diego, rainfall, runoff and local storage capacity provides enough sustainable water for a population of 50,000 people, a number that we exceeded some time ago. As a result we take water from other regions, almost all of it coming from either the Colorado River or Northern California. Hardly seems fair to them does it, but then, we all like the weather (little rain) and the politicians looking to expand the tax base and developers looking for huge profits have loved building us more homes, all the while ignoring and denying the water issues;
Agribusiness which is subsidized enormously by "big government" and has historically fought government efforts aimed to conserve water. Their subsidized water has always been so inexpensive that it was much easier to flood irrigate fields and groves at an enormous waste of that precious water. Instead of driving, if you were to walk some of the fields and groves between Redding and Sacramento, you might find where some or our anadramous fish runs have gone, particularly salmon, steelhead and American shad as the fry of these fish were pumped with the water from the river in order to flood irrigate fields. Many of those that remained in the rivers succumbed to the toxins associated with the pesticides and herbicides that drained back into the river;
Commercial as well as recreational fisherment who have fought over fishery limits, restrictions and allocations to the point that one day they will have to flip a coin to see who will get the head and who will get the tail of the last fish in the river;
Enormous processing ships which are tied to fleets which are not only grossly overfishing target species, but wasting even more poundage as by-catch;
Industries which have greatly polluted the waters of the delta with the legal as well as illegal discharge of contaminants that have disrpted the food chain target species are dependent upon;
Politicians bought off from their regulatory responsibilities as law makers by campaign contributions.
There are of course, many other issues involved and evolving in this dilemma, but laying the blame on a person or party for their efforts, however feeble to finally address a problem caused by so many is as cheap as it is shallow and political.
Desalination works fine as a process (our own plant Pt. Loma was moved to Guantanamo during the Cuban Missle crisis), but its costs will be unacceptable until there is no other source. Keep in mind that in additions the costs associated with turning saltwater into potable water, there will be the cost of electricity to pump that water since few of us live at or below sea level, mitigation costs for both inflow and outflow impacts, etc.
Gray water use should be helpful to a certain level yet to be determined.
Sewage reclamation is proven and safe (but costly), and will always be plagued by hysteria, depsite the fact that the water we now receive from both the Colorado River and Northern California receives reclaimed effluent along the way.
In summary and one way or another, the blame lies with the collective WE, and believe me, WE are screwed.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Aug 15, 2009 17:36:20 GMT -8
Uwaztec, If you would like, you can blame: Ourselves along with the developers and politicians who have continued to build in areas where there is not sufficient water in reasonable proximity. In San Diego, rainfall, runoff and local storage capacity provides enough sustainable water for a population of 50,000 people, a number that we exceeded some time ago. As a result we take water from other regions, almost all of it coming from either the Colorado River or Northern California. Hardly seems fair to them does it, but then, we all like the weather (little rain) and the politicians looking to expand the tax base and developers looking for huge profits have loved building us more homes, all the while ignoring and denying the water issues; Well, keep a couple things in mind. First, San Diego is pretty much built out. Most of the vacant land is outside the County Water Authority line, which means the water comes from other sources, mainly wells, North of Escondido and east of I-15 and east, IIRC, of Alpine in the south, although I can't swear to Alpine. And second, the problem isn't new houses as much as it is the allowance for landscaping. There are houses in this city that were built from anywhere between 1880 and 1970 that have lawns, use water and precede the development of the 3rd ring burbs like Mira Mesa and RB. New Transit Oriented Development has little outside water use since there's not all that much landscaping, so continuing with that isn't a great problem. It's the insane idea that we can keep watering lawns, other landscaping and golf courses at the rate we've been doing so and not run into a water shortage. There needs to be a culture shift that rejects the notion that a lawn that's the color of California gold in the Summer will reduce the property value. And it will be forced on everyone sooner or later because whether or not there has been a drought in the Sierras, there has most certainly been a drought in the Colorado River basin. And while I'll admit that William knows a fair bit of history, he needs to look more at the history of the Southwest and Great Basin. Around 1130 AD a drought started and lasted for about 170 years. There is nothing to suggest that such a cycle won't occur again. Unless I'm mistaken, the Anasazi went out of business because of that drought. Bill would say that technology can overcome that and perhaps it can, but water is going to get a whole bunch more expensive over the next couple of decades and water rationing may be a fact of life. =Bob
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Aug 15, 2009 17:38:24 GMT -8
William...some things for you to ponder. I wonder what the congressman representing Monterey Co., Fort Bragg, San Fran and other marinas whose commercial salmon fisherman have lost their livelihoods are arguing? Impacts to rivers in California (especially the klamath) affects Oregon as well... you need to factor this into your impact analysis. Also, you may want to research what the total economic impact to commercial and sport fishing in California is due to salmon closures... it may be higher than you think. Also, to be Devil's advocate, how many of the 40,000 jobs are illegal aliens? I thought the Right objects to aliens working here and draining the economy? What are you advocating? Should we mirror China where anything goes regarding impacts to the environment? The "Wild Wild West" is over. A time that the west had unlimited resources is a thing of the past... a tough lesson that we are learning. Maybe a family of 2 living in a 5,000 square foot house on 4 acres in a desert and using the same amount of water as some 20 home subdivisions is impractical?... yes, I agree with "Freedom".... but I say our heritage includes the allowance of at least a few healthy salmon / steelhead tributaries in the north part of our State... I think the southern populations are basically dead and I'd rather put our efforts North. Very tough issue. I wonder what the environmental impact of the del-sal plants is or will be. That could be a partial solution. I also think that grey water to your yard is long over due. I can't get comfortable with the "toilet to tap" idea even though it is surely safe. If we put as much effort into solving the water issue and in restoring the fisheries as the dunderheads in Washington are putting into trying to socialize health care it might be done by now. Why would anyone put thought into that when every attempt to restore the fisheries is attacked by conservatives? As for toilet to tap, you should be comfortable with it since every drop of water that comes from the Colorado is already toilet to tap. =Bob
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Aug 15, 2009 17:56:27 GMT -8
Sport, you do me a grave injustice! I am not, repeat NOT, blaming this on Obama. This is a conflict that has been going on for a long time. I was not completely joking when I suggested that 50% of Californians could help solve the problem by moving east. You are just 5 years younger than I, and that means (if you grew up here) you can remember how nice it was in many ways not to have so many people in this state. I can remember back to the late 1940s. Orange County was far nicer then than it is now, at least in my opinion. But the people are here; that's a fact. I don't have answers. I doubt anyone does. Oh, yes, the travel routes issue. I think I did not express myself very well when I mentioned highways 5 and 99. I was just trying to explain that I am more familiar with the Central Valley than I am with the area on the coast affected by water shortage problems. Actually, what I am personally familiar with in that sense is pretty irrelevant to this discussion. Soooo. . . never mind! AzWm
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Aug 16, 2009 6:33:14 GMT -8
Very tough issue. I wonder what the environmental impact of the del-sal plants is or will be. That could be a partial solution. I also think that grey water to your yard is long over due. I can't get comfortable with the "toilet to tap" idea even though it is surely safe. If we put as much effort into solving the water issue and in restoring the fisheries as the dunderheads in Washington are putting into trying to socialize health care it might be done by now. Why would anyone put thought into that when every attempt to restore the fisheries is attacked by conservatives? As for toilet to tap, you should be comfortable with it since every drop of water that comes from the Colorado is already toilet to tap. =Bob Oh! Yes! Those terrible Conservatives! When will you wake up and see that this is about the economics of water and fish?
|
|
|
Post by uwaztec on Aug 16, 2009 7:17:24 GMT -8
Uwaztec, I think you are missing Azwm's general modus operandi, which is to try to paint a picture that points blame at Obama or the democrats. Not to suggest that his finger pointing is political and shallow, but he says he has become familiar with the central valley dilemma because he drives up and down 5/99 once or twice a year. To be honest, I don't think switching to Highway 1 would help him understand the impacts on the fishing industry as much as it has helped him to understand agriculture and water issues - which are indeed complex. I won't stoop to blame a particular political party for the actions and in some cases greed that have contributed to the water dilemma that faces not only California, but the southwest and many other areas as well. The fact is that most of the central valley was an enormous and highly valuable ecologically freshwater marsh that was dewatered through the damming, diking and diversion of rivers, mostly by "big government" (Bureau of Reclamation) in order to accomodate agriculture and development. Over time, we have come to measure the benefits of these actions against their consequences, most of which were difficult to understand right away, because they are cumulative and they seemed tolerable until we passed a threshold of collapse or major impact. We are pretty much screwed at this point and there is plenty of blame to go around, far too much and for far too long to blame a single political party, unless your aim is so shallow as to try to make a phony political point. If you would like, you can blame: Ourselves along with the developers and politicians who have continued to build in areas where there is not sufficient water in reasonable proximity. In San Diego, rainfall, runoff and local storage capacity provides enough sustainable water for a population of 50,000 people, a number that we exceeded some time ago. As a result we take water from other regions, almost all of it coming from either the Colorado River or Northern California. Hardly seems fair to them does it, but then, we all like the weather (little rain) and the politicians looking to expand the tax base and developers looking for huge profits have loved building us more homes, all the while ignoring and denying the water issues; Agribusiness which is subsidized enormously by "big government" and has historically fought government efforts aimed to conserve water. Their subsidized water has always been so inexpensive that it was much easier to flood irrigate fields and groves at an enormous waste of that precious water. Instead of driving, if you were to walk some of the fields and groves between Redding and Sacramento, you might find where some or our anadramous fish runs have gone, particularly salmon, steelhead and American shad as the fry of these fish were pumped with the water from the river in order to flood irrigate fields. Many of those that remained in the rivers succumbed to the toxins associated with the pesticides and herbicides that drained back into the river; Commercial as well as recreational fisherment who have fought over fishery limits, restrictions and allocations to the point that one day they will have to flip a coin to see who will get the head and who will get the tail of the last fish in the river; Enormous processing ships which are tied to fleets which are not only grossly overfishing target species, but wasting even more poundage as by-catch; Industries which have greatly polluted the waters of the delta with the legal as well as illegal discharge of contaminants that have disrpted the food chain target species are dependent upon; Politicians bought off from their regulatory responsibilities as law makers by campaign contributions. There are of course, many other issues involved and evolving in this dilemma, but laying the blame on a person or party for their efforts, however feeble to finally address a problem caused by so many is as cheap as it is shallow and political. Desalination works fine as a process (our own plant Pt. Loma was moved to Guantanamo during the Cuban Missle crisis), but its costs will be unacceptable until there is no other source. Keep in mind that in additions the costs associated with turning saltwater into potable water, there will be the cost of electricity to pump that water since few of us live at or below sea level, mitigation costs for both inflow and outflow impacts, etc. Gray water use should be helpful to a certain level yet to be determined. Sewage reclamation is proven and safe (but costly), and will always be plagued by hysteria, depsite the fact that the water we now receive from both the Colorado River and Northern California receives reclaimed effluent along the way. In summary and one way or another, the blame lies with the collective WE, and believe me, WE are screwed. Good analysis...thanks!
|
|
|
Post by uwaztec on Aug 16, 2009 7:24:55 GMT -8
Why would anyone put thought into that when every attempt to restore the fisheries is attacked by conservatives? As for toilet to tap, you should be comfortable with it since every drop of water that comes from the Colorado is already toilet to tap. =Bob Oh! Yes! Those terrible Conservatives! When will you wake up and see that this is about the economics of water and fish? Winn... the problem with Conservatives is that their loudest voices: Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity etc. are incapable of looking at the whole picture. They feed their true beleiver audiences absolute garbage that there is plenty of water, the fight over water in California is all about "saving a stupid little minnow" and that the issue is manufactured by the extreme enviro wackos. Of course they are doing their audiences no favors in understanding the big picture. Is that because their audiences cannot handle issues that are complex and have no easy answers, or is it because most of these individuals (talk show hosts) never went to College and are incapable of understanding complex issues themselves? I am not including you or William in this category....but you asked the question.
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Aug 16, 2009 11:05:17 GMT -8
Oh! Yes! Those terrible Conservatives! When will you wake up and see that this is about the economics of water and fish? Winn... the problem with Conservatives is that their loudest voices: Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity etc. are incapable of looking at the whole picture. They feed their true beleiver audiences absolute garbage that there is plenty of water, the fight over water in California is all about "saving a stupid little minnow" and that the issue is manufactured by the extreme enviro wackos. Of course they are doing their audiences no favors in understanding the big picture. Is that because their audiences cannot handle issues that are complex and have no easy answers, or is it because most of these individuals (talk show hosts) never went to College and are incapable of understanding complex issues themselves? I am not including you or William in this category....but you asked the question. I think that issues like these would be more likely to be able to gather broad based support if politics were set aside. We need to find solutions rather than how to skewer Conservatives or liberals.
|
|
|
Post by uwaztec on Aug 16, 2009 12:00:51 GMT -8
Winn... the problem with Conservatives is that their loudest voices: Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity etc. are incapable of looking at the whole picture. They feed their true beleiver audiences absolute garbage that there is plenty of water, the fight over water in California is all about "saving a stupid little minnow" and that the issue is manufactured by the extreme enviro wackos. Of course they are doing their audiences no favors in understanding the big picture. Is that because their audiences cannot handle issues that are complex and have no easy answers, or is it because most of these individuals (talk show hosts) never went to College and are incapable of understanding complex issues themselves? I am not including you or William in this category....but you asked the question. I think that issues like these would be more likely to be able to gather broad based support if politics were set aside. We need to find solutions rather than how to skewer Conservatives or liberals. Win.. so question remains. Why can't voices on the Right see the entire issue and complexities associated.? Are they uneducated or wishing it was still 1950?
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Aug 16, 2009 12:45:08 GMT -8
I think that issues like these would be more likely to be able to gather broad based support if politics were set aside. We need to find solutions rather than how to skewer Conservatives or liberals. Win.. so question remains. Why can't voices on the Right see the entire issue and complexities associated.? Are they uneducated or wishing it was still 1950? That is exactly why nothing gets done! When you put over-educated people who won't work pitted against what you describe as dumb folks who will work, how can you get anything done other than a fight? The Fisheries and Farms are just too important to resort to the fun of a food fight.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Aug 16, 2009 20:57:35 GMT -8
Bob says that the watering of lawns and other landscaping is a problem. He is surely correct about that. (When my wife and I bought a home in eastern Oceanside in 1991, xeriscaping was all the rage. There was a drought then, too. Drought tolerant plants were in front of the house rather than grass. Well, guess what. . . a couple of years later it rained a lot and people up and down the block started putting in grass. Everybody forgot about the need to conserve water.) But I do have a question. Does anybody know just what percentage of the water used in San Diego County is used for residential landscaping? Or for that matter, what is the break down of all major categories of water usage? (Here is a link to an article on the subject, but it's anecdotal. . . www.voiceofsandiego.org/articles/2008/02/26/government/599water012408.txt ) AzWm
|
|
|
Post by sportnlyf on Aug 16, 2009 21:14:43 GMT -8
AzWm, born at Quintard, raised in Golden Hill, schooled at Brooklyn Elementary, Roosevelt JHS and '64 grad of San Diego High School, '70 grad of SDSU. About as native as you can get without being a Californio or offspring of a a local band of Indians.
I did you an injustice? Methinks you doth protest too much. It was you who described remedial efforts as "the feds seem ready to make it worse. I don't see how this cannot become a huge negative for the democrats." Does that scenario make you happy or unhappy?
As a result of his position, President Obama may lead the federal agencies you say are going to make the situation worse and is the leader of the democratic party.
Seems to me that you introduced politics into the discussion, provided a republican congressman's editorial as source material and much more often than not use your forum to criticize Obama and democrats - hence my response.
In later posts you acknowledge this is much more than a party issue and on that we agree.
I have been involved professionally with local reservoirs and water issues in varying capacities for most of my life and I remain very intersted in water issues. If you get a chance and have not read it, pick up a copy of Cadillac Desert, which is a very good read.
Politicization of the water issue, like most issues that have gone in the tank for citizens of every stripe, is to some degree if not most, the result of the failure of our political parties and system.
Natural resources are far too important to be left in the hands of politicians and those who prop them up financially in return for their vote.
I repeat, we are screwed, just like the extirpated bear on our state flag, abalone, black seabass, delta smelt, Pacific salmon, pronghorn antelope on Kearny Mesa and Southern steelhead.
Screwed!
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Aug 16, 2009 21:29:31 GMT -8
Quintard! That's where my uncle died in 1952. Family lore has it that the care he got there could have been better, but I have no way of knowing whether that is true. Didn't seem to hurt your debut on planet Earth, at least! Well, I hope you are incorrect about our being screwed, but I would not want to bet the homestead against you. I am a libertarian, or, in terms of actual party affiliation, a Libertarian. Therefore, I have no problem if you want to take shots at GOP politicians. They can just as big horse's asses as members of any party. AzWm
|
|
|
Post by uwaztec on Aug 17, 2009 5:20:27 GMT -8
AzWm, born at Quintard, raised in Golden Hill, schooled at Brooklyn Elementary, Roosevelt JHS and '64 grad of San Diego High School, '70 grad of SDSU. About as native as you can get without being a California or offspring of a a local band of Indians. I did you an injustice? Methinks you doth protest too much. It was you who described remedial efforts as "the feds seem ready to make it worse. I don't see how this cannot become a huge negative for the democrats." Does that scenario make you happy or unhappy? As a result of his position, President Obama may lead the federal agencies you say are going to make the situation worse and is the leader of the democratic party. Seems to me that you introduced politics into the discussion, provided a republican congressman's editorial as source material and much more often than not use your forum to criticize Obama and democrats - hence my response. In later posts you acknowledge this is much more than a party issue and on that we agree. I have been involved professionally with local reservoirs and water issues in varying capacities for most of my life and I remain very untested in water issues. If you get a chance and have not read it, pick up a copy of Cadillac Desert, which is a very good read. Politicization of the water issue, like most issues that have gone in the tank for citizens of every stripe, is to some degree if not most, the result of the failure of our political parties and system. Natural resources are far too important to be left in the hands of politicians and those who prop them up financially in return for their vote. I repeat, we are screwed, just like the extirpated bear on our state flag, abalone, black seabass, delta smelt, Pacific salmon, pronghorn antelope on Kearny Mesa and Southern steelhead. Screwed! Hey Sportn, really like your analysis. Not many people know that the last pronghorn antelope was killed on Kearny Mesa (1916?) All the species you noted are in serious trouble, and of course the bear that appears on our State Flag is gone. However, the black sea bass has made a huge recovery since the late 70's and mid 80's. I was a biologist during those years and made more than 3,000 dives in local waters. I never saw a black sea bass until 1984. Now, you can see them with regularity at locations like Italian gardens at Catalina, the second buoy at the La Jolla Cove etc. The sea bass came back because of full protection and removal of gill nets to 3 miles off the beach in the mid 80's. Yes, just a small success story.... but I agree with your take that we are Fu**ed.
|
|