Re: [californiadisasters] Sierra snowpack shows improvement, but not enough to declare California's drought over

No question in my mind that ALL aspects of water use are going to have to be re-evaluated, but the provision of already overpopulated areas with liberal amounts of water cannot be the primary concern. Ecosystems are important, even if some don't agree, and so is agriculture--that's what actually drives a huge portion of CA economy. Can we afford to keep crippling it? Questions like that are important.

Conservation is not necessarily a bad or pointless thing; it keeps us happy and fed in some cases; in others, it helps keep watersheds and various ecosystems intact which, if destroyed through lack of water, could have devastating ripple effects.


So yes, we all need to look hard at what we do and how we do it....but we also must remember that we aren't the only ones out here that need water.

PA



>________________________________
> From: "Kim Noyes kimnoyes@gmail.com [californiadisasters]" <californiadisasters@yahoogroups.com>
>To: CaliforniaDisasters <californiadisasters@yahoogroups.com>
>Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 10:54 AM
>Subject: Re: [californiadisasters] Sierra snowpack shows improvement, but not enough to declare California's drought over
>
>
>
>
>Agriculture uses 500% more of the water than urban areas and often growing water-intensive crops that are probably no longer appropriate to grow in California and they often benefit from antiquated water agreements drawn up in the 19th century when California and the West were very different than they are now. Another problem is that half of the water available in California is not even available to human use but is set aside for conservation. We need to look at that and see if we need to change that percentage. In other words, AG needs to change, urban growth needs to slow and get more efficient which it has but more is needed and water for conservation may need to be looked at for possible reallocation of some of it.
>
>
>
> Virus-free. www.avast.com
>
>
>On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 10:48 AM, Pamela Alley rnrq@att.net [californiadisasters] <californiadisasters@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Nope. You bring 'em up here, you STAY to deal with 'em!
>>
>>Like the cut-off idea, though, at least for the cities. Ag can have what they need within reasonable limits.... :)
>>
>>You'd think they'd have learned from Owens Valley but noooo....
>>
>>PA
>>


------------------------------------
Posted by: Pamela Alley <rnrq@att.net>
------------------------------------

Be sure to check out our Links Section at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/californiadisasters/links
Please join our Discussion Group at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/californiadisasters_discussion/ for topical but extended discussions started here or for less topical but nonetheless relevant messages.
------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/californiadisasters/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/californiadisasters/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
californiadisasters-digest@yahoogroups.com
californiadisasters-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
californiadisasters-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/