As this article from the Sacramento Bee reports, extolling the value of underground storage rather than above ground—and I can certainly see the value of underground storage—the above ground storage requiring dams is just not the way to go; though it is an argument with little to recommend it to reasonable people other than ideological rant.
Hating dams is as commonplace among the environmentalists as is that of hating the suburbs, though both resonate very positively with a vast majority of the American people who see the former as necessary to have enough water when times are too dry or enough protection when times are too wet; and the latter as the preferred way to live.
An excerpt from the Bee article.
The acute water shortages now hitting California have prompted many in Congress and the state Legislature to call for new surface reservoirs to reduce the impacts of future droughts.
Some have even blamed the lack of reservoir development as a primary cause of water scarcity during the current drought.
The reality is that new surface storage would have added only modestly to the state’s water supply. We’d still be in the midst of a severe drought. Building drought resilience requires a much broader set of actions, including conservation, water trading, managing groundwater and expanding nontraditional supplies like recycled wastewater and stormwater.
Following the 1987-92 drought, urban water agencies invested heavily in surface and groundwater storage. These investments have paid dividends during this drought, greatly reducing water shortages in the state’s major cities. But few investments were made to increase water reliability for agriculture and the environment, and these two sectors have been hit particularly hard.
Retrieved July 6, 2015 from http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/op-ed/soapbox/article25812187.html