Guest guest Posted July 17, 2004 Report Share Posted July 17, 2004 Having worked for the heads of governments of Oregon and Colorado, and having some involvment with the utilities sector, I believe that California gets water from those states (as well as some others) mostly via aquifers versus wells. It is indeed safer than above surface water. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2004 Report Share Posted July 18, 2004 Also from Arizona. If my information is correct I think we sell some of our water rights from the Colorado river to the Los Angeles area. Kimmie rheumatic Aquifer > Having worked for the heads of governments of Oregon and Colorado, > and having some involvment with the utilities sector, I believe that > California gets water from those states (as well as some others) > mostly via aquifers versus wells. It is indeed safer than above > surface water. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2004 Report Share Posted July 18, 2004 Not just LA, but a good chunk of SoCal, something like 25 million people and most of the ag. They've been illegally exceeding their allotment by ~20% for some time. Last year the feds threatened to cut them off, and the SoCal water folks blinked and negotiated for a longer transition back to their legal allotment levels. Now what is interesting is there is a followup deal that will pay farmers to rotate their crops so that they can cut their water usage and sell it to the municipalities (LA, SD etc.), yet still maintain the legal rights to that water. They're more than happy to do that because they will all make much much more than what they do to grow wheat, alfalfa, etc. The deal's great for the farmers ($$$), for the cities (long term stability), for the pol's (Feinstein won't shutup about her great triumph), for the environment (top soil will improve); but not for the taxpayer (including NoCalers, who are also picking up the tab). Next we will see the Governator in DC crying on GW's sleeve about how expensive water is becoming, so eventually we'll all being paying for SoCal's thirst. I love my former state, but sometimes I'm glad I only visit. Jeff ----Original Message Follows---- From: & quot;Kimmie & quot; & lt;kimmielee@... & gt; & lt;rheumatic & gt;, & quot;leatanner & quot; & lt;leatanner@... & gt; Subject: Re: rheumatic Aquifer Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2004 23:50:04 -0700 Also from Arizona. If my information is correct I think we sell some of our water rights from the Colorado river to the Los Angeles area. Kimmie rheumatic Aquifer & gt; Having worked for the heads of governments of Oregon and Colorado, & gt; and having some involvment with the utilities sector, I believe that & gt; California gets water from those states (as well as some others) & gt; mostly via aquifers versus wells. It is indeed safer than above & gt; surface water. & gt; & gt; & gt; & gt; Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2004 Report Share Posted July 18, 2004 Not just LA, but a good chunk of SoCal, something like 25 million people and most of the ag. They've been illegally exceeding their allotment by ~20% for some time. Last year the feds threatened to cut them off, and the SoCal water folks blinked and negotiated for a longer transition back to their legal allotment levels. Now what is interesting is there is a followup deal that will pay farmers to rotate their crops so that they can cut their water usage and sell it to the municipalities (LA, SD etc.), yet still maintain the legal rights to that water. They're more than happy to do that because they will all make much much more than what they do to grow wheat, alfalfa, etc. The deal's great for the farmers ($$$), for the cities (long term stability), for the pol's (Feinstein won't shutup about her great triumph), for the environment (top soil will improve); but not for the taxpayer (including NoCalers, who are also picking up the tab). Next we will see the Governator in DC crying on GW's sleeve about how expensive water is becoming, so eventually we'll all being paying for SoCal's thirst. I love my former state, but sometimes I'm glad I only visit. Jeff ----Original Message Follows---- From: & quot;Kimmie & quot; & lt;kimmielee@... & gt; & lt;rheumatic & gt;, & quot;leatanner & quot; & lt;leatanner@... & gt; Subject: Re: rheumatic Aquifer Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2004 23:50:04 -0700 Also from Arizona. If my information is correct I think we sell some of our water rights from the Colorado river to the Los Angeles area. Kimmie rheumatic Aquifer & gt; Having worked for the heads of governments of Oregon and Colorado, & gt; and having some involvment with the utilities sector, I believe that & gt; California gets water from those states (as well as some others) & gt; mostly via aquifers versus wells. It is indeed safer than above & gt; surface water. & gt; & gt; & gt; & gt; Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2004 Report Share Posted July 20, 2004 Hi Jeff! Geoff here. You wrote: > Not just LA, but a good chunk of SoCal, something like 25 million people and > most of the ag. [snip] > > Now what is interesting is there is a followup deal that will pay farmers to > rotate their crops so that they can cut their water usage and sell it to the > municipalities (LA, SD etc.) [snip] That's incredible. The farmers have been selling their water allotment off the West Side canal and the Friant-Kern for years. I don't recall exactly when it started but I think it was shortly after Gray took office. (Interesting side bar: he's from Exeter but publicly claims he's from LA. Exeter's glad to let LA have him and his $20K/yr for 3yrs running raises for the CDC to buy their votes. Anyway - enough of that.) They've been selling water for a long time. They sell some and dry farm, hold some and irrigate, whatever works out best for them. They always rotate, land here works year round, 3-4 crops a year depending on the crop, duration to harvest and soil nutrient or compaction/opening needs. They've been rotating year-round, irrigating and dry-farming for more than 40 years, well, closer to 60 I'd guess but the canals really made it happen after they dammed the snow melt off the Sierras and killed off the Tulare Lake, which happened to be the 2d largest fresh water lake in N. America (think Lake Superior.) If the politicos are going to subsidize these guys besides, they're even more stupid than I thought. Farmers in this valley KNOW how to make money, big money, money that makes Wall Street look like small potatoes. Boswell's land alone is bigger than most 2-3 states combined, and he's just one of the big guys. Ag is the #1 industry, by far, in CA, a state whose GDP is 6th in the world if it were a nation. You know, it sounds about right after all. ;-) Geoff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.