Is Leaving California More Practical Than Water Rationing? (Carlsbad: rental, eviction)

[Allanswift]

Agree..... California and NYC, both cities are overpopulated nowadays.. authorities should look into these serious real estate issues.

[Mattie Jo]

Originally Posted by JeffSanDimas

It is not my fault that we didn't build Desal plants 30 years ago like we should have because environmentalists and people worrying about the extinction of a stupid fish like the delta smelt. I am not suffering for their stupidity.

the fish is the least of California's worries. the drought there is worse than what you have been hearing. much worse. I doubt if water rationing will help much, but it has to be done, and in the mean time I would suggest rain dances.

[Mattie Jo]

Originally Posted by pch1013

... while gorging themselves on California almonds, California avocados, and California wine.

the grape vineyards in ca are using up the water meant for the homeowners, and no one is doing a thing about it except to say that many who live in the area where they grow grapes have stopped buying California wine.

where I grew up the lakes are all dry and the people who live on well water are just about dry. those who need to have their well drilled deeper are on a two year waiting list. in all my long, long life I have never seen such a thing as this in california.

this is also where the world needs to practice population control. this just doesn't hurt Californians, it hurts everyone, especially when the water wars begin as they have already started with certain states demanding water from other states. what a mess.

and has anyone thought of how much water pollution and water usage fracking causes?

[Hardpan]

Originally Posted by roadwarrior101

What are you talking about? We had a 6 year drought in California from late 1985 through 1991. What is unique about this particular drought isn't the length, but the severity, not to mention that California now has a much higher population.

Baloney!

I worked in an industry serving farmers (growers) during that time. That was not a "drought", just less rainfall in the central valleys then normal.

The snow-packs in the Sierras was plenty good enough for everything, including skiing. You want a real drought, go back to the three year long drought, back when Brown was Governor in the 1970's.

Now THAT was a real drought, much like this one only not four years long. In the meantime, thousand's of agricultural wells have been drilled and are reducing the aquifers to the point of depletion. One more year
of this drought and you can put a stick in it.

[Hardpan]

Originally Posted by Allanswift

Agree..... California and NYC, both cities are overpopulated nowadays.. authorities should look into these serious real estate issues.

When did California become a "city"? Last time I checked the map, New York was a state, like CA.

Oh, you mean the entire Los Angele's area? Hell, that's just a small portion of CA, which will be a desert if
it doesn't rain next year.

Maybe the State of Jefferson idea will take off, when the wells and pumps run dry!

[GoldenZephyr]

Originally Posted by la_fuerza

Um... I own a 700 sq ft condo... that I actually LIVE in with my wife and 2 cats. We have nothing to gain by housing refugee relatives from California.

However the water situation is very real. We drove to San Francisco last year and we have NEVER seen Lake Shasta water levels so low.

Of course, because they've drained the reservoirs to keep river levels high for the delta smelt. CA should have much more water on hand, but instead no diversions to reservoirs, all for a fish.

I don't disagree that we've been in a particularly bad dry spell, it's just that there are many things that were already in place and could have been put in place to mitigate that, and they weren't, mostly because of the hard left governance of the state beholden to eco-oppression.

We could have fast tracked Desal plants years ago, instead, we're wasting billions on a choo choo to nowhere. The Carlsbad Desal plant costs about $1B dollars. Brown's choo choo to nowhere, $65-100B
That could be 65 to 100 new Desal plants that could replace a HUGE amount of water.

We could have built more reservoirs, we could have filled the ones we have. We could capture rainfall runoff, which is all shuttled right to the ocean, post haste.

We could force Big Ag to actually reduce their water usage by using drip irrigation and other techniques. Big Ag uses 80% of the water in this state, they've been asked to cut nothing. However, the little guy is asked to cut 25%, which amounts to only a 5% overall reduction in water usage, painful for the little guy, does nothing to help the drought. Big Ag could be asked to cut by measly 7.5% at it would result in 50% MORE water savings than we are doing now with these draconian reductions.

We do none of these things, why?

[manekeniko]

Originally Posted by JeffSanDimas

Gonna water my lawn as per course. I refuse to suffer because of the bad planning of our government.

You seem to believe that it's all about you, and you're demanding that California continue serving your preferred lifestyle as though nothing has changed. The smart thing do when conditions change is to change with them. This is basic science. Species that cannot adapt to a new environment go extinct. I always say "Adapt or get paved over." Your choice.

I'm in NY, and it's very damp here. Soon I will be living in New Mexico, one of the most arid states. If my new house has a lawn it will be ripped out in favor of xeriscaping, and I will be fastidious about water usage so that I don't stress the system.

Doing the right thing is not just about being a good citizen; it's about survival. If you don't change your ways you will suffer.

[nightbird47]

Originally Posted by la_fuerza

OP here. I didn't see the other thread when I posted mine, but the other thread was from 2014 before the mandatory water rationing in CA and when people were still hoping for a decent winter in 2015. Things are much more critical now. A little background, I left Northern CA in 2007 after a very dry winter. It wasn't the main reason, cost of living was, but climate change definitely was a factor.

The point is, the water rationing is just one more thing. Now you have to watch how much water you use on top of the traffic and high cost of living. At what point does one say "living in CA just isn't worth it anymore"?

I have many friends and family still living in CA. They are enjoying their 85 degree days without a care in the world, not understanding the situation they are in. I don't think everyone moving north to WA and OR is the answer. The Pacific Northwest had a pretty pitiful snow pack this winter too but at least we are not in drought with restrictions impacting our daily routine.

I moved all the way to Oklahoma. One of the reasons I loved the place is it ISN'T crawling with people. We do have a problem with drought, but OKC imposed no lawn watering very early on. And people generally didn't try to squirm out of it. I happen to love the relaxed culture, but its clearly not for those who need something to do at every moment. But for years my ex and I wanted to bail on socal for that very reason. I'm not sure I'll ever really 'fit in' perfectly but do quite well enough, and I LOVE that so many people just wouldn't EVER want to live here. Good, we have drought concerns too. We don't need you.

Now my son moved out of California with his wife and is so happy where he is he and his wife don't plan to return. For them it was cost of living and available jobs at first, but they like the rest too. We're third and fourth generation natives who bailed.

I'm sorry for the animals who fight to live each day since the water is gone. I'm sorry for the trees which are trying to hang on. I'm not sorry for the people who keep crowding in and now complain about resources when there never was room for them in the first place. You can't fix a problem of overpopulation by creating more problems trying to suck out water from places you should be leaving alone. The only real cure is to put major and continuing restrictions on people and if they don't like them, then find somewhere where nobody cares how long your shower takes. With all the blizzards, the east coast has plenty of water.

[nightbird47]

Originally Posted by mysticaltyger

Um, you're just being ridiculous. You criticize building mega cities in the desert on one hand while insisting on your right to water your lawn in that very same desert.

And your initial criticism is off the mark. Your final comment gets more to the heart of the issue.....California, as usual, wants everything both ways. No matter what you try to do, someone will scream and bellyache about it. Want more reservoirs? Desalinate ocean water? The environmentalists scream. Conserve water? The people insist in their rights to water their lawns. Same deal with the farmers who won't adopt more water efficient uses for their crops.

The enemy here isn't just the government, but ourselves. We are selfish, short sighted, and don't cooperate. Government inaction over past decades is just mirroring the conflicted, lazy, and indecisive attitudes of the people.

Bring back the law which used to be common, before builders found it in the way and it got grandfathered away, that they could not build new housing on an area unless there was sufficent resources like water in the area to fully support it. Moreno Valley development almost got stopped with this, but they gave them a 'variance' and now we have a bunch of quickly built, and quickly aging homes in the middle of a very dry place.

If the state is in drough, do not allow grass laws. Simple. Give people a discount if they have fully drought resistant yards. The bank account will talk to them. Before more developers wanted in and they insisted on grass lawns, Tuscon required low water yards. Last time I was there a few years ago there was a lot more houses and a lot of grass. It was also a high forclosure area. So, which approach was better? If you live in a desert, let it be a desert plant wise.

[Hardpan]

[quote=GoldenZephyr;39085620]Of course, because they've drained the reservoirs to keep river levels high for the delta smelt. CA should have much more water on hand, but instead no diversions to reservoirs, all for a fish.

I don't disagree that we've been in a particularly bad dry spell, it's just that there are many things that were already in place and could have been put in place to mitigate that, and they weren't, mostly because of the hard left governance of the state beholden to eco-oppression.

We could have fast tracked Desal plants years ago, instead, we're wasting billions on a choo choo to nowhere. The Carlsbad Desal plant costs about $1B dollars. Brown's choo choo to nowhere, $65-100B
That could be 65 to 100 new Desal plants that could replace a HUGE amount of water.

We could have built more reservoirs, we could have filled the ones we have. We could capture rainfall runoff, which is all shuttled right to the ocean, post haste.

We could force Big Ag to actually reduce their water usage by using drip irrigation and other techniques. Big Ag uses 80% of the water in this state, they've been asked to cut nothing. However, the little guy is asked to cut 25%, which amounts to only a 5% overall reduction in water usage, painful for the little guy, does nothing to help the drought. Big Ag could be asked to cut by measly 7.5% at it would result in 50% MORE water savings than we are doing now with these draconian reductions.

We do none of these things, why?[/QUOTE?

Money of course. The agricorps lobbyists at the capitol are very powerful.
.
Homeowners will be paying through the nose while big AG wastes water on
crops that are not a nessessity.

As for dams, let us not forget that the eco-terrorists have been trying to remove dams, not build new ones.