Drought Assistance Open House for Farmers, Ranchers and Farmworkers

As California faces one of the driest years ever recorded, the California Department of Food and Agriculture and the U.S. Department of Agriculture will be holding an informational session on drought resources for farmers, ranchers and farmworkers in Cloverdale.

This session will provide information on a variety of state and federal government programs designed to assist farmers with water conservation, crop insurance, and other on-farm management tools. Information on farmworker assistance programs will also be available.

While deadlines for some federal assistance programs have already passed for the 2014 crop year, there are many programs still available to those involved in agriculture.

Cloverdale event information:

March 17, 2014 – 4:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. (Cloverdale/Sonoma County) – Cloverdale Citrus Fairgrounds

Several state/federal government entities will be represented at this event, including: USDA Farm Service Agency; USDA Risk Management Agency; USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service; USDA Rural Development; the California Employment Development Department; and other community resources.

CDFA continues to support California’s drought response. The department has developed a web page as an information clearinghouse on assistance programs for farmers, ranchers and farmworkers; will continue to work with California food banks to address drought-related impacts; and is working with the University of California to develop a real-time assessment of drought impacts in farming and ranching communities.

Additionally, CDFA continues to work as part of Governor Brown’s Drought Task Force to coordinate drought response efforts with other state agencies.

For more information concerning drought resources for California farmers, ranchers, and farmworkers, please visit – www.cdfa.ca.gov/drought

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:38:50-07:00March 12th, 2014|

California Water Alliance: SWRCB Water

SUMMARY

California State Water Resources Control Board

Water Rights Prioritization Proposal

March 2014

SUMMARY

California State Water Resources Control Board (“SWRCB”), in response to a Temporary Urgency Change Petition filed by the CVP and SWP operators, issued an order that had the effect of undermining water rights and contracts, regardless of historic priority, under SWCRB control for “health & safety” purposes. The current proposal would cause State Water Project (SWP) and Central Valley Project (CVP) agricultural surface water deliveries to cease until 2015. Areas in need of “health & safety” water for the next year are undefined and not one evidentiary hearing has occurred.

Further, an official SWRCB decision was scheduled for March 12, 2014. A formal request for a delay of decision until March 21, 2014 was submitted by Senator Feinstein, Senator Boxer, Congressman Garamendi, and Congressman Costa on March 5, 2014. SWRCB’s response was received on March 10, 2014, but with no clarity as to when they will implement further orders or hold hearings.

STATE WATER RESOURCE CONTROL BOARD

The State Water Board’s mission is to preserve, enhance and restore the quality of California’s water resources, and ensure their proper allocation and efficient use for the benefit of present and future generations. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (Regional Boards) protect water quality and administers surface water rights.

Felecia Marcus; Chair – Appointed in May 2012 by Gov. Jerry Brown
Frances Spivy-Weber; Vice-Chair – Reappointed in March 2013 by Gov. Jerry Brown
Steven Moore; Member – Appointed in May 2012 by Gov. Jerry Brown
Tam M. Doduc; Member – Reappointed in March 2013 by Gov. Jerry Brown
Dorene D’Adamo; Member – Appointed in March 2013 by Gov. Jerry Brown
Tom Howard; Executive Director – Appointed in August 2010 by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger

AREA of IMPACT

Area of impact includes 3,750,000 irrigated acres.
State Water Project Service Area includes Greater Los Angeles Area, Greater San Diego Area, Greater San Francisco Area, Santa Clara Valley, Inland Empire, Central Coast, Sacramento Valley, and San Joaquin Valley.
Central Valley Project Service Area spans 400 miles from the Cascade Mountains near Redding to the Tehachapi Mountains near Los Angeles. CVP manages 9 million acre feet of water for California cities, businesses, farms, and wildlife refuges. Including 1 million households daily water needs, 1/3 California’s farmland, 11 power generating facilities, and over 420,000 acres of fish & wildlife refuge annually.
Impacted Counties: Contra Costa, San Joaquin, Fresno, Kern, Kings, San Joaquin, Merced, Madera, Stanislaus, Alameda, Santa Clara, Tulare, Shasta, Trinity, Tehama, Colusa, Butte, Glenn, Sutter, Yuba, Yolo, Sacramento, Mariposa.

PROJECTED ECONOMIC IMPACTS

40-80% unemployment in impacted SWP & CVP service areas.
700,000-800,000 acres of farmland fallowed. Equivalent of 1,100 square miles or the Greater Los Angeles & San Diego areas combined.
Estimated $2.5 billion direct loss to California farm economy.
Estimated additional $5 billion loss to state economy from reduced related economic activity. Related industries include, but are not limited to, processing, transportation, wholesale, retail, cargo shipping via ports of Oakland, Stockton, Los Angeles, & Long Beach.
Increased consumer level food and milk prices estimated at $10 – $15 per trip to the market, and 10% – 15% increase in fruit, vegetables, beef and poultry prices in the short-term.
Increased utility costs, including energy & water. Projections based on 2007-2009 drought data where consumers paid $1.7 billion more in energy bills.

ECOLOGICAL IMPACT

Habitat for migratory waterfowl and shorebirds will be reduced by up to 550,000 acres.
Water for refuges are expected to be reduced or eliminated impacting up to 230 species of wildlife.
Depleted aquifers due to over reliance on groundwater, and inability to annually recharge aquifers with surface water.

LEGAL IMPACT

Water rights within impacted SWP & CVP service areas, including historic pre-1914, are being undermined, fundamentally changing California state law.
Reassessment of all property values with effected water rights, changing all tax assessment & revenues in all impacted counties. Estimated reduction of property values, on average, by approximately 50%.

SOURCES

http://www.news10.net/story/news/local/california/2014/02/22/drought-will-impact-food-prices/5723079/

http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nightly-news/54502245#54502245

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-h-gleick/the-costs-of-californias_b_4747043.html

http://m.westernfarmpress.com/markets/average-california-farm-real-estate-value-7200-acre

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:38:51-07:00March 12th, 2014|

State Failed to Analyze Effects of Kern Water Bank

Source: Bettina Boxall; LA Times

Stewart Resnick

A court ruling issued Wednesday could throw obstacles to the operation of a Kern County groundwater bank that has helped billionaire Stewart Resnick build a nut empire in the southern San Joaquin Valley.

In the latest development in a two-decade legal fight, a Sacramento County Superior Court judge found that the state Department of Water Resources didn’t properly analyze the environmental impacts of the Kern Water Bank, which is partly controlled by Resnick’s Paramount Farms enterprise.

Judge Timothy Frawley will hold a hearing to determine the next step in the case. Environmental groups intend to argue that the water bank should be shut down while the state prepares a new environmental report.

“These guys have spent 16 years avoiding this moment. It’s always been a possibility that a court would come in and shut it down,” said Adam Keats, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity, which represented plaintiffs in one of two related lawsuits that Frawley decided.

Representatives of Resnick and his wife, Lynda, who also own Fiji Water and POM Wonderful pomegranate juice, referred requests for comment to the water bank, whose attorney could not be reached.

The legal challenges sought to undo changes to the State Water Project that were made as part of a 1994 deal, known as the Monterey Agreement, between the Department of Water Resources and agencies supplied by the project. An earlier round of lawsuits forced the state to issue a new environmental review of the pact, which opponents argued was again insufficient.

Frawley ruled against them on all but one issue involving the water bank.

On that count, the judge concluded that the state’s environmental report failed to adequately assess the effects of the bank’s operation, particularly on groundwater and water quality.

Some neighboring water districts and environmental groups contend that the bank — originally developed by the state, but later ceded to private control — is harming the aquifer.

They also argue that because the groundwater bank is replenished with supplies from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the operation is increasing demand for water from the environmentally fragile delta.

The Monterey Agreements, made behind closed doors, were intended to settle disputes between contractors of the State Water Project, which supplies Southern California cities and some irrigation districts in the southern San Joaquin Valley.

The deal has been controversial since its inception and opponents have spent years trying to overturn its provisions.

In his decision, Frawley rejected most of their most recent claims, finding that except for the water bank, the state’s review met legal requirements.

Next, he has to decide what happens to the bank while the state launches yet another environmental evaluation. “That’s the big question we’re all going to be fighting over,” Keats said.

Paramount Farms is the world’s largest grower and processor of almonds and pistachios; in tandem with their Grower Partners, they farm 125,000 acres that deliver 450 million pounds of nuts.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:38:52-07:00March 6th, 2014|

1200 California Farmers Urge D.C. Delegation to Fix Water Supply

Posted on March 5th by the California Farm Water Coalition , an open letter dated February 24, 2014, from 1200 California farmers was written to senators and representatives in the U.S. Congress to “outline the immediate threat that the drought poses to California’s $44.7 billion agricultural sector, and to respectfully insist that members of the California Congressional Delegation set aside their regional, ideological and political differences and work together to address the water supply crisis.”

The letter said, “The stakes could not be higher and time is of essence.” . . . “What happens this year will fundamentally change the face of California’s agriculture forever.”

Signers of the letter were described as, “family farmers who have been good stewards of the land for generations, but are now facing catastrophic losses from which they may not recover.” These farmers are also concerned about the thousands of men and women working in the diverse who also face the uncertainty the drought means for their families.

While the farmers called the current drought a “natural disaster”, they also said that California’s water projects, the Federal Central Valley Project and the State Water Project, which were designed to provide reliable water supplies, even during droughts, and which met this challenge through previous droughts, no longer work as they were designed to work.

They stated that California’s reservoirs in 2011 were filled to overflowing by a year of heavy rains and in 2013 were above average. But currently, California’s reservoirs are empty, the consequences of which are lost water supplies, depleted groundwater and higher farming costs and damage to aquifers “as the result of short-sighted and unbalanced application of environmental regulations.”

Acknowledging that laws to protect the environment are necessary, as farmers too are caretakers of the land, the signers pointed to the managing agencies, claiming they spent all of the stored water with no consideration for the future. “Operating the Projects in this manner is quite simply unsustainable.”

The authors of the letter were in complete agreement that the current two separate bills, one in the House and the other in the Senate, are “of absolutely no value. What’s needed is a single bill that can be enacted by Congress and signed into law by the President within the next few weeks. Anything less will be your collective failure.”

Continuing, “You cannot allow partisan or personal animosities to interfere with you doing your job.” . . . “You must set aside those distractions, show courage, vision and leadership, and roll up your sleeves to work together as professionals to resolve this complex problem.”

They concluded, “We need you – all of you, northern and southern, Republican and Democrat, House and Senate – to come together and find a way to fix this broken system, now, before it breaks us all.”

And, finally, “Get it done.”

Thanks to California Farm Water Coalition.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:38:52-07:00March 6th, 2014|

Letter to USBR regarding Sac River Settlement Contractors

Excerpted from Andrew Creasey/Appeal-Democrat

Until the federal government fulfills water obligations in the north, don’t send the water south.

That was the message from Sacramento River settlement contractors, through an attorney, to the Bureau of Reclamation, which recently forecasted the 60 percent water deliveries cut to the districts and water companies along the river.

The contractors, however, claim their water right allows the bureau to reduce deliveries by a maximum of only 25 percent.

READ THE LETTER

“If there is simply not enough water available because of the ‘drought,’ we understand that Reclamation cannot provide what it does not have. But Reclamation has made no such showing,” the letter, signed by four attorneys representing 23 settlement contractors, read. “We are advised that Reclamation is making discretionary decisions that, among other things, deliver Sacramento River Water for use south of the Delta.”

Currently, about 3,000 acre-feet of water is being sent south of the Delta every day, and the contractors were likely to protest that delivery with another letter to the State Water Resources Control Board on Monday, said Thad Bettner, general manager of the Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District. An acre-foot is about 326,000 gallons.

“We don’t think the projects have provided a justification for that to continue,” Bettner said, adding that he heard the Bureau may voluntarily suspend that operation regardless of the contractor’s actions.

The contractors met with the Bureau on Friday morning to better understand its 40 percent allocation.

“It does appear that there are limitations to how much water can be provided,” Bettner said. “Our interest is that if the water supply in our contract could be increased, we’re going to be coordinating with Reclamation to allow that to happen.”

Bureau spokesman Louis Moore said Reclamation is doing what they can to manage a difficult drought issue. He said the bureau will be looking to issue a revised allocation forecast once the effect of the recent rain on the state’s hydrology is better known.

“We understand this is unprecedented,” Moore said. “We’re just trying to manage the water resources that are available.”

The recent rain caused an increase of about 160,000 acre-feet in the total water storage of the Bureau-operated Central Valley Project with several days of rain on the way, but the bureau is still about 1.4 million acre feet short of the water it needs for a normal year of deliveries. The Central Valley Project draws from the Shasta and Folsom reservoirs and delivers water to farms and communities as far south as Mendota in Fresno County.

Bettner said he was uncertain if the rain would cause a direct increase in the district’s water supply.

Moore said a revised allocation could be issued by late this week. “We’re hoping to see increases across the board,” Moore said.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:38:53-07:00March 5th, 2014|

“The Fight for Water” screens at Columbia College in Sonora, California

The award-winning documentary, “The Fight for Water: A Farm Worker Struggle”, has been invited to screen at 5:40 pm, Saturday, March 8th at Columbia College’s Dogwood Theatre in Sonora, California, as part of the “Official Selection” at this year’s Back to Nature Film Fest Series.

Joe Del Bosque

Presented by the college’s Forestry & Natural Resources Club and the ITSA Film Festival, the screening will be followed by a Q & A with the filmmaker.

The film documents the impact of a federal decision on people living in a Central Valley farming community in the Spring of 2009 when their water supply was cut off and they staged a march to fight for their water.

The film proudly tells the humble story of Joe Del Bosque, who came from parents who were migrant farmworkers to become a farmer and a major Ag leader in the California Central Valley.

He was recently thrown into national spotlight when President Barack Obama visited his farm on February 14, 2014 to address the current drought in California.

Hollywood actor Paul Rodriguez, who helped organize the March for Water in the style of Cesar Chavez, and former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger are also featured in the film.

The documentary film, which serves as a cautionary tale and precursor to the current drought in California, has screened at over 10 film festivals, winning accolades and worldwide recognition. The film was produced by Juan Carlos Oseguera, 40, a San Francisco State University alumnus who has been a published film critic and an accomplished producer of several award-winning short films.

It recently received the Best Documentary award at the 2013 International Monarch Film Festival and at the 2013 Viña de Oro Fresno International Film Festival. The film also received runner-up honors for Best Documentary in Cinematography and for Best Political Documentary Film at the 2013 Action on Film International Film Festival, where it also received a nomination for Excellence in Filmmaking.

“People should see this film,” stated Lois Henry, a newspaper columnist who reviewed the film for The Bakersfield Californian. “It’s important that we understand that perspective of what the ‘Water Wars’ mean on a really, really human scale.”

This is Oseguera’s first feature-length film.

.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:38:54-07:00March 4th, 2014|

Many Legislative Bills Introduced

Legislative Update From Calif. Farm Bureau

Many Legislative Bills Introduced in California Last Week!

The State Water Resources Control Board (State Board) held a Workshop this week to take public comment on the Temporary Urgency Change Petition (TUCP) for the State Water Project and the federal Central Valley Project.

Consistent with the Governor’s Executive Order B-21-13 issued last May the TUCP for these two projects would temporarily modify (reduce) Delta outflow and export requirements to preserve water in storage and maintain in-Delta water quality.

Additionally, the TUCP would temporarily modify (open) the Delta Cross Channel gates to improve in-Delta salinity conditions. State Board staff also presented information on water diversion curtailment notices for junior water right holders. Due to rain events a couple of weeks ago the notices have not yet been issued.

A measure that would repeal provisions of the $11.14 billion Safe, Clean, and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act, currently scheduled to go before California voters November 4th this year, was heard in the Senate Environmental Quality Committee this week. If approved by the voters, the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality, and Water Supply Act of 2014 (SB 848), authored by Senator Lois Wolk (D-Davis), would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $6.825 billion in five separate categories. Those five categories include:

$900 million for Safe Drinking Water,
$2 billion for Integrated Regional Water Management Planning and stormwater capture and reuse projects,
$1.2 billion for projects that protect the Delta ecosystem and integrity of Delta levees,
$1.7 billion for Watershed and Ecosystem Improvements,
$1.025 billion for Water Storage Projects.

All five categories would require legislative authority to appropriate the funds. Farm Bureau remains actively engaged in this and every effort to impact the size and structure of the water bond, emphasize the need for increased water storage, area of origin water rights protections and continuous appropriation for water storage dollars. Farm Bureau has an Oppose Unless Amended position on SB 848.

A measure that would allow multiple use registrations for small livestock stockponds was introduced this week. AB 1905 (Luis Alejo, D-Salinas) would allow small (10 acre feet or less) livestock stockponds to also be registered with the State Water Resources Control Board for use as small irrigation ponds. Currently law allows small irrigation ponds to also be registered for small domestic use, but not for livestock. Farm Bureau is the sponsor of this measure and therefore is also in support.

AB 1634 (Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley) would require employers to immediately abate conditions that Cal/OSHA alleges are a violation of occupational safety and health regulations if the agency classifies the citation as a serious, repeat serious, or willful serious violation. Under current law, if an employer appeals the citation, the employer is not required to abate the violation unless and until the appeal is denied. AB 1634 allows Cal/OSHA to grant a stay of abatement at its own discretion. This is similar to legislation Assemblymember Skinner carried in 2013 (AB 1165) which Governor Brown vetoed in October. The Governor’s veto message cited an appeal process in AB 1165 for abatements parallel to that which already exists through the Cal/OSHA Appeals Board. AB 1634 does not include that duplicative appeal process. Farm Bureau will oppose AB 1634 because it undermines due process protections allowing employers to appeal Cal/OSHA citations.

SB 1034 (William Monning, D-Carmel) would eliminate waiting periods before employers offering health insurance would be required to institute coverage. Current state law allows for a 60-day waiting period; federal law allows a 90-day waiting period. Farm Bureau is analyzing SB 1034 before taking a position.

SB 1087, also by Senator Monning, would impose a laundry list of changes to the California Labor Code for Farm Labor Contractors (FLCs). Several of these changes include:

higher licensing fees;
increase the size of surety bonds FLCs must obtain and provide documentation of the size of the bond to the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE);
requires that surety bonds be conditioned on compliance with state laws prohibiting sexual harassment;
requires FLCs to receive training on prohibitions on sexual harassment;
doubles the number of continuing education hours required of FLCs from 8 hours annually to 16 hours annually;
adds violations of laws prohibiting sexual harassment by an FLC or an FLC’s supervisory personnel to the list of violations of law which prohibit DLSE from issuing an license to an FLC and requiring DLSE to revoke an FLC’s license;
requires FLCs to provide, upon request to a current or former employee or grower, a written statement showing compensation paid to employees, and requires growers to retain payroll records furnished by FLCs for three years.

Numerous other changes in the Labor Code pertaining to FLCs are further outlined in the bill. Farm Bureau position pending.

AB 1723 (Adrin Nazarin, D-Sherman Oaks) would authorize the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) to recover for employees payment of applicable penalties for willful failure to timely pay wages. Existing law provides for criminal and civil penalties for violations of statutes and orders of the commission regarding payment of wages. This bill would expand that penalty, restitution, and liquidated damages provision for a citation to also subject the employer to payment of any applicable penalties for the willful failure to timely pay the wages of a resigned or discharged employee. Farm Bureau is opposed.

AB 1660 (Luis Alejo, D-Salinas) clarifies that an action taken by an employer to comply with federal immigration law is not a violation of California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act. AB 60, which became law in 2013, requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to issue driving privilege cards to persons who cannot furnish the requisite documentation to obtain a regular driver’s license. AB 60 also prohibited discrimination under the Unruh Act against people using a driving privilege card. Farm Bureau supports AB 1660.

AB 2033 (Rudy Salas, D-Bakersfield), just introduced yesterday, would create an Agricultural Career Technical Education (ACTE) unit in the Department of Education to provide schools with assistance in establishing and maintaining ACTE classes. This bill is in response to the 2014 state budget proposal to eliminate $4.1 million from the Agricultural Career Technical Education Incentive Grant Program from the state budget. Ag Incentive Grant funds are used to update and modernize equipment and technology, as well provide vital resource for developing leadership skills and personal growth opportunities for students through ACTE programs and coursework. Farm Bureau is in support.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:38:54-07:00February 28th, 2014|

California Drought Precipitation Data Shows a Drop of Promise

DATA SHOWS CALIF. PRECIPITATION JUST ABOVE TWO WORST DROUGHT YEARS

Current data shows California precipitation levels are inching just above drought year levels 1976-77 and 1923-24.

California Data Exchange Center Data

(Click on Image)

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:38:55-07:00February 26th, 2014|

March 3rd Deadline for Drought-related Conservation Funds

USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) reminds interested farmers and ranchers that they have until March 3, 2014, to apply for $25 million in drought-related conservation assistance. Farmers and ranchers should consult with their local NRCS offices as soon as possible in order to apply for assistance.

NRCS California can help farmers and ranchers understand the options for their particular water situation, soil type and production goals and develop a plan to get through this drought. Soil conservation practices for fallow land include cover crops, residue management, mulching and other complimentary practices.

To help ranchers suffering from drought conditions, NRCS can offer practices such as livestock well development, piping, troughs, and fencing. For some ranchers, this may allow livestock to take advantage of available grass while protecting vulnerable ranch resources.

Finally, for farmers who have access to water and want to make every drop count, NRCS can provide improved irrigation hardware with an irrigation management plan to optimize efficiency.

USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack announced $20 million in drought assistance through NRCS’s Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) on February 4 and President Barak Obama enlarged the conservation cost share assistance to $25 million during his California visit on Feb. 14. The program is strictly voluntary and producers share in the cost of the work.

USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA) is also providing drought assistance through the Emergency Conservation Program (ECP). Farmers and ranchers are encouraged to consult with their local offices to gain a full understanding of the drought assistance options available from both agencies. FSA and NRCS are often co-located in service centers throughout California.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:38:55-07:00February 26th, 2014|

Solar Thermal Desalinization Shows Promise for Ag

PANOCHE WATER DISTRICT AND STATE TEST SOLAR THERMAL DESALINIZATION

Source: Excerpted from Todd Woody, The New York Times and posted By CDFA

With California facing a record-breaking drought, the spigot has gone dry for farmers that depend on long-term contracts with the federal government’s Central Valley Project to deliver cheap water from the north. Irrigation costs are expected to double or triple as growers are forced to buy water on the spot market. “Food prices are going to go up, absolutely,” said Dennis Falaschi, manager of the Panoche Water District, as he drove his pickup truck past bone-dry fields of almond trees and grapevines on an unseasonably warm day recently.

But, on a wheat field in Firebaugh, a giant solar receiver installed slowly rotates to track the sun and capture its energy. The 377-foot array, however, does not generate electricity but instead creates heat used to desalinate water.

It is part of a project developed by a San Francisco area start-up called WaterFX that is tapping an abundant, if contaminated, resource in this parched region: the billions of gallons of water that lie just below the surface. Financed by the Panoche Water District with state funds, the $1 million solar thermal desalinization plant is removing impurities from drainage water at half the cost of traditional desalinization, according to Aaron Mandell, a founder of WaterFX.

If the technology proves commercially viable — a larger plant is to be built this year — it could offer some relief to the West’s long-running water wars.

For agricultural water districts like Panoche, solar thermal desalinization promises to solve two persistent problems. One is a chronic  water shortage, even in rainy years, as regulators divert water to cities and for environmental purposes, like protecting endangered fish. The other is the growing salt contamination of agricultural land that has led farmers to abandon more than 100,000 acres in the Central Valley in recent years.

During the pilot project, WaterFX produced 14,000 gallons of purified water a day. A commercial version of the plant, set to be built this year on 31 acres of land, will produce 2,200 acre-feet a year. That’s the amount of water that would cover an acre of land at a depth of one foot, or 717 million gallons. The company will store excess heat generated by the solar array in molten salt to allow the plant to operate 24 hours a day.

Mr. Mandell said WaterFX currently produces an acre-foot of water for $450. That compares to about $280 an acre-foot charged by the Central Valley Project — when water is available. This year, farmers in the Panoche district will receive no water. Last year, they received only 20 percent of their allocation, Mr. Falaschi said. In 2012, the allocation was 40 percent. Farmers elsewhere who rely on the State Water Project to irrigate 750,000 acres of farmland will also receive no water in 2014.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:38:56-07:00February 25th, 2014|

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

California Ag News…
At Your Fingertips!

SUMMARY

California State Water Resources Control Board

Water Rights Prioritization Proposal

March 2014

Legislative Update From Calif. Farm Bureau

Many Legislative Bills Introduced in California Last Week!

DATA SHOWS CALIF. PRECIPITATION JUST ABOVE TWO WORST DROUGHT YEARS

PANOCHE WATER DISTRICT AND STATE TEST SOLAR THERMAL DESALINIZATION

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

California Ag News… At Your Fingertips!

California Ag News…
At Your Fingertips!