DFG logic

[Bulletin Board]

Posted by Stan P on 2007-10-29 08:12:04 in reply to Coalition for a sustainable delta playing hardball with striped bass - this could mean the end... posted by Dan Blanton on 2007-10-28 19:11:38

Clearly this issue of non-native species has driven DFG's apathy with respect to a striper management plan, better said, the lack of one. They have no plan and have treated this issue with silence for too long. At the very least this will require that DFG to take a stance one way or the other. We will then know if DFG is friend or foe on this issue. I am trying to find a silver lining in this all be it weakly. This statement Dan posted is meant to deflect the argument away from water and toward endangered species. However the history of both salmonids and stripers in this system shows that BOTH are in commensurate decline due to a single factor--excessive water exports. I hope we all have the focus to keep the guns directed at the enemy. We cannot let the "divide and conquer" tactic work on us. It is also very important to not overstate or become hysterical about this. This often reduces the effects of environmental movements. Perhaps it will be important to point out that the Delta Smelt just happens to be the present pressure point. What is the next one? and the next and the next? certainly they will all have a common cause----the lack of WATER. I wrote our Governor and suggested he focus on water conservation rather than infrastructure to resolve our water crisis. Water is a finite resource and regardless of how many dams and canals we build at some point we will run out of water. I suggested to him that he make everyone farmers included, pay fair market price for water. This is the single most effective way to encourage conservation by everybody. Their argument is the price of food will go up. We the tax payers pay for the farmer's water now, so food prices do not reflect the true prices we pay but we still pay. I say let me choose which crops I will purchase to eat based on responsible water use by farmers. That pressure will surely create an incentive for farmers to conserve water. In the end conservation of water will be the final answer if we are to survie. There is no incentive to conserve if the water is free to the largest users and abusers of this resource. If not for corruption why would any politician choose to create more bond issues and spend more money when the governement could increase revenues by simply chargeing the users for the water they use? What is so difficult to understand about that?

Follow ups:

Post a Followup:


Use the space below to compose your message: