Laserfiche WebLink
And the third thin g that I want to call out is, last year -- <br />I think it’s last -- 2004, the SWSI -- CWCB completed the Statewide <br />Water Supply Investigation Report. One of the state <br />recommendations in there was that the CWCB should, I'm quoting <br />from the Executive Summary, "The CW CB should identify clean <br />segments or equalizable areas for flow prioritization or <br />enhancement and the state should begin to development an <br />objective reproducible framework for evaluating, quantifying and <br />prioritizing environmental and recreational water go als." <br />That's not funded. <br />If you're looking for a place to give the CWCB more <br />funding -- more monies to meet and fund that need, we would <br />suggest diverting the money to that diversion -- . <br />Senator Isgar: <br /> -- And that’s what you’re interested in now? <br />Ms. Kassen: <br /> And we would be much more comfortable with <br />this bill even if there were those kinds of sidebars. So, in <br />other words, that there was -- I mean, if this bill is going to go <br />forward, is it possible to amend it to allow -- to say only <br />projects that are going to conserve, protect or restore the <br />adversely affected rivers, they get bonus points. They get an -- <br />you know, there's an incentive for the CWCB to fund that. <br />I mean, that's not -- that's what -- dealing with our <br />environmental and recreational instream values are not getting <br />funded. Dealing with abandoned mines is not getting funded. I <br />- 9 - <br /> <br />