-
Tips for becoming a good boxer - November 6, 2020
-
7 expert tips for making your hens night a memorable one - November 6, 2020
-
5 reasons to host your Christmas party on a cruise boat - November 6, 2020
-
What to do when you’re charged with a crime - November 6, 2020
-
Should you get one or multiple dogs? Here’s all you need to know - November 3, 2020
-
A Guide: How to Build Your Very Own Magic Mirror - February 14, 2019
-
Our Top Inspirational Baseball Stars - November 24, 2018
-
Five Tech Tools That Will Help You Turn Your Blog into a Business - November 24, 2018
-
How to Indulge on Vacation without Expanding Your Waist - November 9, 2018
-
5 Strategies for Businesses to Appeal to Today’s Increasingly Mobile-Crazed Customers - November 9, 2018
California State Water Regulators In Hot Water Over Improper Violation
The Sacramento Superior Court released a ruling against California regulators about water cutbacks that were implemented on farmers.
Advertisement
The court’s temporary restraining order blocks the government of California from punishing the farmers who are ignoring the notice by the state issued earlier in 2015 to immediately stop the diverting of water. This ruling, then, only applies to dozens of farmers located in the Central valley.
In a potentially major setback for California’s efforts to handle the drought, a judge Friday blocked the state water board’s decision to curtail the water rights of four irrigation districts.
The cutbacks included notices from the state water board that streams and rivers were running too close to dry to provide water that was entitled to them.
This plan would not create a drop of new water, and would destroy the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Western Hemisphere, Mr. Garamendi says.
The State Water Resources Control Board says the ruling may require it to tweak its notice letters, but still allows it to punish those who illegally take water. However, only 33% responded to confirm they had stopped using the water. An acre-foot is 326,000 gallons.
Several agencies and water rights holders have sued, challenging the board’s authority.
“The Curtailment Letters… result in a taking of Petitioners’ property rights without a pre-deprivation hearing, in violation of Petitioners’ Due Process Rights”, Chang wrote.
A number of irrigators had responded with lawsuits, contending, among other things, that before the state board halted diversions, it need to hold hearings in which the rights holders could contest the need for curtailments.
Although Friday’s order covers only the four districts, the ruling could set a precedent and affect “everybody that received a curtailment order”, Sacramento water law attorney Stuart Somach told the paper.
“The fundamental premise that these water districts waste water is just inaccurate”, said Somach.
Advertisement
Associated Press text, photo, graphic, audio and/or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Users may not download or reproduce a substantial portion of the AP material found on this web site.