California: Less water, more saving - With the water surplus gone, the state will have to conserve

The Orange County Register ^ | Wednesday, January 1, 2003 | PAT BRENNAN

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

With the water surplus gone, the state will have to conserve

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

calgov2002:

calgov2002: for old calgov2002 articles. 

calgov2002: for new calgov2002 articles. 

Other Bump Lists at: Free Republic Bump List Register

[Mark]

Pi*s on them! Oh, wait, I may be onto something.....

[Dutch Boy]

Why doesn't CA build several giant water treatment plants and convert ocean water to drinking water? I'm sure there are small plants that are used for that but obvioulsy not enough or "Aqua Duck" would be out of a job. That seems to be a task CA should invest in rather than new ways to conserve. Without water the rest won't matter much.

[hoot2]

c'mon, you farmers n water drinkers....the government knows whats best for you.
just don't worry about it...they'll take care of it for you.

[dalereed]

Dry up the Salton Sea!

It was caused by the Colorado River flood and isn't a natural body of water.

The fish were planted in it and are ocean fish anyway.

The birds migrated for thousands of years before it was there and can do it again.

[Hebrews 11:6]

California does not have a water shortage--it has the largest water supply in the world, the Pacific Ocean. What California actually has is a salt surplus.

They are starting to move ahead with desalination plants now.

[okie01]

"That seems to be a task CA should invest in rather than new ways to conserve."

Faced with the same problem, Texas would be aggressively pursuing desalinization -- probably nuclear desalinization plants -- in order to maintain growth and keep improving the standard of living.

But we're talking about California here. They just don't think that way...

[BooBoo1000]

California has plenty of water in the Northern part of the state that could be diverted to the Southern part, look at the Russian River, Feather River, all pouring out into the ocean. Only reason it is not being used now is the Greenies.

[SierraWasp]

Yup! There's enough water in Lake Tahoe to cover the Big Valley from Redding to Bakersfield with over a foot of water!

Oh, and Lake Tahoe is not a natural lake, but rather a reservoir with a dam operated by the Federal Bureau of Reclaimation!!!

Oh, and there are excellent sites for new reservoirs in the "Desolation Wilderness" just over the ridge of the Sierra on Tahoe's west side. Water stored that high could be wheeled with tunnels and generators to supply both CA & NV with inexpensive water for generations to come!!!

See... all the Sierra Flub does is make everything cost more due to artificial scarcity. We have no scarcity of resources but the dang fools want humankind to die!!! (except their kind)

[okie01]

"Only reason it is not being used now is the Greenies."

It wouldn't be California without the Wienies...

[kellynla]

Happy New Year, Ernest! Water shortage? We don't have no water shortage! We don't need no stinking water conservation! LOL Hey with all the rain and snow last week I think this story is old news...

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

LOL!

Happy New year!

Keep us posted regarding your new digs!

[yankeedame]

... Calls to consumers to conserve more water also will increase. Local and regional water districts will ask residents to avoid over-watering lawns by setting timers carefully on outdoor sprinklers....

Sounds crazy I know, but why not just let the free market handle this? Let the price of water rise (or "float", as may be the case) to its true market level. As the price of water rises people will begin using less of it, e.g. not wash the car or watering the lawn quite so often, things like that.

=======================================

Water rates also could rise for residents by as much as $10 over the next decade, an accelerated increase compared to how fast they might have risen otherwise.

Ten dollars a what? A month? A year? A day? And a $10 raise over 10 years? What the heck is that-- a buck a year? Eight or so cents a month?? Whoa, hardship city here we come!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

but why not just let the free market handle this?

Well, very little of the water is managed outside of public institutions! Which means the politicians are always lurking around looking for a way to take advantage of issues to promote themselves!

[hedgetrimmer]

Proliferating water articles about California. This ones going out to a bunch of folks. Thanks for posting.

[hedgetrimmer]

Water is a public good. Reservoirs, lakes and streams are good for the public. Constitutionally citizens can use lakes, reservoirs and streams for their own water needs, recreation and fishing. Corporate control of systems and delivery is bad. They do not allow historical public use of water. They can price water out of the reach of many consumers. They can control who gets it.

[I_Love_My_Husband]

You've got that right.

[marsh2]

Under California and Western water law, appropriation of water for beneficial use ripened into private property. (In California, use only to water SURPLUS to that not already privately appropriated before 1914 or not part of a private riparian right became "public.")

Once property has "vested" as private, it is not supposed to be vulnerable to public encroachment without legitimate public need and payment of just compensation.