Water - The drought.

[Stormfeather]

I honestly cant wait til the water table dries up in California, return that place back to the desert it once was. Maybe then people will see how futile the whole drought thing is to fight against.

[Ripon83]

You have to go back several hundred years to see a 20-25 year drought turning the valley into a desert. Fact is rain numbers were fairly normal this year / snow pack is dismal. There is enough money in water for politicos, wacko enviro nutjobs and even greedy Union thugs....projects to collect more water will get done.

[laurelpark]

I've always wondered why we don't have a national water grid just like we do an electrical grid. It is certainly expensive to build, but it would likely be worth it in the future.

As far as building pipelines, I wonder how many people here remember the drought of the early 70's in the Bay Area. People were flushing their toilets with shower water, putting bricks in their toilets to make them low-flow, and letting their landscapes die. In the middle of that, a big pipeline was built to deliver water.

Ironically, once the pipeline got finished, we had an El Nino year and everything flooded. We all of a sudden had too much water to deal with, and the panic refocused to flood control. That nice pipeline got dismantled and who knows what ever happened to it...

Next year is strongly predicted to be an El Nino year. If we can get through the summer, there's a very good chance that next time this year we'll be licking our wounds from all the mudslides and flood damage.

What I'm seeing this year is that places relying on snowpack are screwed, and places relying on local springs are doing fine. This winter was horrible for the Sierras - just too warm to accumulate snow. But, we did get a decent amount of rain in a lot of hilly areas toward the coast, and those areas are doing just fine right now.

[Ripon83]

Laurel it's not like there aren't 50-60 million people sitting around on entitlement that couldn't help. Sadly though such a project today one must pay off lawyers for enviros, union bosses and of course feinsteins hubby.....

[rm1911]

There is no drought. We're a desert. Always been one. Compare us to the atacama desert. What we have is a water shortage. This is due to price controls on water.

If, if, we paid market price for water then there'd be no drought. If, if, we paid market price for water then the slippery stuff would come in from other states.

Droughts do not exist. Shortages do.

[uglyduckling]

Originally Posted by Ripon83

It should be known the 85% for water usage by farmers is not correct; in fact its not even close. Its half that or about 42% with another 46% being used for environmental causes. The mismanagement of state water resources likes very much to lump those two - together.



Whereas agriculture used to consume 80 percent of the state’s water supply, today 46 percent of captured and stored water goes to environmental purposes, such as rebuilding wetlands. Meanwhile 43 percent goes to farming and 11 percent to municipal uses.
— The Economist, October 2009

Yep, this is true!

[Steve_In_29]

Originally Posted by laurelpark

I've always wondered why we don't have a national water grid just like we do an electrical grid. It is certainly expensive to build, but it would likely be worth it in the future.

As far as building pipelines, I wonder how many people here remember the drought of the early 70's in the Bay Area. People were flushing their toilets with shower water, putting bricks in their toilets to make them low-flow, and letting their landscapes die. In the middle of that, a big pipeline was built to deliver water.

Ironically, once the pipeline got finished, we had an El Nino year and everything flooded. We all of a sudden had too much water to deal with, and the panic refocused to flood control. That nice pipeline got dismantled and who knows what ever happened to it...

Next year is strongly predicted to be an El Nino year. If we can get through the summer, there's a very good chance that next time this year we'll be licking our wounds from all the mudslides and flood damage.

What I'm seeing this year is that places relying on snowpack are screwed, and places relying on local springs are doing fine. This winter was horrible for the Sierras - just too warm to accumulate snow. But, we did get a decent amount of rain in a lot of hilly areas toward the coast, and those areas are doing just fine right now.

Can you site a source on this? I'm not finding anything.

[laurelpark]

Here's one article, and you can find a ton by searching on "California drought of 1977" and then "California flooding of 1982".

http://www.weatherwest.com/archives/1038

And, here's a very recent article that I just found:

http://www.marinij.com/general-news/...n-water-supply

[Steve_In_29]

Originally Posted by laurelpark

Here's one article, and you can find a ton by searching on "California drought of 1977" and then "California flooding of 1982".

http://www.weatherwest.com/archives/1038

And, here's a very recent article that I just found:

http://www.marinij.com/general-news/...n-water-supply

Thanks and to be clear I wasn't disputing the drought/flood cycle itself. Just the suggestion of nefarious plans in regards the pipeline.

So from what I got from reading those links is that a TEMPORARY emergency pipeline was installed. Which apparently took up a traffic lane of the bridge roadway. Also being of a temporary nature and built quickly under exigent circumstances it most likely wouldn't have held up to long term use and quickly turned into a maintenance nightmare. So it's not surprising that it was removed once the emergency" was over.

In this case I don't see government incompetence in the removal of what was most likely always seen as a stop gap solution to a specific situation. Now the lack of government planning/action to aleviate future shortages is a total failure.

[chris]

Originally Posted by Steve_In_29

In this case I don't see government incompetence in the removal of what was most likely always seen as a stop gap solution to a specific situation. Now the lack of government planning/action to aleviate future shortages is a total failure.

this is true to California politics and their never ending quest to have one crisis after another.

we really have the government we deserve. we have morons who cant see past their huge egos and quests for legacies that will not help the state.

Brown is doing just that with that useless high speed rail. too bad those idiots couldn't see that droughts come and go with different degrees of severity. if this morons had micrometer of foresight they would have told the NIMBYS, envromentalnuts to piss off and create ways to stop water from rushing out to sea, fix the horrific water system in LA that main lines just explode and that is the only way they find them thanks Mulholand, build desal plants that would help and create jobs (oh wait this state doesn't want to do that), build more dams or resiviours heck I cant spell that dam word.

there are so many solutions to help make future drought less severe instead we have high speed rail.

this state is truly ran by idiots and the voters who are dumb enough to send back year after year.

[elk hunter]

Just a sample of the loony toons coming out of Suxremento.

http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-...le2608207.html

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...x-for-water-g/

It's only going to get worse. Tax ya by the gallon, every gallon that gets used. Think it wont happen, all this stuff is for is to let the camels nose under the tent. Once he's in it's full speed ahead.

Time to move the sprinkler
elk hunter

[KevinB]

California goberment has destroyed its manufacturing base, Ag is next.

They are going to have to rewrite the states constitution to make any changes in water rights.

Browns latest water decree is going to be ignored by tier 1 water right holders.

[keep_ur_powder_dry]

Drip, Drip, Drip....we are drowning in over regulation....here come even more regulations regarding the creeks, ponds and puddles!

Thank our corrupt pols, environmental nuts, center for biodiversity, corporate agri/bus and the lawyers.

"Free our run-off" containment is evil.

It's enough to make you thirsty...Fail to plan, Plan to fail.

gb

[JDay]

Originally Posted by Ripon83

My home is in a region which averages 4.25 inches a year. It's desert. We use pond liners and collect and store that rain water. 11 years at that site neither my or my brothers storage has gone dry. Last year June 1 we were 81 % this year 80. We don't expect rain till October / November.

I hope you're collecting that from your roof.

http://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsr...rainwater.aspx

[Falstaff]

Meanwhile in SOCAL:

Wake me when all yer publically subsidized courses turn brown down there, that's when we'll know there's a problem..

[Ripon83]

Its in Nevada, but yes we collect off the roof and two set up rain collection ponds. Its actually overkill and we often over fill our collection capacity but its enough to live on and even manage the garden with easily. I'm just saying when you live or want to (I'm not there nearly enough) in a desert you learn to make do with what you got, and CA isn't making do with what it has; much of it is sadly wasted.

Originally Posted by JDay

I hope you're collecting that from your roof.

http://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsr...rainwater.aspx

[KevinB]

Okay, things are starting to get stupid. Local water rant.

I have a small lake on my vineyard land. It is on a seasonal creek. I have deeded water rights on the seasonal creek going back to 1889. The lake is pretty much full. There is no water running into the lake and none running out.

2 of my neighbors that live over a mile down stream want me to put water in the creek and are threatening to take me to court to do so.

Water never runs in that creek past mid June even during a wet year. They have even had F & G up at my place trying to get them to make me release water. There are several pools that have water in them pretty much year around during normal wet years. There haven't been any in the last 3 years. They could fill those pools of water on the creek with their wells but want me to fill them.

One of them is in hot water with the law right now for drilling their well too close to the creek bed. Stream bed modification is a big no-no up here without a bunch of permits.

I politely gave them the number for my attorney. Such are water rights.

[laurelpark]

That is really stupid. By the time any water gets a few hundred yards from your place, it's going to go underground - so they won't benefit except for their illegal well that's too close to the creek... So, they're asking you to enrich their illegal well. Sounds totally irresponsible and unreasonable to me.

Remind them of those endangered red belly newts that live in your lake. Just a slight change of water level could kill some of them. Maybe they'd offer to pay for a full three-year environmental assessment of the damages that will be caused by an unnatural release of water from your lake

[Falstaff]

Originally Posted by KevinB

Okay, things are starting to get stupid. Local water rant.

I have a small lake on my vineyard land. It is on a seasonal creek. I have deeded water rights on the seasonal creek going back to 1889. The lake is pretty much full. There is no water running into the lake and none running out.

2 of my neighbors that live over a mile down stream want me to put water in the creek and are threatening to take me to court to do so.

Water never runs in that creek past mid June even during a wet year. They have even had F & G up at my place trying to get them to make me release water. There are several pools that have water in them pretty much year around during normal wet years. There haven't been any in the last 3 years. They could fill those pools of water on the creek with their wells but want me to fill them.

One of them is in hot water with the law right now for drilling their well too close to the creek bed. Stream bed modification is a big no-no up here without a bunch of permits.

I politely gave them the number for my attorney. Such are water rights.

this (the drought not just your situation)is gonna get ugly...

[elk hunter]

Originally Posted by Falstaff

this (the drought not just your situation)is gonna get ugly...

Hell, it ain't even getting started yet. You want to see the worst in people just put some pressure on them, your going to find out real dam fast just how fugley they can get and over the littlest thing.

[chris]

Originally Posted by elk hunter

Hell, it ain't even getting started yet. You want to see the worst in people just put some pressure on them, your going to find out real dam fast just how fugley they can get and over the littlest thing.

I agree it's going to get bad. neighbors narcking on neighbors for using too much water. going to get like Nazi Germany here.

[Ripon83]

Kevin make sure your attorney goes after any complainants for your time and not just his.

[gorn5150]

Originally Posted by Californio

I would guess the last one was built around 1974.

Los Vaqeros in Contra Costa was built in the 1990's.

[KevinB]

Originally Posted by Ripon83

Kevin make sure your attorney goes after any complainants for your time and not just his.

There has been no legal action as of yet, but trust me when I say we will ask for treble and punitive damages if they bring legal action and lose. My water rights have been challenged before and they were not successful and my counter suit was. In fact they haven't even had contact with my attorney.

[elk hunter]

Originally Posted by KevinB

There has been no legal action as of yet, but trust me when I say we will ask for treble and punitive damages if they bring legal action and lose. My water rights have been challenged before and they were not successful and my counter suit was. In fact they haven't even had contact with my attorney.

If the state and the feds get involved your water rights will be taken from you like a snow cone from a 5 year old. FEMA or the EPA could work against you to, never and I mean never get cocky and under estimate what could happen. Someone in the right place could decide to condemn your property and take it for little or no recompense, don't think it can happen? it has in other places and dam well could happen time and again. You think they have morals or a conscious, you better re think that real fast. All it takes is a accusation even if its trumped up and false to destroy you, who do you think has the deep enough pockets to drive you into financial ruin.............that's right Uncle Sugar. Who's Uncle Sugar working for, it ain't you or me it's who they decide.

[olhunter]

Originally Posted by chris

don't bother arguing to them SoCal steals "their" water. no mater what you tell them and what facts are presented it's "their" water.

Hetch Hetchy.

You're stealing water!

No different than the US 'stealing' Alaska.

A deal's a deal.

[elk hunter]

A deal is a deal huh, only if they want it to happen. Your deal can go away in a instant if the nitwits in the political arena decide........no such deal exists, end of story. Don't believe me, they shoved Obama care right up your @ss and the Courts let it happen and in fact helped it, a deal is a deal......BS. Quit trusting what they tell you it's probably the same BS that they told us about the NSA and what they are doing.

[Huntsprig]

Originally Posted by olhunter

Hetch Hetchy.

You're stealing water!

No different than the US 'stealing' Alaska.

A deal's a deal.

Originally Posted by chris

don't bother arguing to them SoCal steals "their" water. no mater what you tell them and what facts are presented it's "their" water.

Yes it is our (Northern California's) water.
And yes, a deal is a deal, and the deal is that the south only get Norcal's excess water.
Here are the real facts.

What the people of Northern California (North of the delta) want is for the south state to live up to their word and follow the laws of the state.

Unfortunately time has shown that when it comes to water, the south can be trusted to live up to their agreements about as much as Poland could trust Hitler to live up to his word.

The bottom line is the south is only supposed to get water that is leftover after all the north uses all it needs.

Northern California learned a lesson from LA's rape of the Owens Valley and had laws written when the State Water Project was proposed to insure that we would always have the first rights to our water.
Of course, as was predicted in 1933, they are using the courts and multi-billion dollar schemes (the tunnels) to keep the water flowing, not caring at all about the damage is that done to the north's environment and economy. Slowly but surely they are doing the same to the North as they did to the Owens Valley.
The only water that is to be sent south is water that is leftover after all of the north's needs have been met.


California Water Code Section 11460

In the construction and operation by the department of any
project under the provisions of this part a watershed or area wherein
water originates, or an area immediately adjacent thereto which can
conveniently be supplied with water therefrom, shall not be deprived
by the department directly or indirectly of the prior right to all of
the water reasonably required to adequately supply the beneficial
needs of the watershed, area, or any of the inhabitants or property
owners therein.


California Water Code Section 10505

10505. No priority under this part shall be released nor assignment
made of any application that will, in the judgment of the board,
deprive the county in which the water covered by the application
originates of any such water necessary for the development of the
county.


California Water Code Section 386


386. The board may approve any change associated with a transfer
pursuant to this chapter only if it finds that the change may be made
without injuring any legal user of the water and without
unreasonably affecting fish, wildlife, or other instream beneficial
uses and does not unreasonably affect the overall economy of the area
from which the water is being transferred.
A petitioner requesting a change which is subject to this section
shall pay to the board a fee which shall be in an amount determined
by the board to cover the reasonable costs of the board in evaluating
and processing the petition.


Even the father of the State Water Project, Gov. Pat Brown when he was Attorney General agrees:

Opinion of the Attorney General, Edmund G. Brown State Of California. 1955.
In the circumstances specified in the in the statute, Water Code Sections 10505 and 11460 would require that water which had been put to use in the operation of the Central Valley Project in areas outside the county of origin, or the watershed of origin and immediately adjacent thereto, be withdrawn from such outside areas and made available for use in the specified areas of origin.

These folks in 1933 must have had a crystal ball, because they nailed it!

Text from the Referendum Measure 12/19/1933 (prop. 1- which authorized the Central Valley Project)

Argument Against Water And Power Referendum Measure:
"Nor is it certain that the Sacramento Valley will always have water to spare. True, there is a recapture clause; but once communities in the San Joaquin become dependent on the water from the Sacramento, they will find a way to keep it. Thus the development of the Sacramento Valley will be limited."

That is where we are at now.

The people from LA and the San Joaquin Valley are like a heroin addict who steals from other people to support there habit, they don't care what happens to Northern California as long they keep getting what they want.

As they said in 1933, the communities in the San Joaquin Valley and LA have become dependent on the water from the Sacramento, and they are doing everything they can to find a way to keep it.


The north state needs to keep our water, we no longer have any more to spare.
You have had over a half century to find other sources or water, you have not.
Don't blame us up here, you have no one to blame but yourself.


Maybe it is time for south state to quit acting like a weasel and do the honorable thing and live up to the deal they made.

And by the way, to the person who said that no water is being sent south from the delta this year, that is 100% wrong.

[chris]

Originally Posted by Huntsprig

Yes it is our (Northern California's) water.
And yes, a deal is a deal, and the deal is that the south only get Norcal's excess water.
Here are the real facts.

And by the way, to the person who said that no water is being sent south from the delta this year, that is 100% wrong.

and yet there are solutions to reduce the amount of water from the state water project and are rejected out right for idiotic reasons. and yet no one even mentions that the political elite in this state is importing millions more of the third world here for votes and power in the future.

the population is double from 1990 and yet nothing has been done to lessen the effects of drought which we know happen here. Jerry Brown did nothing for the future when he was governor in 77 and he's from Oakland. another bay area snob politician.

again we should not be one bit surprised that no one is following the law in regards to what you posted. and again there are solutions that no one wants to do either. they have been listed here again and again and people laugh at it. how stupid is that? makes about as much sense as those who wanted to help the oil spill the Gulf of Mexico with possible solutions to help clean up only to be laughed at by the government.

I would love nothing more than to reduce the amount of water from the north so you would stop crying about it. with population growth here out of control it will never happen and the politicians we have it will never stop period. once again there are solutions to help make droughts less severe and they are ignored.

1) desal at least San Diego has done something right. Santa Barbara has one and they wont spend the money to upgrade it. IIRC its about 22 million to do so. I see that as an investment to do it. it will create jobs in the upgrade and the maintenance as well.
2) toilet to tap. happening where I live and it's not LA. I don't live in LA or LA county screw them.
3) reduce the amount of water that rushes out to sea after it rains. the dumbest idea to not capture most of that water. literally billions of gallons of water is rushed out to sea instead of captured and allowed to soak into the local water table. it is done here in OC but on a limited basis in the Santa Ana river bed.



these are a few and of course nothing is being discussed on the legislative end other than to tax people for using too much water. we know wet years will come again and in the mean time use that to build more ways capture more water and store in for the future.


but hey guess what we have high speed rail

[JDay]

http://ww2.kqed.org/science/2015/06/...-water-rights/

[KevinB]

This has all happened before, it will happen again. Every single time the courts have sided with the senior water rights holders. It will take a change in the state constitution to nullify deeded water rights and the state will not be able to afford to buy them.

Turlock Irrigation District produces over 5 billion dollars in Ag income every year.

Try taking Hetch Hetchy water rights and see what happens.

Like I said, this has been tried before. 1992-1993, 1977-1978, 1966, 1967, and 1954-1955 and every time the state failed in court.

A big water rights case that set precedent was Merced Irrigation vs The State of California. They lost all the way to the Supreme court.

[new1911]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...-out-of-water/

Twenty-one of the world’s 37 largest aquifers — in locations from India and China to the United States and France — have passed their sustainability tipping points, meaning more water was removed than replaced during the decade-long study period, researchers announced Tuesday. Thirteen aquifers declined at rates that put them into the most troubled category. The researchers said this indicated a long-term problem that’s likely to worsen as reliance on aquifers grows.

[Gem1950]

I'm worried about the Job Creators. No rationing for them - please!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/nation...y.html?hpid=z5

[John J]

Just returned home from the Coachella Valley. All Golf courses were green, the fairway I stayed next to was watered each night by 5 huge broadcast sprinklers for 45 minutes each evening. (x's 18 holes) There was water gushing down every gutter on the clubs property. I attempted to engage people regarding the drought and was met with huffy denials.

[Dutch3]

Originally Posted by KevinB

This has all happened before, it will happen again. Every single time the courts have sided with the senior water rights holders. It will take a change in the state constitution to nullify deeded water rights and the state will not be able to afford to buy them.

Turlock Irrigation District produces over 5 billion dollars in Ag income every year.

Try taking Hetch Hetchy water rights and see what happens.

Like I said, this has been tried before. 1992-1993, 1977-1978, 1966, 1967, and 1954-1955 and every time the state failed in court.

A big water rights case that set precedent was Merced Irrigation vs The State of California. They lost all the way to the Supreme court.

Lots of debate over senior water rights in this area as well. Some of the senior holders are electing to sell their deeded water down south rather than flooding their rice this year. Apparently, it is more profitable.

Others are pumping like mad to irrigate their orchards. I'm just a homeowner living among rice fields and orchards who doesn't have a 500 foot well with a 25HP pump. I have serious concerns about my well running dry, but I guess I am just out of luck.

The nearest city water is 15 miles away and I can't afford to move, so I will be installing some storage tanks and a pressure pump in case I need to have water trucked in for toilets and showers. I am hoping I will be able to afford the cost of delivered water if things go from bad to worse.

This could turn into a major game of 'screw your neighbor'.

[Californio]

Santa Barbara Desal Plant will cost $53 million, bend over.

Pulling the $53 Million Desal Trigger
‘We Have Exhausted All Other Options,’ Says Water Czar

http://www.independent.com/news/2015...desal-trigger/

[greensoup]

Originally Posted by Californio

Santa Barbara Desal Plant will cost $53 million, bend over.

Pulling the $53 Million Desal Trigger
‘We Have Exhausted All Other Options,’ Says Water Czar

http://www.independent.com/news/2015...desal-trigger/

$125 a person spread across years. Whooo. Damn better sell the mansion.

[anothergunnut]

Originally Posted by greensoup

$125 a person spread across years. Whooo. Damn better sell the mansion.

Wrong. The cost isn't in the building of the desal plant, it is the operating cost. Desalinating water costs about $2,000 an acre foot according to this article: http://www.mercurynews.com/science/c...t-goes-up-near . A water utility could supplement their existing water supply with a tiny portion at $2K per acre foot but anything more than that would be cost prohibitive.

[bkz81]

A little more security...

http://beprepared.com/320-gallon-ult...rve-combo.html

[bajarage]

Originally Posted by anothergunnut

Wrong. The cost isn't in the building of the desal plant, it is the operating cost. Desalinating water costs about $2,000 an acre foot according to this article: http://www.mercurynews.com/science/c...t-goes-up-near . A water utility could supplement their existing water supply with a tiny portion at $2K per acre foot but anything more than that would be cost prohibitive.

$2000 per acre-foot comes out to a little over $.006 per gallon, where I am located water is sold in units of 748 gallons, one unit is ~2.50.

At $2000 per acre-foot per unit, of 748 gallons, would cost $4.591.

Roughly a 200% increase but not that expensive, at least for my neck of the woods