Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Exchanges of information among planners and decision-makers have helped determine the <br />direction of drought-related research, and sharing of findings among research entities has helped . <br />promote many of the advances in drought-related research. The Commission heard that there are <br />various opportunities for expanding such collaborative and cooperative activities. <br /> <br />We also heard that research benefits greatly from trained, skilled people who have a deep and <br />abiding interest in drought-related issues. As technology and knowledge evolve, so does the need <br />for a new generation of trained, skilled, and interested individuals. <br /> <br />Because drought is a worldwide phenomenon, the United States has the opportunity to share <br />drought experience and expertise with other countries and learn from them. We also note that such <br />efforts should not be limited to the federal level. The cities of San Diego, California, and Tijuana, <br />Mexico, for example, have the ability to connect their water systems and transfer potable water <br />during times of drought or other emergencies. <br /> <br />The fourth category of needs focuses on coordination offederal drought-related programs. <br /> <br />The array offederal and even state drought-related programs can be intimidating and frustrating for <br />stakeholders who would like access to the services the programs offer, including training, technical <br />assistance, and data, but who do not deal with government agencies on a regular basis. At another <br />level, the multitude of federal programs can also cause problems for state, country, and tribal <br />governments that may be very used to governmental transactions but still have to deal individually <br />with separate federal agencies for any number of drought-related issues. <br /> <br />Our needs analysis indicates that there are also federal programs authorized by law that are not . <br />currently funded or that were funded for only a specific time period. This can be disconcerting to <br />stakeholders who become familiar with one pro~am and then have to learn new rules when that <br />program changes or is eliminated. <br /> <br />While service delivery networks exist for many federal programs, they are not always integrated <br />with drought-related federal programs and thus communicating the message about what the <br />programs offer can be problematic. <br /> <br />The fifth category of needs focuses on providing a safety net for stakeholders and the general <br />public during drought emergencies. <br /> <br />The Stafford Act and its implementation by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) <br />is an effective, proven model for organizing and providing emergency assistance during natural <br />disasters. One of the factors that makes this program successful is that FEMA can draw monies <br />from a standing fund to pay for disaster assistance. As examples of assistance that might prove <br />helpful during drought emergencies, FEMA can provide disaster unemployment assistance, truck in <br />water, and assist in replacing or building infrastructure such as pipelines for water transfers or <br />wells. However, the Stafford Act does not inclUde at least one important segment of the public- <br />agriculture-that is likely to be adversely impacted by drought on the list of entities eligible for <br />assistance. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />q <br />