Please help chairman huffman pass ab 49

[Trout Nut]

The following is a letter from our good friend, Doug Obegi of the Natural Resources Defense Council. Doug has been VERY helpful to me in my efforts to advocate for fisheries, for instance. He and Barry Nelson, who heads the western water policy division at NRDC are our friends. I have already written a slightly customized letter. What follows is an email from Doug, complete with a well written sample letter to edit and faxing instructions.
AB49 is one of the first measures to begin what California must do to conserve water and encourage efficiency measures that are long over do.

Google "NRDCs Virtual River" and you will see that if California follows all these recommendations, WE WILL LITERALLY SAVE (which means create or produce, cause a gallon saved is a gallon produced) MORE WATER THAN HAS EVER BEEN EXPORTED FROM THE DELTA!!!

I (Robert Johnson) am working on a political strategy to accelerate the states adoption of measures such as AB49 and many others. More on that later. so please help NRDC and Chairman Huffman, who helped us defeat AB 1253!
(CSPA will have this stuff up by tomorrow per Jerry..)

__________________________________________________ ______
Dear fishing friends,

I am writing to ask that your organizations and membership consider writing letters in support of state legislation to dramatically improve water conservation and efficiency in California (AB 49), which NRDC is sponsoring in conjunction with the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. This legislation is a critical element in implementing the “Virtual River” of water supply tools that NRDC has identified as being the best way for California to meet its existing and future water needs while also sustaining our State’s environment, fish, and fisheries.

AB 49 would implement the Governor’s call for legislation to require that urban per capita water use be reduced by 20% by 2020. The legislation provides a flexible approach to meeting this goal, offering urban water agencies three different methods to calculate their targets, and allowing targets to be met on an individual agency or regional basis. The bill would also require agricultural users to implement best management practices and report on water savings.

AB 49 is authored by Assemblymembers Feuer and Huffman, and it passed the State Assembly last week. It now heads to the Senate, and likely will be heard in the Senate Natural Resources and Wildlife Committee on June 23. There is significant opposition to the bill, primarily from the agricultural community and some large commercial/industrial water users (the registered support and opposition is listed on the attached fact sheet).

The fishing community’s support could be very helpful in getting this bill passed and signed into law. Many of you have asked how you could help make the Virtual River a reality – this would be a great way to do so, and to show that businesses, fishing organizations, and others – not just environmental groups and some water districts – support this legislation.

I have attached a fact sheet summarizing the bill, and below have pasted in a sample support letter. The bill text and legislative analysis are available online at: http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postqu...B&author=feuer, and I’m happy to answer any questions you have about the details of the legislation (there are also some additional amendments going into print in the next couple of days). The more letters we can get, and the more personalized those letters are, the more effective they will be.

Please fax support letters to the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee (Attention Dennis O’Connor) at (916) 323-2232. Please also email us a copy of your letters, so that we can share them with the Author’s office and use them later in the legislative process, with your permission. If you also know who your State Senator is, it would be great to cc them a copy of your letter, so the members hear that this bill is important to constituents in their district. Letters must be received by the committee by June 16 to be incorporated into the bill analysis.

Please feel free to call or email me if you have any questions or need any help. We really appreciate your support for this important legislation.

REMEMBER:
Deadline for Support Letters: June 16, 2009
Fax #: (916) 323-2232

Thanks,
Doug
----------------------

June __, 2009

The Honorable Fran Pavley, Chair
Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee
State Capitol, Room 4035
Sacramento, CA 95814

Sent Via Fax to (916) 323-2232

RE: AB 49 (Feuer-Huffman) — Support

Dear Senator Pavley and Members of the Committee,

On behalf of ______, I am writing to express our support for AB 49 by Assembly Members Feuer and Huffman. I am / my organization is _____.....

Enactment of this legislation will help ensure that California can meet its water needs while also sustaining and restoring the State’s fisheries. There is growing imperative to accelerate water use efficiency in California. The impacts of climate change, the fragility of Delta ecosystems and levees, recent court decisions and federal permits limiting Delta water exports, and reduced reliability of other traditional sources demonstrate a need for prompt action to conserve precious water resources. Efficient use is the foundation of local water supply reliability, and the State must act to promote this and other critical water management strategies.

The Governor has called for a 20% reduction in per capita water use by 2020, and has invited legislation to achieve that goal.

AB 49 would:

· Meet the Governor’s goal by requiring a 10% reduction in statewide urban per capita water use by 2015, and a 20% reduction in statewide urban per capita water use by 2020.
· Provide flexibility to water suppliers by allowing them to comply on an individual or regional basis, and by allowing them to allocate savings across customer classes in the manner they deem appropriate to their service area.
· Require agricultural water suppliers to implement specified Best Management Practices, and to report on savings from those practices.
· Require agricultural water suppliers every 5 years to prepare water management plans and submit those plans to the Department of Water Resources
· Establish compliance with these requirements as a precondition for receiving state water management grants or loans.
· Authorize use of existing state bond funds to carry out this measure, and give consideration to disadvantaged communities in allocation of those funds.

Please vote “aye” on AB 49 when it is heard in your committee. Thank you for considering our views.

Sincerely,


---------------------------------
Doug Obegi
Staff Attorney
Water Program
Natural Resources Defense Council
111 Sutter Street, 20th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
415.875.6100 (phone)
415.875.6161 (facsimile)

[STEELIES/26c3]

Thanks RJ.

I worked as a consultant for MWD for 5 years and I must say of all the government and quasi-government agencies out there... they were, and apparently continue to be... one of the most progressive resource agencies out there.

I worked as a naturalist on the 12,000 acre wildlife reserve in Winchester/Hemet (set aside as a mitigation for Stephens Kangaroo Rat habitat inundated in the construction of Diamond Valley Reservoir). They were mandated to set aside only 8,000 acres and went way above and beyond...

It's nice to see them again using their resources to work towards a mutually beneficial solution to our water/wetland crisis.

I'll definitely write those letters and do my best to spread the word amongst my peers.

Forever in Fish~
Mark Lynn

[Darian]

Recognizing that this bill is a step in the right direction, it appears to deal with end (water usage) instead of at the beginning (allocation) of the process.

According to the committee analysis, the bill encourages/requires construction of new reservoirs, recovery of spillage/tail water thru construction of new systems for that purpose and expanded use of groundwater storage facilities.... Does this allow tail water recovery systems be installed below each dam in the state (Folsom, Natomas, Oroville, Shasta to name a few) What does that mean to flows for rivers/streams Of course, recovered water will be allocated to distributors who will, in turn, re-sell. Agricultural users will irrigate or store the water and sell the excess water from their groundwater storage facilities. Expanded use of groundwater facilities is already in existence. Water banks, transfer facilities for water distributors, and, ultimately, re-sales of excess water to downstream users are the norm. Doesn't appear to be any real conservation at this level....

If the goals of this bill are met by end users, there doesn't seem to be any requirement to lower allocations in proportion to the 20% reduction target for water distributors. So, if water in excess of that used is being sold to downstream buyers, the incentive is to continue to request the same or more water in allocations. No conservation at this level. Maybe no reduction of pumping, either.

IMHO, The problem with all of these type bills is that they fail to deal with to deal with the allocation of water at the beginning of the process. Is that a recognition of the futility of that prospect....