[von949]

Originally Posted by LuisSuarez

Vegas uses so little water that the 2 million here are not the issue. It is California farmers using so much on crops to export abroad that is the issue.

This.

One of my Air Force reservists co-workers works at Lake Mead as an engineer. We had a conversation about this two weekends ago. He told and showed me how little water Las Vegas uses from LM. Basically southern California uses more water from LM than all the other states combined.

[LuisSuarez]

10 Percent of California’s Water Goes to Almond Farming a stunning 1.1 trillion gallons of water each year. It would not bother me if I never ate another almond in the rest of my life.

10 percent of California’s water goes to almond farming.

[ScoopLV]

And all those almond farmers have the audacity to put up billboards along their property comparing what little water restrictions California has to a police state.

[bayview6]

Originally Posted by ScoopLV

And all those almond farmers have the audacity to put up billboards along their property comparing what little water restrictions California has to a police state.

Of course, LVOC would say that you can't take the almond growers' water away without compensing them. In this case, he is would be right.

[Willy702]

I love how most people posting in here seemed to have failed Econ 101. The solution will be pricing based, where necessary. The scarce resource will be priced at a point where those who have the most to pay will get it. That would be the cities, the farmers only use the water system because it economically makes sense. If they have to pay 3 times as much to get the water they have rights for, they'll leave a lot of land fallow and the problem will be solved. This is how the oil/gas market works, no reason to think water should be any different.

Furthermore I can't believe how many people don't understand the true effects of water shortages. Those who already have a home with a water supply in Las Vegas are going to win, not lose if drastic measures such as no new water service meters are instituted. There will be an immediate scarcity of housing and those who want it will pay more for it. The price of housing, along with water will increase until it meets equilibrium. People wanting to move into the area probably have some additional capacity to pay and will drive up prices. Those living in the area who have a financial stake in the price of water and housing will have some sort of price in mind at which point they think of moving. There is a lot of stickiness to this (jobs, kids in school, attachment to home and place, etc), but everyone has a price. In any event these media idiots and a lot of posters who come into whatever region and say hey how are you all going to live without water are morons who don't understand Econ 101 apparently.

Lastly think about what happens if the laws of the market are unleashed on the water supply. Lets say you are paying $25 a month for a water bill in Las Vegas, something I would guess is pretty average. In the worst case, what's that going up, triple? So you pay $75 a month. Are people going to move out of Las Vegas or alternatively not move in because they pay $50 more a month? I doubt it. Farmers with larger operations though pay water bills in the six and even seve figure range. If their bills triple, what do you think they will do?

[ScoopLV]

Or.... the government subsidizes the wrong people because they have political clout. I do not expect government to do the right thing because they only do THAT when there is no other option.

[lvoc]

Originally Posted by bayview6

Of course, LVOC would say that you can't take the almond growers' water away without compensing them. In this case, he is would be right.

Actually CA is all screwed up on this subject. They do not regulate the use of water from the aquifer. Only state in the nation where this is true. The result of course is that 130 of the CA water basins are in trouble...some big time. Moves to regulate water usage are underway but may well fail again. So mother nature gets to rule...you lose your water when an aquifer gets too deep to pump or runs dry.

That happens in NV also though it should not. Basically NV gives out more water rights than the aquifers can sustain...and again nature takes its course. A domestic well in Nevada is always allowed even if there is no water available. See Pahrump.

[lvoc]

Originally Posted by Willy702

I love how most people posting in here seemed to have failed Econ 101. The solution will be pricing based, where necessary. The scarce resource will be priced at a point where those who have the most to pay will get it. That would be the cities, the farmers only use the water system because it economically makes sense. If they have to pay 3 times as much to get the water they have rights for, they'll leave a lot of land fallow and the problem will be solved. This is how the oil/gas market works, no reason to think water should be any different.

Furthermore I can't believe how many people don't understand the true effects of water shortages. Those who already have a home with a water supply in Las Vegas are going to win, not lose if drastic measures such as no new water service meters are instituted. There will be an immediate scarcity of housing and those who want it will pay more for it. The price of housing, along with water will increase until it meets equilibrium. People wanting to move into the area probably have some additional capacity to pay and will drive up prices. Those living in the area who have a financial stake in the price of water and housing will have some sort of price in mind at which point they think of moving. There is a lot of stickiness to this (jobs, kids in school, attachment to home and place, etc), but everyone has a price. In any event these media idiots and a lot of posters who come into whatever region and say hey how are you all going to live without water are morons who don't understand Econ 101 apparently.

Lastly think about what happens if the laws of the market are unleashed on the water supply. Lets say you are paying $25 a month for a water bill in Las Vegas, something I would guess is pretty average. In the worst case, what's that going up, triple? So you pay $75 a month. Are people going to move out of Las Vegas or alternatively not move in because they pay $50 more a month? I doubt it. Farmers with larger operations though pay water bills in the six and even seve figure range. If their bills triple, what do you think they will do?

Not how it works. Water rights are a property right and are owned. The owner has a right to that water. As well there are arrangements between the states that govern water distribution.

The CA agricultural interests own the rights to millions of acre feet of water from the Colorado. They in fact distribute it to their members at costs as low as $10 per acre foot. (SNWA sells its water to the local purveyors at about $300 per AF)

Even if the agricultural interest should develop the capability to sell their water rights they would be restrictied to selling them within California.

[Willy702]

Originally Posted by lvoc

Not how it works. Water rights are a property right and are owned. The owner has a right to that water. As well there are arrangements between the states that govern water distribution.

The CA agricultural interests own the rights to millions of acre feet of water from the Colorado. They in fact distribute it to their members at costs as low as $10 per acre foot. (SNWA sells its water to the local purveyors at about $300 per AF)

Even if the agricultural interest should develop the capability to sell their water rights they would be restrictied to selling them within California.

Well guess we are all DOOMED! Come on you really think the powers that be wouldn't impose a fee structure on water use to ration it ? Never underestimate the power of government and governmental agencies to get in the way of what seemed like a pretty clear property right in the past.

[007 license to sell]

Here's the latest on what's happening with Lake Mead.

Lake Mead to get more water | Las Vegas Review-Journal

Here is a recent article on what CA is doing for it's water issues.

California Lawmakers Pass $US 7.5B Water Bond
http://www.circleofblue.org/waternews/2014/world/california-lawmakers-pass-us-7-5b-water-bond/