"Brown unveiled plans to build a $14 billion pair of tunnels -- to be willingly paid for by farmers and other water users with no need for voter input -- to move water more easily from the north to the south."
http://www.mercurynews.com/californi...ter?source=rss
This excerpt from another article really stood out to me. Farmers and other water users are willingly paying 14 billion dollars for this project. That means there is financial motivation that will exceed the 14 billion dollar expenditure. I'm becoming increasingly disgusted with the use of public resources for profit by private enterprises. I tried to access the Russian River recently and found it nearly impossible with the exception of a single public park and two bridges which I had to walk 2 miles to. Over and over again vineyards and privately owned land stood in the way of accessing a public resource. Because the Russian River flows into the ocean the actual water can't be restricted, but the land around it is, and therefore, the water is inaccessible. It really upset me that people profit from this public resource but restrict public access.
I know we see this canal issue from the side of fishermen, but even when trying to consider this unbiasedly I am at a loss for understanding. The canals aren't the answer for drinking water, they make that pretty clear by revealing who is paying for this. Even if it were sold as a drinking water solution, the researchers have already said this isn't the way to increase our water supply for the south.
Screw the Nor Cal vs. So Cal argument, this isn't about southern CA. This water will never reach So Cal.
We all better weigh in on this or no rivers will reach the sea soon
Your Privacy Choices