Comments on: Planning & Conservation League: PCL: Water package brings subsidies, not solutions http://aquafornia.com/archives/14798 The California Water News blog! Fri, 10 Feb 2012 18:26:03 -0800 hourly 1 By: dfb http://aquafornia.com/archives/14798/comment-page-1#comment-23403 dfb Thu, 05 Nov 2009 06:25:53 +0000 http://aquafornia.com/?p=14798#comment-23403 New dams are sexy, even if they don't provide much water, relatively speaking. The peripheral canal is not included in the $11 billion. The canal will cost another $15-$20 billion and is expected to be paid by the ratepayers who benefit. New dams are sexy, even if they don’t provide much water, relatively speaking. The peripheral canal is not included in the $11 billion. The canal will cost another $15-$20 billion and is expected to be paid by the ratepayers who benefit.

]]> By: Wes Rolle http://aquafornia.com/archives/14798/comment-page-1#comment-23402 Wes Rolle Thu, 05 Nov 2009 02:47:57 +0000 http://aquafornia.com/?p=14798#comment-23402 That bond money has yet to be spent. $3 Billion according to Asm. Member Joan Buchanan. That bond money has yet to be spent. $3 Billion according to Asm. Member Joan Buchanan.

]]> By: Anne http://aquafornia.com/archives/14798/comment-page-1#comment-23401 Anne Thu, 05 Nov 2009 02:44:55 +0000 http://aquafornia.com/?p=14798#comment-23401 I'm worried about this legislation. Why new dams? and I saw a comment a few days ago about needing the bonds to restore our levees - but we passed bonds several years ago to restore our levees. What happened to that money? A bunch of new dams, peripheral canals, and no pressure on farmers to go to less water intensive crops? I like the urban area 20% conservation cut, but farmers need to cut too. And how about mandating no new golf courses unless they prove they don't use any extra water? I’m worried about this legislation. Why new dams? and I saw a comment a few days ago about needing the bonds to restore our levees – but we passed bonds several years ago to restore our levees. What happened to that money?

A bunch of new dams, peripheral canals, and no pressure on farmers to go to less water intensive crops? I like the urban area 20% conservation cut, but farmers need to cut too. And how about mandating no new golf courses unless they prove they don’t use any extra water?

]]>