Issue link: https://www.epageflip.net/i/354332
AllofCalifornia is in a state of emer- gency because of prolonged drought, now in its third year. And it's more than just Califor- nians who are feel- ing the impact — the state uses its scarce wa- ter to provide the nation with more food than any other state. In the last cen- tury, the state suffered seven multiyear droughts but this one is particularly bad. By this spring, California had experienced its driest three-year stretch since 1895. San Francisco, Los Ange- les, Sacramento and Fresno logged their driest year ever recorded in 2013 and in the first half of this year rain- fall in Red Bluff is a third lower than average. Condi- tions now are so dry that all of the state is considered to be in a drought with more than 80 percent of the state in extreme or exceptional drought according to the United States Drought Mon- itor. Governor Brown called for Californians to reduce overall water use by 20% but so far this year use actually went up over one percent al- though some areas with ag- gressive water management efforts made significant re- ductions. California farms are feel- ing the heat as they guz- zle 80 percent of the wa- ter used by humans in the state. Farmers in the dry Central Valley alone stand to lose $810 million this year by keeping fields idle, according to the UC Davis Center for Watershed Sci- ences. They'll also lose about 17,000 agricultural jobs and spend an extra $453 million pumping water out of the ground. To make matter worse in the past 20 years, nut trees, like almonds, walnuts and pistachios have become more popular to plant be- cause the crops are lucrative but in a dry year, a nut tree still needs water to survive, while an annual crop, like rice or tomatoes, could not be planted and the field left fallow. Some farmers now are uprooting nut trees be- fore they're past their prime because they don't have the water to keep them alive. With water a scarcity, there's a drilling frenzy to scoop up groundwater stress- ing aquifers and forcing deeper wells. In some areas of the state, the groundwa- ter has become so overtaxed that the earth is literally sinking for instance between 2008 and 2011, parts of the Central Valley subsided more than 2 feet. The ecologically impor- tant Sacramento-San Joa- quin River Delta also is feel- ing the drought. In June, rainbow trout and steel- head trout had to be re- leased from two hatcheries at a much younger age and smaller size than usual be- cause scientists predicted that by midsummer, the wa- ter in the hatcheries would be too warm for the fish to survive due to re- stricted mountain run- off. Chinook salmon have been trucked to San Pablo Bay so they won't have to navigate parched rivers and streams on their way to the ocean. Wildfire risk also is up statewide. This year, there had been 3,400 wildfires as of July 19, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protec- tion. That's an increase of 36 percent over the five-year average. In May, more than a dozen wildfires raged in San Diego County. The wild- fire season there is usually in the fall following the hot, dry summer. It is difficult to link any one weather event like the current drought to climate change but it is highly likely for more extreme droughts in the future, thanks to cli- mate change. Climate scien- tists predict that Southern California will get drier and Northern California will get hotter to reduce snowpack and accelerate melting. That could shrink the Sierra Ne- vada spring snowpack that serves as California's larg- est reservoir by upwards of 90%. Without it we must learn to get by with much less groundwater and/or dra- matically increase our reser- voir capacity, to include rais- ing the dam at Lake Shasta and building additional wa- ter storage facilities. Although groundwater is an essential source of wa- ter for the state with 75 per- cent of Californians relying on it for at least a portion of their drinking water Cal- ifornia lacks a comprehen- sive groundwater manage- ment plan, which all other dry Western states have. We need to support both lo- cal and statewide ground- water monitoring and man- agement practices to ensure continuing supplies and doc- ument conservation suc- cesses. We should measure water use and hone our abilities to use less of it. If you have wa- ter meters take the time to make daily readings and ex- periment with ways to use less of it. If you don't have a water meter, install one, or if you have a well pump put an inexpensive run-hour me- ter on it. In this way you can compare water use on a per- centage basis to gauge the effectiveness of your conser- vation efforts. By taking ac- tion now you won't be "stuck on stupid" until the well runs dry. RichardMazzucchiisare- tired research engineer specializing in energy ef- ficiency and renewable energy. He has travelled ex- tensively and now makes his home in Los Molinos, where he is striving to man- ifest a sustainable and spir- itual lifestyle and operate a barbecue equipment and supply business. He can be reached at living-green@ att.net. PositivePoint Don'tbe stuck on stupid until well runs dry Cartoonist's take It was with some be- musement that I read (prior to finding ourselves camped where there is no Internet—really, none) on- line letters and columns over the votes by residents and supervisors in favor of the State of Jefferson declaration (I support it). I would only point out that (as of July 17) the opponents' let- ters tended to pile up attitude, insults, derision and a general loose use of supposed facts. Be- fore the vote in June, opponents knew they had the short end of the public opinion stick, mostly couldn't bother themselves to take in the numerous informa- tional meetings, and thereaf- ter resorted to nearly hysteri- cal doom-and-gloom mongering when they weren't denigrating the character of Jefferson sup- porters. The other 3 columnists have all been opposed, and pre- dictably fail to reflect the pre- dominant political leanings of Tehama County's voters. When voters overwhelmingly (57%) favored the Jefferson dec- laration (if Obama's 53% con- stituted a "mandate" then Te- hama County's 57% qualifies as "overwhelming," in my opin- ion), the opponents took to be- littling and explaining away the numbers. There's nothing to ex- plain—our voters usually split heavily for Republicans and for issues like traditional marriage. The public employee/union sec- tor is a primary source of votes for Democrats, gay marriage, tax increases and so on, so it can be assumed that the anti- Jefferson votes were stoked by those reliable Democrats op- posed to upsetting the union- dominated political establish- ment dictated by Sacramento. Del Norte County's vote against the State of Jefferson is likewise easily explained by the large numbers of state workers in the Pelican Bay correctional facility. All of these groups know that if there are no state employee unions, the salaries, benefits and wages for public employees and public construc- tion will reflect local market rates, not Sacramento's bloated costs. They think the private sector taxpayers should just shut up and pay up for excessive compensation. I knew that the su- pervisors would have to summon the cour- age to vote in the face of the Democrat-domi- nated government and union sector—a tail seeking to wag the dog of local opinion. Con- gratulations, super- visors, for a unanimous stand for our rightful need to control more of our own affairs. Nay- sayers, there are rural-dom- inant states, run by Republi- cans, that have better econ- omies, lower unemployment, more folks providing for them- selves and less dependency on "guv'mint" handouts. I guess the ideologically blinded will not see what they don't wish to see. Upon reading "The Rise of the Right" by William A. Rusher (1983), I found that many things haven't changed. The subtitle, "An eye-opening, behind-the-scenes history of the conservative movement by one of its leading and most outspo- ken founders," may seem irrel- evant today; it did, in one re- spect, describe some of what we have witnessed over the Jeffer- son movement. When conserva- tive thinkers, intellectuals and writers began to formulate be- liefs, convictions and narratives in the late 1940s, culminat- ing in publications and engage- ment with the prevailing liberal orthodoxy in the 1950s, deri- sion, dismissal and name-call- ing were the left's response— the same reaction they gave the Tea Party and the State of Jef- ferson. Efforts then and now to strangle conservative move- ments in the cradle fell short for the simple reason that Americans self-identify as con- servatives by 35 to 40 percent, compared to, at most, 20 per- cent for liberals. When pre- sented with articulate conser- vative arguments and solutions, most voters will support such advocates. Absent same, those voters will stay home (2012 presidential election) or be taken in by verbally glib, per- sonally glittering, even dema- gogue-like candidates (Obama in 2008 and 2012). Most readers either ap- peared on the scene long af- ter the '50s and '60s, or were, like Barbara and me, children knowing only that parents supported someone named Barry Goldwater but not much else. Because of the landslide defeat (Senator Goldwater won a handful of states and about 40 percent of the vote), Democrats gloated; the East- ern establishment Republi- cans— who had consistently nominated losers like Wilkie and Dewey and preferred the Rockefeller name to all oth- ers—took smug satisfaction in conservatism's supposed repu- diation (many even voted for Democrat Johnson). Hence, eastern Republi- cans favored (squishy Republi- can) Nixon over Reagan, giving America the Nixon impeach- ment/resignation and Carter's miserable tenure. So how did voters rise up in their conser- vative numbers to give Reagan two landslide victories? First, Americans had already voted by 57 percent (total of Nixon/ Wallace votes) to repudiate the liberal Democrat McGovern. However, from the "Draft Gold- water" movement to the orga- nizing and contributors that put Goldwater on the ticket, the conservative cause had made tremendous strides. Just be- fore the assassination of Presi- dent Kennedy, Time magazine looked at Kennedy's fading al- lure and the strong polling for Goldwater and concluded it could go to the conservative Re- publican. Rusher summarized the rea- sons for Johnson's win: 1) sym- pathy for the deceased Kennedy carried over into a reluctance to change parties in "mid-stream;" 2) Johnson's rural, southern im- age undercut the contrast that had been Goldwater's strong suit against the eastern lib- eral Kennedy; 3) While some of Goldwater's personae and state- ments were used mercilessly by the news media and Democrats to paint a caricature of him, that didn't prove that conserva- tism was Goldwater's undoing. The right was rising through it all. Don Polson has called Red Bluff home since 1988. He can be reached by e-mail at donplsn@ yahoo.com. The way I see it Jefferson critics; right's rise Climate scientists predict that Southern California will get drier and Northern California will get hotter to reduce snowpack and accelerate melting. Sounding off Alookatwhatreadersaresayingincommentsonourwebsiteandonsocialmedia. Eithersellordonatethewoodtolocal cra smen so they can create beautiful things with it. Then make some of the items available for sale. With some of the proceeds going towards the restoration. Robert Staton: On what to do with downed oak tree at Ide Adobe State Historical Park Donate the firewood to the elderly in the community and benches and tables sound cool out of the big wood. Greta Corbin: On what to do with downed oak tree at Ide Adobe State Historical Park Greg Stevens, Publisher Chip Thompson, Editor EDITORIAL BOARD How to have your say: Letters must be signed and provide the writer's home street address and home phone number. Anonymous letters, open letters to others, pen names and petition-style letters will not be allowed. Letters should be typed and no more than two double-spaced pages or 500words. When several letters address the same issue, a cross section will be published. Email: editor@red bluffdailynews.com Phone: 530-527- 2151ext. 112 Mail to: P.O. Box 220, 545 Diamond Ave., Red Bluff, CA 96080 Facebook: Leave comments at FACEBOOK.COM/ RBDAILYNEWS Twitter: Follow and send tweets to @REDBLUFFNEWS Richard Mazzucchi Don Polson OPINION » redbluffdailynews.com Tuesday, July 29, 2014 » MORE AT FACEBOOK.COM/RBDAILYNEWS AND TWITTER.COM/REDBLUFFNEWS A6