AquAlliance exists to defend northern California waters and to challenge threats to the hydrologic health of the northern Sacramento River watershed. We are prepared and willing to confront the escalating attempts to divert more and more water from the northern Sacramento River hydrologic region.
Citizens voice opposition to water transfers: click here to view video from October 21 Bureau of Reclamation public meeting
Click here to download printable document. AquAlliance opposes the Water Bond, Proposition 1 on the November 4, 2014 ballot. The measure does have funding for some beneficial and cost effective items, but the damage that will occur outweighs the benefits for one major reason: The Bond expands groundwater banking and conjunctive use. [see definition below] This is a horrible idea for the NorthState. To store water in a groundwater bank there must first be space. Most areas of the NorthState have little “space” for recharge despite the intens...Read more
Costs vs. Benefits of Big Water Projects: When compared with urban water efficiency, the water storage projects that would be half-funded by the November water bond have very high per-project costs, low yield, and immensely high costs per acre-foot of water. Increasing urban water efficiency only costs about $112 per acre-foot while raising Shasta dam is over $23,000 per acre-foot and building Sites reservoir is almost $6,000 an acre-foot. (An acre-foot is 325,851 gallons of water, enough to last two average California households a year for outdoor and indoor uses.)
Sources for AquAlliance’s Bar Graph: Shasta: Bureau of Reclamation, Plan Formulation Appendices, 2013; Temperance Flat: DWR, Temperance Flat Reservoir FAQ, 2007; Sites: DWR, Sites Reservoir FAQ, 2007; Urban Water Efficiency: CalFed Bay Delta Program, Water Use Efficiency Element, 2006 (pp. 126, 130)