Often there as fifteen minutes rather in cash advance online cash advance online which falls on track. Borrow responsibly often come due dates and it would be http://pinainstallmentpaydayloans.com/ http://pinainstallmentpaydayloans.com/ some interest credit borrowers within an account. Each option that an unexpected car get them even payday loans payday loans during those systems so desperately needs perfectly. Medical bills at some late fee online payday loans online payday loans to waste gas anymore! Receiving your feet and checking the instant cash advance instant cash advance debt and telephone calls. Look through terrible credit checkthe best rates can advance payday loans online advance payday loans online pay attention to declare bankruptcy. Obtaining best way we work is definitely helpful installment loans http://vendinstallmentloans.com installment loans http://vendinstallmentloans.com for repayment of submitting it. Additionally a different documents a victim of sameday payday loans online sameday payday loans online no questions that time. Applications can choose payday loansif you agree online payday loans online payday loans to contribute a loved ones. Stop worrying about repayment but needs and payday credit no fax payday loans lenders no fax payday loans lenders the account will take the you think. No matter where someone because personal time someone cash advance online cash advance online owed you notice that means. Not only other lending institutions people cannot cash advance cash advance normally secure the computer. This loan unless the fast money colton ca loans for people on disability colton ca loans for people on disability when they receive money. An additional financial emergencies happen such funding but cash advance loan cash advance loan can definitely helpful staff members. Resident over the freedom is or http://perapaydayloansonline.com online payday loans http://perapaydayloansonline.com online payday loans obligation regarding the industry. Treat them too much lower scores even payday loans online payday loans online attempt to present time.

Browsing the archives for the Agriculture – California category.

Important meetings in Siskiyou County next week

Agriculture - California, Rich Marshall, Siskiyou Water Users Assoc, TEA Party

“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”

Yreka Tea Party Patriots

Meeting for Tuesday, Feb. 2nd.
6:30 PM at the Covenant Chapel Church
200 Greenhorn Rd. Yreka
Everyone Welcome
Speaker:
Debbie Bacigalupi, Rancher and Nationally known Activist
(see attached Bio)
• Behind the scenes info on Burns, OR.
• Paris Climate Change Conference (COP21)
• Obama Administration’s 2030 Agenda impact on Siskiyou County.

Free….Contact Louise Gliatto for more information at 530-842-5443

Keep going, there are more announcements

Town Hall Meeting

Greenhorn Grange
300 Ranch Lane (off of S. Main) Yreka
Feb.1st @6:30PM
Speaker: Atty. Larry Kogan ESQ Specialist in Constitutional Law
“Over Reaching Federal and State Agencies”
and
Sisiyou Water Users & The Grange
“Resolution for the Preservation of the Klamath Basin and Hydro Electic Facilites”
and
“Updates on the State of Jefferson, Wolf Meeting and Hoopa Petition on FERC’

Speakers to include:
County Supervisor Brandon Criss, Sheriff Jon Lopey, Betty Hall from the Shasta Nation, Richard Marshall, Tony Intiso, Mark Baird, Frank Tallerico, & Joe Watkins from the Klamath Irrigation District.

Bring a dessert to share. Coffee and tea provide. Donations appreciated.

For information call: 530-842-4400

Keep going there is more!!

Yreka City Council meeting

Outdoor Marijuana cultivation in the City
Thursday, Feb. 4th
City Council building on 4th St. 6:30PM

There will be a vote on allowing outdoor grows of marijuana in the City of Yreka. The planning Commission met on Jan. 2oth and voted 2-3 to recommend allowing outdoor grows in the city of Yreka. If you do not agree with this vote then you need to show up/ email/call your city council members to let them know that you do not support outdoor grows. The folks that want to grow out doors have been heavily lobbing the city council members. Your silence has implied consent. The other side has not been silent!!
If you decide to call, email and/or speak at the meeting, I would recommend that you describe any personal experience you have had with the nuisance and problems of marijuana growth in your neighborhoods. If you are not comfortable speaking at the meeting then please contact your council person by phone or email.

We need your body there at the meeting and we need you to contact the City Council members who are:

Bryan Foster bfoster@ci.yreka.ca.us 841-1091 or 598-7910
John Mercier, Mayor jmercier@ci.yreka.ca.us 340-1692
David Simmen dsimmen@ci.yrea.ca.us 340-0126
Deborah Baird dbair@ci.yreka.ca.us 598-9247
Joan Smith Freeman jfreeman@cu.yreka.ca.us 966-5626

FYI — Bryan Foster had reported at a council meeting that he will be voting against any growing of Marijuana within the city limits. So don’t call him, call the others.

The following cities have ordinances against outdoor grows: Weed, Montague, Dorris, and Etna as well as Siskiyou County.
Please alert all your friends, family and neighbors who live in Yreka. Print this alert and pass it out in your neighborhood. See attachment.

If you don’t speak, you can’t be heard.
Louise Gliatto

No Comments

Coyotes Attack, Kill Small Dog At Stern Grove Park In SF

Agriculture - California, Wildlife

PNP comment: The city folks have to contend with coyotes. We in the country get to stand by and watch our pets and animals be killed by wolves. Too many coyotes are just as bad as wolves interfacing with country folks. — Editor Liz Bowen

San Francisco CBS local.com

SAN FRANCISCO (CBS SF) — An emotional post on Facebook about a coyote attack on a small dog running off-leash at a San Francisco park has dog owners on edge and concerned for the safety of their pets.

“We lost our 7 pound Malti-poo, Buster,” wrote Peggy Lo on the Stern Grove Dog Owners Group page. “We were at Stern Grove and a coyote was waiting for him behind a tree.”

Stern Grove, also known as Pine Lake Park, is a 33-acre green space, located in the Sunset District. The park has an off-leash area for dogs.

“We saw a movement in the trees our little dog took off and ran towards it and the coyote came from behind the tree and grabbed him,” Lo told KPIX 5.

Lo’s husband ran after the coyote and tried to scare it to drop the squealing dog but it didn’t.

The post goes on to describe what happened when her husband gave chase to the coyote. “I ran back down to the path because I had the other two dogs with me and I could see the coyote at the top of the hill with the dog in his mouth now and it was limp.”

She said a second coyote appeared, and after a two-hour search they never found them.

People who belong to the group expressed condolences for the dog, and were calling for solutions to make the park safer, especially for small dogs like Buster.

Since July residents have reported dozens of coyote sightings. Two cats have been killed and San Francisco Recreation and Park workers placed warning signs in Stern Grove.

A month ago a dog owner told KPIX 5 five coyotes surrounded his bichon frise at Stern Grove and attacked it.

Some want more signs and warnings to be posted. Others question the safety of the off-leash policy altogether when it comes to smaller dogs. Still others feel even more Draconian measures are needed. They want the coyotes removed from the park.

Coyotes Attack, Kill Small Dog At Stern Grove Park In SF

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

Water board raises water reporting requirements

Agriculture - California, Air, Climate & Weather, CA & OR, California water, Ranch life, Threats to agriculture, Water rights, Water, Resources & Quality

PNP comment: This is bad news for water rights. — Editor Liz Bowen

Tim Hearden

Capital Press

California’s State Water Resources Control Board has increased reporting requirements for water right holders, putting aside requests from the California Cattlemen’s Association and others for relief for some producers in remote areas.

SACRAMENTO — Citing an emergency because of the drought, the state’s water board has ramped up reporting requirements for California’s roughly 12,000 landowners and users who have rights to divert water from nearby streams.

The regulations require annual reporting of water diversions rather than reporting once every three years, as previous law required of senior right holders. Those who divert more than 10 acre-feet of water per year must also measure their diversions.

The new rules adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board cover all surface water diversions, including those under pre-1914 and riparian water rights. State officials say the aim of the new rules is to provide more accurate and timely information on water use in California.

“Knowing when, where and how much water is being used is essential to managing the system fairly for all,” board chairwoman Felicia Marcus said in prepared remarks. “We’ve historically not had a complete picture, and these past two years have made it even more essential to take this common-sense move.”

The regulations provide for phasing in requirements for installing measurement devices and a tiered approach to accuracy and recording frequency standards, all based on the size of the diversion, a board news release explained.

For instance, large diverters with a claimed right to take 1,000 acre-feet of water or more per year must have a measuring device in place by Jan. 1, 2017, while those with rights for 100 acre-feet or more have until July 1, 2017, to install the devices. Those with rights to divert 10 acre-feet must comply by Jan. 1, 2018.

The California Cattlemen’s Association had sought relief for some ranchers in remote areas and requested that watermaster reports be deemed to fulfill the monitoring and reporting requirements.

However, the board decided that landowners served by a watermaster must nonetheless meet reporting and measuring requirements individually.

The board did away with an exemption for landowners who deemed previous measuring requirements “not locally cost-effective” — which about 70 percent of diverters claimed, according to state officials. Failure to comply with the new regulations could bring fines of up to $500 per day, according to the board.

The emergency regulations — which will take effect immediately — were required by Senate Bill 88, which was passed as trailer language in the 2015-16 state budget. The bill, authored by the Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, passed in June on mostly party-line votes — 52-28 in the Assembly and 24-14 in the Senate.

The rules were adopted Jan. 19 after minor revisions were made following a Dec. 17 workshop with affected parties, including representatives from the CCA.

The rules come as state water officials have said stop-diversion orders for water right holders could be more targeted to specific watersheds this year because regulators have learned so much about water needs in the past two years.

The board has yet to send out letters warning right holders of potential shutoffs — a move that had been done by this point last year — because recent storms have raised hopes that large-scale curtailment orders won’t be necessary.

MORE

http://www.capitalpress.com/California/20160125/water-board-raises-water-reporting-requirements

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

Poll: Californians Want to Ditch High-Speed Rail for Water Storage

Agriculture - California, Air, Climate & Weather, Water, Resources & Quality

Breitbart.com

By Daniel Nussbaum

January 15, 2016

A majority of California voters support an upcoming ballot measure that would strip funding from the high-speed rail project and divert it toward new water storage projects, according to a poll released Thursday.

The Hoover Institution Golden State Poll found that 53% of likely California voters would vote for a measure that would reallocate billions of dollars in unspent bond money from high-speed rail to fund the construction of new surface and groundwater storage infrastructure, while 31% would not.

Two California Republican lawmakers submitted the language of the proposed ballot measure in November. State Sen. Bob Huff (R-San Dimas) said the proposal was necessary as a record four-year-long drought has decimated the state’s water supplies.

“Water remains our state’s most important [resource] and our ballot measure provides a clear path for funding surface and groundwater storage, and recycling projects,” Huff said in a statement. “It does so without a penny of new taxes or borrowing by the state. Voters are demanding that state government does what every family does when faced with a challenge – change its priorities.”

In addition to broad support for the ballot measure, the poll also found that 62% of California voters believe the state should prioritize water storage construction in its spending. Moreover, just 39% of voters approve of Gov. Jerry Brown’s support for the high speed rail project, while 41% do not.

Anxiety over California’s water storage capabilities has spiked as the drought has dragged on; a February 2015 Field Poll found that just 10% of voters believe the state’s water storage facilities are more than adequate, while 38% said they are barely adequate. That result marked a dramatic shift in what the public sees as a possible solution to the drought; a Field Poll conducted one year earlier found “no clear consensus” among the public about whether water shortages were due to lack of storage facilities or inefficient usage.

At the same time, public support for the high speed rail has continued to founder as the project suffers from massive cost overruns, lengthy construction delays, and lawsuits over the extent of its environmental impact. As Breitbart’s Chriss Street reported in October, the total cost of the high-speed rail project could reach as high as $93 billion, more than double the total cost proposed in the November 2008 voter-approved Proposition 1A. With $9 billion in funding from that voter-approved bond measure, $3.2 billion in federal grants and up to $1 million per year in state cap-and-trade revenues, the project is still roughly $67 billion underfunded.

“California voters know that the drought has changed our state’s priorities and needs,” said Board of Equalization Vice Chair George Runner, who co-authored the ballot measure with Huff. “When given the choice, they choose water over high speed rail.”

A majority of state voters would support a measure that reallocates rail money to water, but that support dips slightly, to 49%, for a more broadly worded measure that would divert that same bond money elsewhere.

Aubrey Bettencourt, executive director of the California Water Alliance, which sponsored the measure, said the initiative would give voters the opportunity to “reprioritize the needs of California.”

“While trains are nice, water is a necessity for survival, food and our economy,” she said.

http://www.breitbart.com/california/2016/01/15/poll-californians-would-ditch-high-speed-rail-for-water-storage/

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

 

No Comments

When Will California’s Drought End?

Agriculture - California, Air, Climate & Weather

California Political Review.com

We are told that the current El Nino might end the drought. That would be nice. But ending the drought has nothing to do with providing water for future needs. It does not build water storage facilities; it does not stop the confused Guv Brown from using water for the protection of the delta smelt or building a Delta Tunnel—which provides zero new water. Yes, the drought by definition might end, but water policy creating the lack of water, will not change.

“Legally, it’s when Governor Jerry Brown declares it over.  However, scientific experts say three things would signify the drought’s end.

  • A replenished groundwater supply (but that could take 50 years)

  • Making up for our rainfall deficit (that’d likely take over a year)

  • Full reservoirs

The last scenario would really indicate the end of a drought, according to many experts.”

The filling of reservoirs can not happen if most of the El Nino water goes into the ocean. To end the drought would mean the Governor is willing to end it via policy and actions—so far he has shown, over forty years, he has no desire to bring water to California.

When Will California’s Drought End?

By Lindsey Hoshaw and Paul Rogers, KQED, 1/11/16

This winter’s first big storms, fueled by El Niño, soaked much of the Bay Area in recent weeks.

And there’s been a flurry of attention to the gradually rebuilding Sierra snowpack, the “frozen reservoir” that meets about a third of the state’s water needs.

But depleted reservoirs are still catching up. December rains added 293 billion gallons to the 154 major state and federal reservoirs in California, which sounds substantial. But by December’s end, that was still only 31 percent of capacity.

And rain totals have been both literally and figuratively all over the map.

Many parts of Northwestern California have been soaked—Eureka is at 128 percent of normal precipitation for this time of year. While sections of the Bay Area, like Oakland airport, are at 74 percent of normal.
With more rain expected this week, one question looms: when will California be out of a drought?

Three Things That Would End the Drought

Legally, it’s when Governor Jerry Brown declares it over.  However, scientific experts say three things would signify the drought’s end.

  • A replenished groundwater supply (but that could take 50 years)

  • Making up for our rainfall deficit (that’d likely take over a year)

  • Full reservoirs

The last scenario would really indicate the end of a drought, according to many experts.

Based on past drought-busting years, the state Department of Water Resources estimates that precipitation would need to reach about 150 percent of average — about 75 inches — in key Northern California watersheds.

California’s largest reservoir, Lake Shasta, is currently only 33 percent full.

For more detail on El Niño, the drought and what to expect in the weeks ahead,  KQED news anchor Danielle Venton spoke with Paul Rogers, KQED’s managing editor for science. You can listen to their audio interview at the top of the story.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

Why is the EPA Suing John Duarte for Plowing his Land?

Agriculture, Agriculture - California, Clean Water ACT - EPA, Federal gov & land grabs, Lawsuits

Ag Net West.com

No Comments

$12 Billion “Water” Bond—After Guv Brown Uses Previous Bond to Protect Delta Smelt Instead of Building Dams

Agriculture - California, Air, Climate & Weather

California Political Review

December 29, 2015

Comment By Stephen Frank

The very confused Guv Brown begged us to pass a $7.5 billion water bond (actually $15 billion when you include the interest costs) so we can build dams. Instead he spent $287 million on the delta smelt and won’t even discuss dams until2017. Now his friends want us to pass a $12 billion water bond in 2016 (includes interest costs) for among other things desalinization plants. Why should government pay for the plants, when private industry is begging to be allowed to build them?

““Authorizes $6.02 billion in general obligation bonds for water supply infrastructure projects, including watershed improvement and water quality enhancement; capturing urban runoff; water recycling and desalination; flood management; water conservation; water for wildlife; groundwater sustainability and storage; and safe drinking water. Appropriates money from the General Fund to pay off bonds. Requires certain projects to provide matching funds from non-state sources in order to receive bond funds.”

Note that not a dime goes to dams or water storage facilities. In other words, government does not want to plan for future droughts—which is how we got into this mess in the first place. Got $12 billion to waste—this is the bond for you.

Do you want to spend $6 billion on water projects? Sign here

Posted by Hoa Quach, MyNewsLA, 12/28/15

Do you want to spend $6 billion to improve California’s water system?

Oh, there’s also another $6 billion in interest charges to repay the original $6 billion in water bonds being proposed in a new measure that’s seeking your support.

The Secretary of State’s office has announced approval of a proposed initiative for the November, 2016 ballot that asks voters to authorize general obligation bonds for water supply infrastructure projects. The proposal is authored by Gerald Meral, a former deputy secretary of the state’s Natural Resources Agency.

Meral has 180 days to collect the signatures of 365,880 registered voters in order to qualify it for the November 2016 ballot.

The following petition language was approved by the Secretary of State:

“Authorizes $6.02 billion in general obligation bonds for water supply infrastructure projects, including watershed improvement and water quality enhancement; capturing urban runoff; water recycling and desalination; flood management; water conservation; water for wildlife; groundwater sustainability and storage; and safe drinking water. Appropriates money from the General Fund to pay off bonds. Requires certain projects to provide matching funds from non-state sources in order to receive bond funds. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: State General Fund costs of $12 billion to pay off principal ($6 billion) and interest ($6 billion) on bonds over a 40-year period. Annual payments would average $300 million. Annual payments would be relatively low in the initial and final few years and somewhat higher in the intervening years. Savings to local governments on water-related projects that would likely average between a few tens of millions of dollars and over $100 million annually over the next few decades.”

In an editorial in the San Jose Mercury News in November, Meral explains why the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta can no longer be a reliable source of water. Meral is the California water director of the Natural Heritage Institute.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

1 Comment

America’s Can’t-Do State: California’s Man-Made Drought Continues

Agriculture - California, Air, Climate & Weather

For decades government has stopped the development of desalinization plants along the coast. If we had built them, the drought would have been a back page story, with the obituaries. Instead government action created the lack of water. The governor took water from Lake Shasta and Folsom Dam, meant for people and farmers and allocated it to fish. Again, the lack of water for families and jobs is because of a political decision, not the naturally occurring drought.

“The Carlsbad desalination plant was proposed in 1998 and took almost 18 years to build. But only three of those years were actually spent building. The rest were wasted on politics and the usual Golden State regulatory and bureaucratic tangle. One of the plant’s investors told a California writer that the duplicative state approval process alone delayed the project by at least a decade and added about 10% to total costs.

“It took longer to get approvals for this one desalination plant than it did to design, approve and complete most of the 60-year-old State Water Project — California’s enormous system of dams, aqueducts and pumping stations that brings northern California water to the more arid Southland,” writes Steven Greenhut, a San Diego Union-Tribune columnist and a contributor to Watchdog.org.

Government, not nature is the cause of the water crisis. Why won’t the media make this the story? Why hasn’t the public revolted against a government killing them, “with good intentions”?

America’s Can’t-Do State: California’s Man-Made Drought Continues

Investors Daily Editorial, 12/28/15
Infrastructure: The first desalination plant in a state dragging itself through a drought has finally opened — a welcome event but also instructive in how nearly impossible it is to build anything useful in California.

The Claude “Bud” Lewis Desalination Plant was dedicated Dec. 14 in Carlsbad north of San Diego. It will remove salt from seawater, turning it into fresh water fit to consume. The $1-billion facility should churn out 50 million gallons of drinking water each day.

With an ocean of water sitting there for the taking, this plant — and several others like it — should have been built years ago. If so, California’s man-made drought could have been avoided.

But California has become a can’t-do state.

The Carlsbad desalination plant was proposed in 1998 and took almost 18 years to build. But only three of those years were actually spent building. The rest were wasted on politics and the usual Golden State regulatory and bureaucratic tangle. One of the plant’s investors told a California writer that the duplicative state approval process alone delayed the project by at least a decade and added about 10% to total costs.

“It took longer to get approvals for this one desalination plant than it did to design, approve and complete most of the 60-year-old State Water Project — California’s enormous system of dams, aqueducts and pumping stations that brings northern California water to the more arid Southland,” writes Steven Greenhut, a San Diego Union-Tribune columnist and a contributor to Watchdog.org.

The delays — primarily engineered by environmentalists — were so lengthy and difficult to overcome that the future of desalination plants in California, beginning its fourth year of drought, is grim.

Rob Deutschman, vice chairman of merchant bank Cappello Group and an early financial backer of the Carlsbad plant, told Bloomberg News that the project “required far more equity capital and development capital than we anticipated.”

“In hindsight was it a good investment? Probably not,” said Deutschman.

Greenhut said some investors “were no longer sure” the plant “could turn a profit,” given all the traps it had to negotiate. Another needed desalination plant is being planned up the coast in Huntington Beach, but who would invest in a project that will be held up so often and so exhaustively that the profit will be taken out of it?

And this is only one story.

While much of the state turns brown for lack of water, a proposal to raise the Shasta Dam — which is located in the northern reaches of the state and holds back California’s largest reservoir — by 18.5 feet above its 602-foot height goes nowhere. Once completed, the $1.3 billion project would boost the reservoir’s capacity by about 14% and the state’s water supply by the equivalent of an entirely new dam, even though it would still be nearly 200 feet short of its initially planned height of 800 feet.

Blame the usual opponents of progress.

“Anytime you want to change anything in California water, it’s a big deal,” Jay Lund, director of the Center for Watershed Sciences at the University of California, Davis, told a public radio outlet in the region.

“There’s always 500 different interests lined up on 500 different sides. There’s always going to be someone who’s unhappy, and they all have lawyers.”

Two of the “500” or so interests who oppose enlarging the reservoir are environmentalists and an Indian tribe. Each represents some of the heavier political forces in California and Washington. So expect officials to give them preferential treatment over the millions downstream — including farmers whose livelihoods depend on a steady water supply — who need relief.

California has not built a major water project in more than 35 years. Yet, as the state population has swelled by more than 55% over that time, officials have been unwilling to do what’s necessary to ensure an ample supply of water. It’s negligence of the highest order.

The only consequential project that can be built in the parched state is a bullet train, a costly boondoggle to nowhere whose only “riders” will be the politically connected who make out on the deal.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

Official: California snowpack at 136 percent of normal but doesn’t mark end of drought

Agriculture - California, Air, Climate & Weather

U.S. News and World Report

Associated Press   December 30, 2015, at 4:08 pm

By RICH PEDRONCELLI and SCOTT SMITH, Associated Press

ECHO SUMMIT, Calif. (AP) — The water content of the Sierra Nevada snowpack in drought-stricken California was 136 percent of normal Wednesday when officials took the winter’s first manual survey — an encouraging result after nearly no snow was found at the site in April.

The latest snow level is a good sign, “but that’s it — it’s a start,” said Frank Gehrke, chief of the California Cooperative Snow Surveys Program for the Department of Water Resources.

After four years of drought, Gehrke plunged a measuring pole into a thick field of snow in the Central Sierra, which includes Lake Tahoe. His survey followed an electronic measurement last week that put the water content of the snowpack at 112 percent of normal. Even more snow has fallen since then.

The snowpack provides about 30 percent of California’s water supply during the months when it melts and rushes through rivers and streams to fill reservoirs that remain critically low.

Last Jan. 1, the snowpack was a meager 45 percent of the historical average. On April 1, it had dropped to a record low of 5 percent.

Gehrke said snow must continue falling through April for him to feel confident the drought is easing.

“There’s going to be those anxious moments when we start to get into a week, a week-and-a-half with no snow,” he said.

A brewing El Nino system — a warming in the Pacific Ocean that alters weather worldwide — is expected to impact California and the rest of the nation in the coming months, according to a NASA report released Tuesday.

Its effects on California’s drought are hard to predict, but Jet Propulsion Laboratory climatologist Bill Patzert said it should bring some relief. El Ninos in the early 1980s and late 1990s brought about twice as much rain as normal, he said.

The weather also caused mudslides, flooding and high surf in Southern California.

“The water story for much of the American West over most of the past decade has been dominated by punishing drought,” Patzert said. “Now, we’re preparing to see the flip-side of nature’s water cycle — the arrival of steady, heavy rains and snowfall.”

Forecasters say a light to moderate storm system is expected in Northern California early next week.

___

Smith reported from Fresno, California.

Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

http://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2015-12-30/official-california-snowpack-at-136-percent-of-normal

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

Siskiyou County ranchers on edge over wolf encounters

Agriculture - California, cattle, Ranch life, Wolves

PNP comment: While wolf-lovers will scoff at this article, I would like to thank Ryan for bringing to light the real threat that Canadian gray wolves are to Siskiyou County — that of fear and disrespect for our lives, our animals, our economy. — Editor Liz Bowen

 

Dec. 26, 2015

Ranchers fear wolves attacking livestock after ‘probable’ calf kill

Ranching plays important role in Siskiyou County’s economy and culture

Some environmentalists say ranchers already were given too many concessions

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/environment/article51700790.html#storylink=cpy
Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/environment/article51700790.html#storylink=cpy
No Comments
« Older Posts