Instead of researching databases to find alleged crimes by farmers you might do some real field research. Go out and talk to farmers and they will show you how water is used and managed.

Marc Reisner who wrote the famous book Cadillac Desert recanted the thesis of his book after he went to observe first hand how rice farmers jointly used estuaries and water sources for ducks and other wildlife.

I notice you have not responded to my charge that water conservation may bring about a depletion of subsurface water supplies. Talk to some farm water hydrologists about this.

Yes, we could do a better job making this statement clearer (I will update the site to show 200MAF rain & 71MAF “usable” water). Still nothing erroneous or intentionally misleading as it stands. Also, this does not change the issue at hand in the very least.

I did disclose who I was in my reply above. Yes, a Google search will return a number of public profiles of mine. For others, feel free to contact me through linkedin or any other medium if you want to participate in making this data better for our state. We have had some of the most talented water professionals, and folks from the technology community step forward to help push this forward.

Now you are mixing rainwater and usable water but the Water Atlas website made no such distinction

Your website uses data from two different classifications of water without disclosure and then use the difference between the two to claim there is some sort of groundwater crisis

You also might clarify for readers who you are

Laci Videmsky – Architecture graduate of Harvard University

Project director at Resource Renewal Institute that sponsored the study

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/laci-videmsky/25/803/952

As one of the co-creators of the Atlas, I assure you there is no “agenda” other than increased accessibility and transparency of state managed data. We have identical data to what the State Water Board collects and maintains. If the data is wrong, I encourage you to bring it up with the SWRCB. When they change it, our Atlas will update automatically.

You are very likely correct in your discovery. There are most definitely other areas where such instances exist. Showing bad data in a clear and easy to understand fashion is just as powerful as good data. That said, the SWRCB has offered to work with us to get this data in better shape, and make it easier to access.

We are citizens who are open data advocates, and volunteer our time for various Open Government initiatives. If you haven’t heard of this term, check out:
http://www.state.gov/j/ogp/index.htm

Your post inspired me to imagine a new feature for the site. An interface where one can submit a claim or a correction to a claim. A dot would appear clearly as pending and not “official”. Others then could see the claim and offer their insights (a virtual town hall). After a set period of time, the “correction” forwards to the SWRCB’s inbox, and a time ticker starts showing the time elapsed for awaiting official reply. Just thought. You wanna help ? 🙂

Admittedly I also found a few instances of small (less than 100 AF) water rights that were not included. But those were very much the exception.

My review was only for two geographic areas with which I have experience and lead me to conclude the Atlas is largely worthless and intended to drum up support for an agenda.

On average, roughly 200 million acre-feet (maf) of precipitation fall annually on California. Most of this water evaporates, particularly in the hottest and driest areas of the state. The remainder, known as “unimpaired runoff” (averaging about 75 maf/year) flows downhill into streams and groundwater basins, and becomes available for management and use (Table 2.1).

citation: http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/report/R_211EHChapter2R.pdf