Addressing Nitrate in California’s Drinking Water Technical Report 1: Project and Technical Report Outline
Keywords:agricultural drainage, Central Valley, coastal aquifers, drinking water, groundwater contamination, Groundwater Exchange, nitrates, water quality
Multiple Benefits of Water Conservation and Efficiency for California Agriculture$0.00 Bulk Download
Multiple Benefits of Water Conservation and Efficiency for California AgriculturePacific Institute | July 29, 2014...Summary
California farmers have made progress in updating and modernizing irrigation practices, but despite past efforts, great untapped potential remains to use water more...
California farmers have made progress in updating and modernizing irrigation practices, but despite past efforts, great untapped potential remains to use water more efficiently. Water efficiency – defined as measures that reduce water use while maintaining the benefits water provides – has been shown to be a cost-effective and flexible tool to adapt to drought as well as to address longstanding water challenges in California. Moreover, today’s investments in efficiency will provide a competitive advantage in the future and ensure the ongoing strength of the agriculture sector in California.
Water-efficiency strategies provide important benefits to farmers, ecosystems, and society. Some of the water saved represents new supply that can be dedicated to other uses. But there are also compelling reasons to seek reductions in total water withdrawals, e.g., allowing farmers to maintain and even improve crop yields and quality; protecting water quality; reducing fertilizer, water, and energy costs; and boosting profits. The multiple benefits associated with reducing both consumptive and non-consumptive water uses argues for a comprehensive approach for promoting water-efficiency improvements that allows us to address complex and interrelated water management challenges in California, including water-supply reliability, conflicts among water users, the risks of droughts, worsening water quality, and ecological degradation. This fact sheet and infographic, The Multiple Benefits of Water Efficiency for California Agriculture, describe some of these important benefits.
California’s San Joaquin Valley: A Region in Transition$0.00 Bulk Download
California’s San Joaquin Valley: A Region in TransitionCongressional Research Service | December 12, 2005...Summary
CRS was requested to undertake a study of the San Joaquin Valley (SJV) and a comparison with another U.S. region. The eight-county San...
CRS was requested to undertake a study of the San Joaquin Valley (SJV) and a comparison with another U.S. region. The eight-county San Joaquin Valley, part of California’s Central Valley, is home to 5 of the 10 most agriculturally productive counties in the United States. By a wide range of indicators, the SJV is also one of the most economically depressed regions of the United States.
This report analyzes the SJV’s counties and statistically documents the basis of current socioeconomic conditions. The report further explores the extent to which the SJV shares similarities with and differs from the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) area and a 68-county Central Appalachian subregion which contains some of the most economically distressed counties in Appalachia. The report also examines the role of federal expenditures in the cities and counties of the SJV.
During the past twenty-five years, population growth rates in the SJV were significantly higher than for California or the United States and their projected growth rates over the next 20 years are also significantly higher. In 2000, the SJV also had substantially higher rates of poverty than California or the United States.
Poverty rates were also significantly higher in the SJV than in the ARC region, although the rate is somewhat lower than that of the Central Appalachian subregion. Unemployment rates in the SJV were higher than in California or the United States and the ARC area. Per capita income and average family income were higher in the SJV than in Central Appalachia, but per capita income in the SJV was lower than in the ARC region as a whole. SJV households also had higher rates of public assistance income than did Central Appalachian households. Madera County ranked among the 10 lowest per capita income Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) in the United States in 2003, and the other 5 MSAs in the San Joaquin were all in the bottom 20% of all U.S. MSAs. Other indicators of social well-being discussed in the report showed that the SJV is a region of significant economic distress.
Drainage without a drain$0.00 Bulk Download
Drainage without a drainThe Bay Institute | January 1, 2003...Summary
Agricultural drainage problems in California’s San Joaquin Valley have been a threat to the environment and to agriculture for at least the last...
Agricultural drainage problems in California’s San Joaquin Valley have been a threat to the environment and to agriculture for at least the last forty years. Though some improvements have been made, inaction - not progress - has been the most characteristic result of efforts to deal with the problem.
A recent federal appeals court ruling has focused the debate by establishing that there is no legal mandate to build the San Luis Drain and granting the federal government discretion to propose the best means of providing drainage service. This Briefing Book explores opportunities to break the decades-old political logjam and proposes a strategy for making long-needed progress on the agricultural drainage problem in the San Joaquin Valley.
Healthy, Fair, and Profitable: A Win-Win Pesticide Policy$0.00 Bulk Download
Healthy, Fair, and Profitable: A Win-Win Pesticide PolicyPacific Institute | January 1, 2002...Summary
A new report released by the Pacific Institute and the California Green Scissors project makes the case for changing the way pesticides are regulated in...
A new report released by the Pacific Institute and the California Green Scissors project makes the case for changing the way pesticides are regulated in California. According to the report, if California significantly increased its funding for sustainable agriculture — instead of just spending money to regulate pesticide usage — we could aid California farmers, improve the public health and save millions of dollars in associated costs.