Posted on 06/26/2007 5:26:44 PM PDT by WayneLusvardi
Prof. Erie's San Diego Drought Paranoia Thesis Proven Wrong
Professor Steven P. Erie in his recent book Beyond Chinatown: The Metropolitan Water District, Growth, and the Environment in Southern California (2006) portrays as paranoid San Diego's fear of being the first to have wholesale water supplies cut off in the event of a regional drought.
Erie’s book incessantly pooh-poohs the perspective of San Diego water officials that what they were fighting for was equal priority “water rights” from MWD’s system in the event of a regional drought or a political drought. As San Diego Water Authority General Manager Maureen Stapleton is aptly quoted in the book, a drought is defined as “when you find out who has the water rights and who doesn’t.”
The moment of truth as to who has priority water rights has apparently arrived with the recent shut down on water supplies from Northern California via the California Aqueduct due to a environmental court order over vanishing smelt fish in the Bay Delta. Erie's paranoia thesis is not holding water. North San Diego County farmers are being noticed to expect water cutbacks later this year. So much for Professor Erie's prognostication powers. See excerpt of article below:
North County farmers bracing for water cutbacks (excerpt) By: QUINN EASTMAN - Staff Writer North County Times
NORTH COUNTY -- Farmers across North County and their water suppliers said Monday they are beginning to prepare for water cutbacks this coming winter, in what one water official said could be the beginning of a "long-term shift" in North County's water resources.
Local water officials said they were dusting off plans that could put month-by-month caps on agricultural customers' water use and penalties for exceeding the caps.
"We are doubling our prayer efforts for a wet winter," said Chuck Badger, a lemon and orange grower in the Encinitas/Rancho Santa Fe area and president of the San Diego County Farm Bureau.
Supply reductions of at least 30 percent, compared with a still-undetermined reference year, could go into effect in January, barring exceptional weather before then.
The official call for cuts from Southern California's main water supplier, the Metropolitan Water District, is not expected until August or September, local water officials said.
See full article here: p://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/06/26/news/top_stories/1_01_296_25_07.txt
All ICE needs to do is stake out the water machines they will find more illegals filling up than standing out in front of Home Depot...
In the last half of the 20th century, the judiciary began re-interpreting the Winters Doctrine such that not only indian agriculture on federal reservations had water rights but that all federal lands and wildlife on those federal lands had rights. This is what has been the basis of increasing the minimum instream flows. Another method the judges have used to steal the water is to re-interpret treaties giving indians fishing rights to mean that those fishing rights were based on adequate/higher minimum instream flows.
The prior appropriation water rights are based in state law and are trumped by Federal Reserved water rights.
What boosts the state economy more, agriculture products or smelt in the Sacramento River?
denver had strict water use restrictions beginning in the 1970’s.
tickets are issued for offenders who break the water day rules.
not so in california. there are no limits, no tickets.
and where does part of the water come from?
There may be technological help on the way. New filters using nanotechnology are now being developed that can desalinize water and clean it even more thoroughly than reverse osmosis, and with a fraction of the typical energy use.
In large scale practical terms, a platform like an offshore oil rig would possibly use tidal forces to low pressure pump large amounts of sea water through a specialized pipe towards the shore. Along its route would be nanotech filters to an outer pipe, which would contain the filtered fresh water. The seawater in the middle pipe would become increasingly more briny, and it would loop back to the rig, with only the fresh water in the outer pipe reaching the shore.
The returned brine would be returned to the sea, in the proper amount to normalize its brine level, so as not to injure marine animals sensitive to changes in salinity, which has been a concern with other desalinization plants.
Such a system could provide an enormous amount of fresh water inland, while not harming biologicals.
Bump to a very interesting post.
The problem that arises is who pays for it.
Certainly there is no objection if the cost is spread across society. If the smelt needs more water, buy the water rights. Or lease them on an intermittent basis. In this way, each taxpayer is paying a small amount
Instead, as the case always is with protecting endangered species, the costs fall heavily on a few or small number of individuals. In this case, the water right holders(beginning with the most senior right holders) are the ones paying for it. They may have a "takings" claim, but if they do, it will take money and many years to adjudicate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.