good evening and welcome to kqed "newsroom." i'm thuy vu. the current drought is threatening as much as 500,000 acres of california's richest farmland. president obama along with governor jerry brown visited the central valley this afternoon to see the drought's impact in person. >> california's our biggest economy. california is our biggest agricultural producer. so what happens here matters to every working american. right down to the cost of food that you put on your table. >> the president pledged millions of dollars in federal aid. scott shafer has been following the developments and he joins us now. >> hi, thuy. >> what did the president offer in terms of drought relief aid? >> the president offered a package of $183 million. it's not new money. a lot of it was in the farm bill he signed. the big ticket item is $100 million for livestock disaster assistance and streamlining the program. it sometimes takes ranchers a year to get money in their pockets. they're promising that will be scaled down to two months. $60 million for food banks in the region. if you think about it, farmers, their families, as well as farm workers are going to be hurting as this drought goes on. that will help provide food to folks who are out of work or struggling to make ends meet. >> and money for conservation efforts as well. >> absolutely. let's be honest, it was a photo op for the president. democrats are kind of on the -- back on their heels a little bit on this issue. and of course what they really need is more rain. and the president can't bring that, neither can the governor or anyone else. at least he can show that he's concerned and meet with all the right people and all the stakeholders and show, in fact, that washington is paying attention. >> and president obama did spend a fair amount of time talking about climate change. what did he say about that exactly? >> he did. and this rural america is not real excited about the idea of climate change. in fact, devin nunez, the republican congressmember dr. this area, calls it absolute nonsense. but the president says that, although you can't blame any particular weather event on climate change, that it is leading to extreme weather and we have to be ready for that. he pointed out that california's water wars in the past have been a zero sum game, that's got to change. he said we need to get hold on carbon emissions and until we do that, he said, and as scientists would mostly agree, there's going to be more extreme conditions in terms of rain, floods, fires, and all the rest. >> he's proposing a $1 billion climate resilience program. how are republicans likely to receive that? how do you think his visit here will affect the response to the drought by lawmakers? >> he did set up these climate hubs which are basically research areas to help farmers and farms become more resilient in the face of all this extreme weather. you know, this issue, like virtually everything else in washington, has become very partis partisan. republicans blame the drought on democrats. they say this is largely the result of environmental policies, specifically the endangered species act. and democrats say, we're not eliminating the endangered species act, that's a nonstarter. republicans in the house passed a bill to loosen environmental laws. that's not going to go anywhere. they're going to have to find something, if they can find anything to agree on. the president says today is really, like i said about showing the flag, giving a little support to democrats who are somewhat vulnerable on this issue. >> and you mentioned the bill passed by house republicans. and democrats countered this week with senators dianne feinstein and barbara boxer, they proposed their own doubt relief package. >> they did. it isn't going to change the endangered species act. $300 million package of support for farmers, it would make it easier for water agencies more flexibility to move water around to get to it places severely hit by this drought. >> governor brown has been talking about the drought this week. he was with the president today in fresno. he hasn't always been perceived as a friend of agriculture. so what is he saying about all this? >> you're right, he hasn't been. those who remember the first time he was governor there was the med fly, his chief justice was not friendly to agriculture at all. he's been vague this week. he was critical of what the house republicans did, saying it was very divisive and doesn't do anything to solve the problems. but he also said, i can't make it rain. he said, we just need to talk, this is going to require political job-owning to try to find common ground. but he's been very unspecific about what that means. >> a state senate committee this week passed a water bond to put on the ballot. what is he saying about that? >> well, he's trying to avoid saying much of anything. because there was an $11 billion water bond passed in 2009 that was loaded up with pork projects, bike lanes and everything else. they know that isn't going to fly with voters. so now this week they passed a much slimmer version. $7 billion. there's another proposal out there floating around in the assembly. but the governor seems very reluctant to put it on the ballot. he said, look, whether i support it or not doesn't matter if voters don't support it. he's being very cautious. i talked to senator feinstein and she really is saying, look, the governor is doing well no matterw3 what, he ought to real put these bonds on the ballot, now is the time. >> he's also, if you believe what's put out there, is probably going to run for re-election and he probably doesn't want to put a bond on the ballot. >> especially he's running on i'm the guy to cleaned up the budget, living wind our means, all of that. >> thank you for the update and analysis. the drought is taking a toll not only on fields and farms but also on fish, including the endangered coho salmon. low water levels have prevented many adult california coho from reaching their spawning grounds in creeks like lagunitas in marin county. last week's rain brought a measure of relief allowing some salmon through. but as reporter dan brekke found, relief may be temporary. >> reporter: the first big rains of the season draw coho salmon back to lagunitas creek. with only a few hundred adult coho returning here annual to spawn these fish are fighting for survival. now they face a new threat, california's drought. to find out how the fish are doing i met up with greg andrew, a fish biologist with the marin municipal water district, and his intern rosa albanese. >> we've got waders for you. you can put these on, keep you dry. >> they let me join them on a survey to track fresh spawning activity in lagunitas creek, one of the last strongholds for wild coho salmon on the central coast. >> right away we've got two nest sites where the female has laid her eggs and the male has fertilized those. >> i gave greg a hand measuring the spawning nest site. >> that's good. doesn't have to be exactly there but pretty close. 7.2. >> normally the coho in the lagunitas watershed finish spawning in mid-january. but the drought has changed the fish's behavior pushing the spawning season well into february. >> what that tells me is that those fish were out in tomorrow's bay holding and just waiting. this is the first time we've actually seen this happen. >> the fish waited for a big storm, a much-needed event that came last week when more than a foot of rain soaked marin county. that deluge prompted 100 coho to surge into the creek to spawn and then die. >> this is a coho carcass. >> beautiful. >> spawn and die. >> as rosa and greg take measurements and tissue samples, i'm reminded that even in death, this coho is a critical link in the ecosystem carrying nutrients into the soil to nourish towering redwoods at the water's edge. as we head upstream, we finally get a glimpse of these remarkable fish and their struggle to pass on their dna. >> oh, wow. that's awesome. use your binoculars and get a good look at those guys. >> two brawny males push and bite to get access to a nearby female, waiting for a chance to fertilize her eggs. we even spot another threatened species of fish, a steelhead trout. >> so far to date, we have counted about 165 coho reds in l lagunitas creek, we've seen close to 300 coho salmon. that's a good number. and just a week ago, we had less than half that. >> the marin municipal water district releases water year round to help not only migrating adult coho but also the young that live here for more than a year before swimming out to sea. but with the drought, the reservoirs are well below capacity. >> the drought means low flows, low water levels in the creek, which is bad for any fish. and certainly bad for the coho salmon of california. >> with steps ranging from building debris structures to provide a refuge for fish, to the state's recent ban on fishing in coastal streams, the fight to save the coho for future generations presses ahead. >> these are fish that don't belong to me or you or the people of marin county. they are a resource to the state of california. they belong to the people of california. i think people view the status of the population as an indicator of the health of their own environment. as the salmon go, so goes their environment. and so goes their state of well-being living here in california. pedestrian deaths continue to be in the news following this week's fatal crash in san francisco on van ness avenue. there were 21 such fatalities in san francisco in 2013. it was also a particularly deadly year in san jose with 26 fatal pedestrian accidents, the highest number in nearly two decades. what's behind the spike? joining me for a look at what can be done to curb the problem are nicole schneider, executive director of walk san francisco. and chris hwang, board president of walk oakland, bike oakland. thank you both for being here. nicole, i wanted to ask you, first of all, why are the number of pedestrian deaths rising in large cities like san francisco, like san jose? >> you know, we don't really know exactly why theorizing over the last year, for instance. but we know what the solutions are. so we're really focused on making progress and making a change right now. >> could things like technology, the use of mobile devices, be to blame? what about the economy's picking up, more people are on the roads, could those are factors as well? >> i have no idea. but i know that for many, many decades we've been designing our cities to bring cars through the streets as quickly as possible. and that has been a priority. and i think that that concept and priority is truly outdated. and needs to be fixed. >> so what is truly the cause? you mentioned some of the environmental and the roadway factors. but is it primarily a case of drivers not being careful enough? or are pedestrians to blame in a fair number of these accidents as well? >> you know, in san francisco we found that 66% of the time the fault is of -- the driver's fault in terms of collision. and pedestrians are at fault the rest of the time. this is in terms of police data. but i think when we take a step back and look at the bigger picture, we should -- this is the city's responsibility. when -- in the last ten weeks in san francisco, 11 people were struck and killed trying to cross the street. this is a crisis that the city needs to take responsibility for. so we know how to solve these problems. we know that the city can prevent these traffic collisions from happening. so rather than i think figuring out who's to blame, we're trying to take a step back and look at how we can prevent them from happening. >> the reality is that we are going to have more people in cities. that is what -- where we're headed towards. and i think it's a great thing to have more people in cities. it makes our cities moreb vibrant, there are great neighborhoods where it's great to see people around. and it's much more fun. and i think that that's what we have to work with. and this is our new reality. and we need to work towards a good solution that is economically sustainable and viable for all users of the roadway. >> so there have been a number of things that have been done. for example, some cities have widened their sidewalks. in san francisco if you drive on market you can see the bike lanes are painted bright green so that it's easier to see. what else do cities need to do? >> in san francisco, we partnered with a group of community coalitions, including the bike coalition, to work with the city to adopt what's called vision zero. that's zero traffic fatalities in ten years. and we're doing that through enforcement, engineering safer streets, and educating the public and drivers especially, engaging our community, community activists, community residents, around these issues. then evaluating our progress. we call it the five es. in terms of engineering we think that's the biggest piece. slow down traffic. we know that when traffic is at 40 miles per hour, pedestrians that are hit by cars have a 5% chance of living. at 20 miles per hour, if you're hit by a car as a pedestrian, you have an 85% chance of living. >> so a huge difference there. >> it's a huge difference. just by slowing down traffic, we can save lives. >> and there are plenty of neighborhood planning groups out there. and every capital improvement project that goes through the city of oakland has to go through some traffic analysis. so one of the first things we're asking the city to do is update traffic analysis techniques and to really implement what they have recently adopted as the complete streets policy. and that is designing streets and roadways so that it's safe and comfortable for all users of the roadway. this is something that we've learned nationally as best practice. it's a framework that california actually adopted in 2008. and i think that we're catching on. and it requires advocacy groups like walk oakland, bike oakland to chase down the planners and traffic engineers to follow through. >> so far we've been talking about deaths. and talking -- we've been talking pedestrian deaths. but bicyclists die as a result of these collisions as well. even though the number of deaths are in the dozens, when we talk about injuries, it significantly increases to hundreds of people. what is it like in san francisco in terms of the number of pedestrians and bicyclists injured? >> yeah, in san francisco we know that three pedestrians are hit by cars a day. >> a day? >> a day. if you look at san francisco general hospital's trauma center, 1 in 4 of the victims -- 1 in 4 patients are victims of traffic crimes. so they're pedestrians who have been hit by cars. 1 in 4. >> that's an astounding statistic. the center for investigative reporting did a big report this. one of the things that san francisco d.a. george gascon said in their report, reckless driving injures hundreds and hundreds of people a year. if we had this many people being shot every year, people would be jumping up and down. in his mind, reckless driving is just as bad as people using a firearm recklessly. so why is it do you think that the pedestrian deaths and roadway safety often isn't that the top of people's lists of concerns, when we're talking about other things like the economy, perhaps, or the drought? >> i think, at least in san francisco, it's a culture that we've got around driving. where we assume that it's an accident when somebody gets hit by a car. when a driver hits somebody, it's just an accident. they didn't mean to do it. but really, if we take a step back and look at were they speeding? were they distracted? what's the situation in the roadway? was the intersection lit? is the roadway too wide? how is the street designed? so we're actually starting to shift that culture through vision zero. and the police department actually took "accident" out of their vocabulary, they're using the word "collision." we know in every situation, somebody is at fault. and this is coming back to the point that these missions a s collisions are preventible, they're not accidents. >> even with the change in collision language, are the penalties for these accidents heavy enough? because back in 1945, the laws changed. it used to be manslaughter statute. but then california lawmakers put into place something called vehicular manslaughter. the range of sentences for that was reduced. you could also have the option of making it a misdemeanor and not a felony. are the penalties severe enough? >> you know, i -- i don't know. i don't think that -- i think that if you hit someone from behind the wheel of a car, just because you're behind the wheel of a car doesn't mean that you didn't kill somebody. you know, we're working with the police department to arrest people who hit and kill other people, or hit and injure other people. actually, until last month, the police department didn't even cite people who hit and injured people. as drivers. so -- in one instance, a woman was walk across the street. another driver ran a red light, hit her. she was in the icu for a month. severe disability as a result. and the driver walked away scot free. no penalties at all. the story was shared with the police department at a hearing last month and the police department actually changed their practice. so now they're actually citing people. but is that enough? i don't think so. >> so does it seem like there's enough progress in terms of city lawmakers coming around? >> i think there is definitely movement. there's desire to change the way we think about planning our cities. i think what we also miss by focusing a lot about -- on collision data is what's not being recorded. and it's that even in roadways where there aren't collisions recorded, people still do not feel safe walking. i think that's a problem. >> okay. definitely a serious problem as you both have made very clear. nicole schneider and chris hwang, thank you both for being here. on this valentine's day, a landmark anniversary celebrated at san francisco city hall. >> 4,036 couples came together to do something no more extraordinary than this, just say "i do." it was a celebration of the most powerful and important thing in life, and that's love. >> it was ten years ago when then-mayor of san francisco gavin newsom began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples at city hall, triggering years of wrangling in the courts and at the ballot box. last year the u.s. supreme court had the final say invalidating prop 8 and restoring gay marriage in california. it also struck down part of the defense of marriage act. the legal landscape and public opinion have been rapidly changing. now 17 states allow gay marriage. just yesterday, virginia became the latest state to have its ban on same-sex marriage struck down by a federal judge. kate kendall with the national center for lesbian rights has been involved in marriage equality litigation for years. she spoke with scott shafer earlier today. >> kate kendall, welcome and happy valentine's day. >> to you as well, thank you. >> think back a decade, 2004 this week, february. pandemonium, euphoria, at city hall. but also concern about where it was leading. did you ever think we'd be where we are today, ten years later, with 17 states allowing same-sex marriage and all the rest? >> never. never. i knew that we were starting something big. and that it was going to cascade in some way. what i couldn't have imagined was the accelerant that it would be to people coming to an understanding about the reality of the lives of same-sex couples and lgbt people. it really was, with the benefit of hindsight now, ten years, a groundbreaking moment. >> what was it about that time that really triggered everything that followed? >> well, you know, i think of that time in 2004. there was still a huge division. if you were republican and conservative, you were opposed to the idea of same-sex couples getting married or gay rights generally. if you were liberal or progressive and a democrat, you were in favor. and what's happened in the ten years since is that that dividing line has totally melted away. now, of course, you still have some factions. but many republicans support marriage equality. many conservatives, self-described conservatives, support gay rights. it truly provided a lens, i think, through which people could examine their own stereotypes or their prejudices that i think maybe nothing else would have. >> there were many ups and downs. those initial marriages were invalidated by the state supreme court. was there a moment that was the low point. >> the passage of prop 8. when i stood on the supreme court steps when we won the decision and we had marriage in california and the right of same-sex couples to marry had been affirmed, that was probably the zenith of my career. certainly the nadir of my career was when prop 8 passed. that was the lowest moment i can imagine in my professional life. >> there were a lot of lgbt legal groups that opposed challenging prop 8 in the federal courts and gay rights advocates had avoided the federal courts. >> right. >> so that was a roll of the dice, wasn't it? >> you know, at the time -- we felt like the idea of ted olson and david boies -- >> the two attorneys who -- >> who challenged prop 8 federally, their involvement felt to us like a real game changer. but everyone knew that when you take a case to the u.s. supreme court -- >> you don't know. >> you're talking big stakes. and we weren't sure how things were going to play out. but i think ted olson and david boies being involved helped ignite and dissolve some of that dividing line between who was in favor, who was against. >> president obama has evolved famously on this issue, now taking a very aggressive role. what difference do you think it's made to have the first african-american president coming out so strongly not just with gay rights but linking it to the civil rights struggle? >> i think it's been a huge momentum changer. i think it had a lot to do with why in november 2012 we won four states when marriage was on the ballot. we've never won a popular election before. i think what obama coming out in favor of marriage for same-sex couples did, as long as people see the government discriminating they don't have to examine their own private prejudices. all they have to say is, look, the government doesn't think they should marry, that's good enough for me. obama coming out and making his statement so publicly made people think, hm. well, now, how do i really feel about this issue? and examining that any prejudice helps to ameliorate it y. >> you were on the losing side of the struggle, now it's going the other way. do you feel sorry or empathy for people supporting the bans that are falling one by one across the country? >> i don't feel any empathy for the anti-gay establishment. for individuals who make their living by vilifying and demonizing the lgbt community. but because i grew up mormon in utah, i do feel empathy for individuals who feel like, something that they don't understand and that they're afraid of is happening and they're feeling threatened by it. those are the folks we need to be always willing to have a conversation with. >> last question on this valentine's day. do you think the struggle for full equality has in any way affected the commitment that gay and lesbian couples feel for each other? >> gosh, that is such a great question. i have to think that the intense focus on why we want to marry, why anyone wants to marry, that you want to marry because of love, because of commitment, does have many same-sex couples thinking more seriously about who they mean to each other, who we are to each other. and makes us feel part of a larger culture where we actually want to embrace the values of commitment and love and be a part of a bigger human family, when before we just stiff-armed the human family because the human family was stiff-arming us. >> extraordinary change. >> and one to celebrate every day. >> kate kendall, thanks so much for coming in. >> my pleasure, scott, thank you. and that does it for tonight. for all of kqed's news coverage, go to kqednews.org. i'm thuy vu. thanks so much for watching. have a good night. ♪ on this edition for sunday, february 16th, secretary of state john kerry says climate change may be the world's most fearsome weapon of mass destruction. in our signature segment, how mexico is battling obesity by raising taxes on foods load ed with saturated fats and on sugary drinks. >> education problems to change the habits of people but we are also using incentives and taxes can be powerful incentives. >> and what's behind growing drug shortages in america next on pbs news hour weekend, made possible by