Here the complaint is about all that water going to vineyards. Not only do they use a lot of water from deep wells but the water usage is also for washing wine bottles and spraying water on vines during frost periods.
I guess we can flush our toilets with cabernet ?
http://www.sfchronicle.com/science/article/Feinstein-Enviros-no-help-on-California-drought-5481560.php
"(05-15) 13:58 PDT WASHINGTON -- Sen. Dianne Feinstein will try to fast-track farm-friendly drought legislation through the Senate over the objections of environmentalists, who the senator complains have done nothing to help her adapt California's aging water system to deal with climate change and the addition of millions of thirsty residents.
Environmentalists "have never been helpful to me in producing good water policy," the California Democrat said in an interview with The Chronicle. "You can't have a water infrastructure for 16 million people and say, 'Oh, it's fine for 38 million people,' when we're losing the Sierra Nevada snowpack.' "
Asked about opposition from environmental groups, Feinstein said, "Well, that's really too bad, isn't it? I would be very happy to know what they propose. ... I have not had a single constructive view from environmentalists of how to provide water when there is no snowpack."
Feinstein's bill, SB2198, co-sponsored by Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., would ease restrictions on water exports from the San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta to farms and cities.
GOP House version
Feinstein said her aim is to take legislation into conference with the House, where Republicans passed a bill in February to waive environmental laws protecting endangered fish to get more water to farms.
Feinstein's bill - and her effort to fast-track it through the Senate - alarms both environmentalists and Bay Area House Democrats, who fear she would tilt California water policy away from the state's devastated salmon runs.
They said Feinstein has already achieved her aims through political pressure on state water agencies, which have maximized pumping within the limits of the law to free up water for people and crops during the drought.
'She's won'
"The truth is, she's won," said Rep. Mike Thompson, D-St. Helena. "There isn't any need to go forward with the legislation, which could be hijacked by some of our House colleagues and create bigger problems."
Most of what Feinstein's bill adds in flexibility to move water from rivers to other uses has "been done administratively, because of her involvement and her legislation," Thompson said. "So one could argue, as many of us did, that she ought to declare victory and not worry about the bill, but she's interested in seeing it through."
Seven California House Democrats met privately with Feinstein last week, including Thompson. Most said they were heartened by her effort to address their concerns, but remain opposed to her bill.
"The real danger I and others see moving forward is that this opens the door to a conference committee with a truly terrible piece of legislation in the House and that can only lead to a worse situation," said Rep. Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael.
Caving to growers?
Bob Wright, a lawyer with Friends of the River, an environmental group, accused Feinstein of exploiting the drought to "cater to the wishes of powerful growers in Westlands and Kern County water districts."
Feinstein conceded that parts of her bill have already been executed by administrative action, but said others haven't. She insisted that her bill would not usurp any environmental laws.
She said her bill is intended to "maximize pumping" within the confines of endangered species protections "for the length of the emergency. And I suspect the emergency is going to go on some time."
Her bill would remain in effect until Gov. Jerry Brown lifts the emergency drought declaration he imposed in January. The declaration permits water agencies to relax certain environmental rules temporarily to ensure water supplies for human use.
Diverting San Joaquin
One of the Feinstein provisions that most concerns critics would lock in complete diversion of the San Joaquin River for as long as the drought lasts. Such diversions are already allowed during "critical dry years."
The diversion is already damaging endangered steelhead trout and commercial Chinook salmon, said Jon Rosenfield, a conservation biologist at the Bay Institute, a San Francisco environmental group.
Under current law, if more rains arrive next year, river flows must be increased. But under Feinstein's bill, the total diversion would be locked in place.
"It's either naïveté and lack of understanding" of what is already in the law, Rosenfield said, "or opportunism to lock in low levels of protection even if water supplies increase next year."
Working on upgrade
He disputed Feinstein's charge the environmentalists have not worked to provide more water for all parties in the state. "We've all spent vast amounts of time and resources to design a plan to upgrade California's water infrastructure and increase water supply and reliability," Rosenfield said.
Feinstein's bill has been stuck in the Senate since February, and she needs the assent of all 100 senators to get to a quick vote. She plans to use a "hotline" procedure next week to determine exactly who is blocking the bill.
"We will find out who the holdouts are," she said."