Another important point here is that the corporate agribusiness we are talking about uses over 80% of the system's water, much of that very wastefully when it could make small improvements to preserve the water base. done7777@sbcglobal.net wrote:
Of course bioregionalism is an organic process for providing accountable political representation based on protecting the watersheds.
That is why I initially liked the idea of elected boards to oversee issues relating to water and land use. But politics is corrupted by money and developers and agribusiness have a lot of it, and control things in eastern California.
I see a difference between agriculture and agribusiness. Monoculture in almonds alone in the state challenges bees to survive.
Of course agriculture needs access to water. But they need to stand in line like everyone else, behind what it takes for the natural processes of the watershed to maintain themselves, but well ahead of the needs for suburban lawns.
I said we own the spigot. Good thing it's not Bechtel.
Don
--- On Mon, 6/15/09, Martin Zehr <m_zehr@hotmail.com> wrote:
From: Martin Zehr <m_zehr@hotmail.com> Subject: RE: [SustainActive] [SFGP-A] SFPUC Appointee Anson Moran On Water/Environment To: "Don Eichelberger" <done7777@sbcglobal.net>, "Eric Brooks" <brookse32@aim.com>, "SF Active Greens" <active@sfgreens.org>, sustainactive@sfgreens.org Date: Monday, June 15, 2009, 6:24 PM
#yiv1123256795 .hmmessage P { margin:0px;padding:0px;} #yiv1123256795 { font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana;}
"They want water, we own the spigot." Don
"San Francisco would be given majority representative numbers" Eric
You and Eric have said it all. You doth presume too much. Agriculture is the supplier of food. You do not support bio-regionalism by denying the integral role of agriculture in the region.
Mato Ska
"In theory you are absolutely correct. These decisions, in a just world, should be made democratically by all citizens throughout the region.
However, what Moran was doubtless angling for (and would put in place if he gained real power) is a selective Joint Powers system which would be very easy for developers and ag giants to dominate and manipulate, by bribing and donating to suburban and valley legislators, who would have the majority of votes on the Authority.
I would be all for a regional decision making body with four strict conditions:
1) The communities and indigenous peoples in the Sierras at the source of the Hetch Hetchy water would be given veto power over all system decisions. 2) San Francisco would be given majority representative numbers on the joint authority to protect residential customers from the undue ag and developer theft of water (theft the likes of which for example so long dominated the Los Angeles water system) 3) a caucus of local independent Salmon fisherman were given strongly weighted representation on the authority and 4) As part of establishing the Authority, San Francisco was forced to switch to a public power system for its electricity customers, as has always been the requirement of the Raker Act which gave San Francisco the legal authority to build Hetch Hetchy in the first place.
cheers
Eric B
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 16:33:14 -0700 From: done7777@sbcglobal.net To: brookse32@aim.com; active@sfgreens.org;
sustainactive@sfgreens.org
Subject: Re: [SustainActive] [SFGP-A] SFPUC Appointee
Anson Moran On Water/Environment
Mato-
I agree that all parties need to be made a part of the
decision-making process. But as we diversify our process, we need to accommodate without becoming dominated by a faction.
Deep pocketed developers want to plant more lawns in
suburbia. And monoculture control of agribusiness is driving the planting of more almonds and grapes, threatening bee populations.
They want water, we own the spigot. Seems like a
bargaining chip there that could help open dialogue around sustainability issues if there were an appropriate forum. What is more sustainable than assuring a stable water supply and efficient use?
At the time Moran was calling for some type of common
watershed authority, I was thinking that sounded alright, and maybe a good way to organize at the grassroots.
But agribusiness and developers are the big gorilla in
most of the watershed's area, and their big money and media access capabilities would need to be countered. This could only be done by sheer numbers of activists going to regional watershed meetings, setting up accountable and democratic processes and running as commissioners.
I had wanted to give this more organizing priority as
a model for bioregional organizing. But in 1999, I took over as Co-Coordinator of the Green Party of California Energy (soon to become Green Issues) Working Group, and I never followed through and the SFPUC and SF government acted relatively quickly to fund HH upgrades and keep SF the sole proprietor.
Then 911 happened....
Don
--- On Sun, 6/14/09, Martin Zehr
<m_zehr@hotmail.com> wrote:
From: Martin Zehr <m_zehr@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: [SustainActive] [SFGP-A] SFPUC
Appointee Anson Moran On Water/Environment
To: "Eric Brooks"
<brookse32@aim.com>, "SF Active Greens" <active@sfgreens.org>, sustainactive@sfgreens.org
Date: Sunday, June 14, 2009, 3:23 PM
Eric,
help me out here. How is the City of San
Francisco making
the decisions on Hetch-Hetchy water NOT a corrupt
set-up?
Why is failing to represent agricultural users in
the region
NOT a corrupt set-up? How does bio-regionalism
exclude
diverse users, including agricultural
users and those
with water rights from engaging in the
decision-making
process?
Mato SKa
_______________________________________________ SustainActive mailing list SustainActive@sfgreens.org
https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainactive
-- "I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves." – Che Guevara