Politics Huge California Water Supplier Slashes Summer Deliveries

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Denny Crane

It's not even loaded!
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
73,124
Likes
10,973
Points
113
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/...r-supplier-eyes-summer-delivery-cuts-30299447

Cities and water districts serving 19 million people in Southern Californiaface smaller water deliveries this summer under a plan approved by the region's water wholesaler in response to ongoing dry conditions.

The Metropolitan Water District, which sells imported water to more than two dozen local agencies, voted Tuesday to slash regional deliveries by 15 percent as California grapples with a fourth year of drought.

The cutbacks, which take effect in July, were expected to spur communities to step up their conservation efforts to avoid paying for high-priced water beyond the allotted amount.

The effect of the cuts would vary between local water districts depending on their supplies and how much water they have saved so far.

Metropolitan officials have said limiting water deliveries was necessary to stretch dwindling storage supplies as summer approaches and could help cities meet Gov. Jerry Brown's order to reduce urban water use by 25 percent compared with 2013 levels — a first in state history.

California is in the grips of a multiyear drought that has dried up wells and forced farmers to leave land idle. Earlier this month, state surveyors found the lowest snow level in the Sierra Nevadasnowpack in more than a half century of record keeping.

Several board members unsuccessfully tried to push for a deeper reduction in regional deliveries — 20 percent — to help preserve stored water.

"I'm still not convinced" the smaller cut is enough, said Judy Abdo, who represents Santa Monica.

The board agreed to revisit the issue in December and take further action if necessary.

It marked the fourth time wholesale water deliveries to Southern California have been curtailed. Cities that want to purchase more water would have to pay stiff penalties — up to four times the normal price — for extra deliveries.

Funds collected from the penalties would go toward Metropolitan's turf removal program or other conservation or demand-reducing programs.

During the last drought of 2009 and 2010, water districts avoided paying for expensive water.
 
I've lived in California for decades. We had droughts in the 1980s and 1990s, too. They didn't last the whole decade, maybe 2 or 3 years each decade.

During one of the droughts when I lived in Northern California, I let my lawn go brown, as did my neighbors. If you used too much water, you'd have to pay a fine of a couple hundred dollars.

I had a business trip in LA and was shocked to see they were watering the medians on the streets near industrial parks in the day time. The thing is, we shipped water to SoCal so they could water their medians while we let our lawns die.

When I got back home after the trip, I noticed all the lawns in Palo Alto were green. You see, rich people pay the fines - it's not a huge cost to them. The fines only affected poor people.

Aside from hurting the middle and lower classes via the fines, the water crises are the result of government policies and not nature.

Way to go government!
 
The cause of the drought is not man made, according to USA Today (who cites NOAA).

http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2014/12/08/california-drought-cause-noaa/20095869/

Causes of Calif. drought natural, not man-made: NOAA

Natural weather patterns, not man-made global warming, are causing the historic drought parching California, says a study out Monday from federal scientists.

"It's important to note that California's drought, while extreme, is not an uncommon occurrence for the state," said Richard Seager, the report's lead author and professor with Columbia University's Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory. The report was sponsored by theNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The report did not appear in a peer-reviewed journal but was reviewed by other NOAA scientists.

"In fact, multiyear droughts appear regularly in the state's climate record, and it's a safe bet that a similar event will happen again," he said.
 
http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/penny-s...ciety-destroys-its-own-food-source-three-inch

EPA and CA Drought: ‘What Civilized Society Destroys Its Own Food Source For A Three-Inch Fish?'

The truth, Grove said, is that the Endangered Species Act and its effort to protect the tiny delta smelt has taken water away from farmers.

“All in all, California farmers fallowed about 500,000 acres of land this year,” the Wall Street Journal reported in June 2014. “But here's the thing: much of this land could have been productive had the state stored up more water from wet years and not flushed 800,000 acre-feet into the San Francisco Bay last winter and an additional 445,000 acre-feet this spring to safeguard the endangered delta smelt.”

“That's enough for roughly three million households to live on and to irrigate 600,000 acres of land,” the WSJ reported.

According to the University of California-Davis, this represents the “greatest water loss ever seen” for California agriculture and resulted in the loss of 17,000 seasonal and part-time jobs.
 
Maybe, I don't know, turn off all the fountains and sprinklers in Las Vegas for a day or two?
 
I don't think individuals conserving water is the big win. Or turning off fountains.

The vast majority of the water used is for agriculture. No biggie if the rest of the country doesn't get almonds or produce.
 
http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/penny-s...ciety-destroys-its-own-food-source-three-inch

EPA and CA Drought: ‘What Civilized Society Destroys Its Own Food Source For A Three-Inch Fish?'

The truth, Grove said, is that the Endangered Species Act and its effort to protect the tiny delta smelt has taken water away from farmers.

“All in all, California farmers fallowed about 500,000 acres of land this year,” the Wall Street Journal reported in June 2014. “But here's the thing: much of this land could have been productive had the state stored up more water from wet years and not flushed 800,000 acre-feet into the San Francisco Bay last winter and an additional 445,000 acre-feet this spring to safeguard the endangered delta smelt.”

“That's enough for roughly three million households to live on and to irrigate 600,000 acres of land,” the WSJ reported.

According to the University of California-Davis, this represents the “greatest water loss ever seen” for California agriculture and resulted in the loss of 17,000 seasonal and part-time jobs.

This is the thing that is concerning me the most. In Fresno, almost half the entire area is dirt lots because they wouldn't allow the farmers to pull from the river that flows into the ocean.
 
Apparently, over the years, the government has refused to implement water projects that would have easily averted the water crisis.
 
http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/penny-s...ciety-destroys-its-own-food-source-three-inch

EPA and CA Drought: ‘What Civilized Society Destroys Its Own Food Source For A Three-Inch Fish?'

The truth, Grove said, is that the Endangered Species Act and its effort to protect the tiny delta smelt has taken water away from farmers.

“All in all, California farmers fallowed about 500,000 acres of land this year,” the Wall Street Journal reported in June 2014. “But here's the thing: much of this land could have been productive had the state stored up more water from wet years and not flushed 800,000 acre-feet into the San Francisco Bay last winter and an additional 445,000 acre-feet this spring to safeguard the endangered delta smelt.”

“That's enough for roughly three million households to live on and to irrigate 600,000 acres of land,” the WSJ reported.

According to the University of California-Davis, this represents the “greatest water loss ever seen” for California agriculture and resulted in the loss of 17,000 seasonal and part-time jobs.

A more relevant question is what moronic society farms where there is no water while not farming where the water is plentiful?
 
A more relevant question is what moronic society farms where there is no water while not farming where the water is plentiful?

Water is plentiful. It's just being diverted to the ocean instead of aqueducts.
 
A more relevant question is what moronic society farms where there is no water while not farming where the water is plentiful?
The farms were established when the waterways had the water plentiful. The "tree huggers" protest that re-directing the water into the oceans would save a food source for ocean fish, so they recently destroyed the water collection long after the farms were already established.
 
It wasn't to save a food source for the fish.

The fish were getting crushed somewhere in the water collection and distribution system.

And Vegas is 10 miles from Lake Meade, which is fed by the Colorado River.
 
I have an extremely small carbon footprint in LA. Don't use much water as I live in an apartment building. Don't have AC either. Don't give a figgity fuck about this drought, son.
 
How many years before California has enough water or the Farmers have enough votes?

cr_71f4-5.gif


The farmers have been farming for years using about the same water for years but now can't get the water. Mean while the population has increase nearly 1.5 time in the past 50 years.

Perhaps the day of the farmer will return as the population falls.
 
In days long gone now, travelling through California was a marvel. Fresh fruit and vegetates along the way were numerous with a native Californian ready to serve the nectar.
Fresh orange juice squeezed right there, severed in a tall cool glass was a favorite of mine while travelling south. 25 cents please! Thank you sir, and one for the road.
 
Back then the population of California was about 10 million. Now the orchards of San Jose to San Diego are all but gone, replaced by about 27 million people and their lawns.
 
Denny, you shouldn't start threads pushing the liberal climate warming theory. We have plenty of water in de River of DeNile.
 
So, we can't change the climate but we can prevent droughts.
 
Denny, you shouldn't start threads pushing the liberal climate warming theory. We have plenty of water in de River of DeNile.

See post #3, the global warming theory is false.

I think it's you in denial.
 
So, we can't change the climate but we can prevent droughts.

If you dig trenches and run all the fresh water from the rivers into the ocean, sure man can make a drought.

Man can poison the atmosphere, too. We aren't poisoning the atmosphere though.
 
If you dig trenches and run all the fresh water from the rivers into the ocean, sure man can make a drought.

Man can poison the atmosphere, too. We aren't poisoning the atmosphere though.

Right. I'm sure the 2.4 million lbs per second of CO2 emissions from vehicles worldwide is having no effect on the atmosphere.
 
Denny is right, if we wouldn't divert all of the water from Mt Hood to the Columbia we wouldn't ever have a drought. Fuck dem indians for digging that river thing!
 
The water diverted was "enough for roughly three million households to live on and to irrigate 600,000 acres of land."

There's no computer model involved in guessing those figures.

A wise dog once said, "don't shit where you eat."
 
The water diverted was "enough for roughly three million households to live on and to irrigate 600,000 acres of land."

There's no computer model involved in guessing those figures.

A wise dog once said, "don't shit where you eat."

Fuck that! You should start hording water in your bathtub.
 
I'd prefer they hoard water in the reservoirs instead of diverting the water into the ocean.

I think you're on to something, you should drive all of your used water to a reservoir and dump in there.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top