Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

California farmers won't get federal water
Yahoo News ^ | February 22, 2014 | Scott Smith

Posted on 02/22/2014 1:12:09 PM PST by Robwin

FRESNO, Calif. (AP) — Without a lot more rain and snow, many California farmers caught in the state's drought can expect to receive no irrigation water this year from a vast system of rivers, canals and reservoirs interlacing the state, federal officials announced Friday.

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation released its first outlook of the year, saying that the agency will continue to monitor rain and snow fall, but the grim levels so far prove that the state is in the throes of one of its driest periods in recorded history.

Farmers who rely on the federally run Central Valley Project received only 20 percent of their normal water allotment last year and were expecting this year's bad news. Some communities and endangered wildlife that rely on the federal water source will also suffer deep cuts.

The state's snowpack is at 29 percent of average for this time of year, which means that for farmers it's going to be a hard year.

"My gross sales are probably going to be cut in half," said Bill Diedrich, who farms 1,500 acres of almonds, tomatoes and other crops in the parched Central Valley community of Firebaugh. "Some farmers out here are going to lose everything they've got."

Gov. Jerry Brown last month declared California's drought emergency, and both state and federal officials have pledged millions of dollars to help with water conservation and food banks for those put out of work by the drought.

California officials who manage the State Water Project, the state's other major water system, have already said they won't be releasing any water for farmers, marking a first in its 54-year history.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; US: California
KEYWORDS: califdrought; californiadrought; drought; watershortage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061 next last
To: Robwin

You think 61% of the farmers in Cal voted for Obama? Save your sympathy for Cal, many of those lost crops go out of state.


41 posted on 02/22/2014 2:48:37 PM PST by morphing libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheDon

new water source in north san diego county

Instead of the high speed train we should be building 5-6 of these plants.

Here’s some info on desalinization

http://www.pacinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/desalination_report3.pdf

Carlsbad Cal is building a plant which is slated to open in 2016, 16 years after the proposal was approved by the city. Administrative hearings and court processes in which environmental groups got several bites of the apple trying to shoot it down.

It will suppjy up to 10% of the county’s water.

What happens to the salt?

The desalination plant typically uses three kilograms of seawater to produce 1 kilogram of fresh water. The extracted salt dissolves in the excess sea water used in the process to form so-called brine. The brine is returned to the sea where it is diluted again in its natural medium.

Can salt be recovered?

The usual desalination processes do not provide for such recovery. Whereas they concentrate seawater 1.5 times, recovery of salt would require seawater to be concentrated ten times. Under such conditions the first crystals would appear in the brine. This would require a lot of energy and cannot be justified on an economic standpoint. Today whenever a large surface area is available close to a sunny seashore, salt pans, which make use of solar energy, are still the best method of salt production.


42 posted on 02/22/2014 2:50:36 PM PST by morphing libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Nope. I’ve seen pictures and know what it is, it would be a good idea for someone who has a small back yard or (if it can stand the weight) a patio.

We have about an acre that is rowed-up and cultivatable. We could make more, but it means clearing out more stumps and blackberries.


43 posted on 02/22/2014 2:51:17 PM PST by djf (OK. Well, now, lemme try to make this clear: If you LIKE your lasagna, you can KEEP your lasagna!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Robwin

Anyone know why Obma cam out to the Central Valey last week? Was it to tell the farmers “tough sh!#?


44 posted on 02/22/2014 2:53:09 PM PST by morphing libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: djf

borrow that backhoe then

:p


45 posted on 02/22/2014 2:54:58 PM PST by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
This is why the Feds claim it is Federal water.


46 posted on 02/22/2014 2:55:41 PM PST by Karl Spooner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Karl Spooner

bump

government should not own land it doesn’t need for a Constitutional purpose in my opinion


47 posted on 02/22/2014 2:58:35 PM PST by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: umgud

Stealing that for my tagline :)


48 posted on 02/22/2014 3:19:51 PM PST by NonValueAdded (Screw the farmers. I can get everything I need at the grocery store.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Robwin

Central valley farmers didn’t vote for Obama ... you can take that to the bank.


49 posted on 02/22/2014 3:24:34 PM PST by BillyBonebrake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robwin; All
This water issue issue was a hard one for me to reconcile the constitutionality of. I had made the mistake in a related thread of not seeing that Congress probably has the power to tax and spend for improving natural "intrastate" resources where the public use lands of the 5th Amendment, or where the federal entities under the exclusive legislative control of Congress indicated in the Constitution's Clause 17 of Section 8 of Article I are concerned.

However ...

Researching the federal law that established the US Bureau of Reclamation, originally called the US Reclamation Service, I discovered the following about that service. The US Reclamation Service was established under the federal Reclamation Act. And the possible constitutional problem with the Reclamation Act is that it provided funding for irrigation projects.

More specifically, and I don't know the details of these historical projects, bu if the federal irrigation projects were not done on the public use lands of the 5th Amendment, or in conjunction with the federal entities described in Clause 17 referenced above, then Congress arguably had no constitutional authority to appropriate tax dollars for such projects.

In fact, the delegates to the Constitutional Convention had discussed the idea of granting Congress the specific power to build canals, waterways historically the most economical way to move manufactured goods before superhighways were made. But the delegates to the Con-Con had decided not to grant Congress such powers. Here's a link to a related page.

Veto of federal public works bill

So the water now controlled by the Bureau of Reclamation is possibly an early example where Congress first needed to petition the States for an amendment to the Constitution which granted Congress the specific power to lay taxes to fund such projects, but neglected to do so.

Finally, it's disturbing that pro-one world government Progressive Movement was gaining momentum in 1902 when the Reclamation Act was established, the Progressive Movement evidenced by the constitutionally indefensible "private" Federal Reserve and the ratification of the misguided 16th and 17th Amendments in that era.

50 posted on 02/22/2014 3:25:02 PM PST by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

http://www.wnd.com/2005/04/29869/


51 posted on 02/22/2014 3:27:22 PM PST by Karl Spooner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: mountainlion

Last year they got 20% of the normal ration. This year they get 0%.


52 posted on 02/22/2014 3:38:45 PM PST by sheana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

They took over all the puddles ...

I’d better quit peeing in my backyard.


53 posted on 02/22/2014 4:04:46 PM PST by Scrambler Bob ("The Pen" has a nice ring to it, kind of like "Graybar Hotel")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: autumnraine
Love that Delta Smelt

Deep fried, to a nice crispy crunch...

54 posted on 02/22/2014 4:27:26 PM PST by JimRed (Excise the cancer before it kills us; feed & water the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS NOW & FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Robwin

Federal Water. Hmmm. Means “owned by the federal government”. I still cling to the quaint idea that the government belongs to us, the people. Therefore, the water belongs to the people. Quaint, but true. But you wouldn’t know it from the tyrannical way things operate now.


55 posted on 02/22/2014 5:06:09 PM PST by JewishRighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robwin

The Feds are setting up for a food crisis. Ultimately famine is a tool of the totalitarians to neutralize the population. Famine is coming to the USA. When inflation takes off food prices will go up much faster than others because farm land is being aggressively taken out of production by the Federal Government, either by denying water or by repurposing it to make “fuel.”


56 posted on 02/22/2014 5:10:11 PM PST by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's Economics In One Lesson ONLINEhttp://steshaw.org/economics-in-one-lesson/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimRed

What isn’t delicious deep fried?


57 posted on 02/22/2014 5:21:39 PM PST by autumnraine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: umgud

Yeah, provided you own some land. What about apartment and co-op dwellers? Duh.


58 posted on 02/22/2014 5:41:44 PM PST by EinNYC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Scrambler Bob
I’d better quit peeing in my backyard.

Actually, it reduces water consumption and helps fertilize the flowers and shrubs. Just be careful not to create a wetland.

59 posted on 02/22/2014 6:16:14 PM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: morphing libertarian
Instead of the high speed train we should be building 5-6 of these plants.

Amen and amen!

60 posted on 02/22/2014 6:22:03 PM PST by TheDon (Californians are losing their right to keep and bear firearms one firearm at a time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson