Skip to comments.Pelosiís home city exempted from water restrictions imposed on rural farmers
Posted on 08/21/2014 11:34:08 AM PDT by george76
The Endangered Species Act has wreaked havoc for decades on rural communities, but a newly filed lawsuit could force San Francisco urbanites like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to share their pain. A federal complaint filed this week contends that the Hetch Hetchy Project, which supplies water to San Francisco and the Bay Area, has unfairly enjoyed an exemption from the severe cutbacks required in rural California in order to save endangered fish species.
Craig Manson, who heads the Center for Environmental Science, Accuracy and Reliability (CESAR) in Fresno, said the lawsuit is aimed at addressing the double standard that forces farmers to give up water in the name of species conservation without requiring Bay Area residents to do the same. Mr. Manson wants the National Park Service to press the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to end the special exemption from the Endangered Species Act (ESA), but the Park Service just wont do it.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Those farmers just produce food.
Those San Franciscans produce Democrat votes. That’s important.
So our royal politicians are more important than those who produce our food. How long can this madness endure?
I guess when you can tell people that they’ll find out what’s in it after they pass it and are exempt you get exemptions in other areas as well.../s
The name Hetch Hetchy brings to mind a similar one Hugh Hewitt...FWIW—and not much.
This is because she is Pelosi, and exempt from the rules that apply to mere mortals.
Pelosi’s home town is not even located in CA.
Pelosi’s home town is Baltimore, Maryland...If fact she was born, raised and educated there..
“endangered fish species” Like large-mouth Dixie Chicks?
All bones, no meat, a beeyotch to clean, taste like ....
There are two nations within our borders. There is The United States Of America and there is Democratland. The citizens of Democratland get their money by taking it from the citizens of The United States. The citizens of Democratland will say or do anything to be able to continue to take money from the citizens of The United States.
It takes a lot of water to float a Nancy Pelosi down the sewer pipe.
Water restrictions for thee, but not for me....
And this is where an enterprising conservative lawyer files a lawsuit that challenges the double standard and attempts to invalidate the application of the endangered species act on water supplies in California. The court can enjoy the fun part - cut off water to San Francisco, or restore water to farmers.
What’s not being openly discussed is that the reason San Francisco needs the water is not for drinking, not for bathing, but to flush the feces from the streets left by their precious homeless population. And my friends, I am not exaggerating or making this up!
Rules are for the ‘little people’
Miss Lube Rack
Steam cleaning of the streets, ahh yes, were it not for that, the liberal bastion would be up to their shoulders in dung. (wonder if they'd even notice)
DemoRat self exemptions = good for thee but not for me. The east coast carpetbagger gets to dictate water allotments to Ca.farmers. Pretty fluxed up.
Elitists don’t want “the country class” using up THEIR resources.
Yup....The roots of this fraud go way back into Maryland government...The east coast well connected sponsored this idiot’s entire life.
Although I agree with this idea in principle, agriculture uses 80% of the water in the State. The cities could cut back by half and it wouldn't make a dent.
There are lots of enterprisers on the political right pulling in big bucks on right wing politics. There's always room for one more to get his share.
He knows that if he frames it as taking on the state water rights law, that is kinda boring, null and void, so he probably won't raise much money.
But if he frames it as taking on Nancy Pelosi, ESA, or EPA he knows he is much more likely to raise money.
You should send him some
> Whats not being openly discussed is that the reason San Francisco needs the water is not for drinking, not for bathing, but to flush the feces from the streets left by their precious homeless population. And my friends, I am not exaggerating or making this up!
Well if there were feces left in the streets in any city in the U.S. it would be San Francisco. Sodomy by-products you know...
A burger and fries there costs $19.50, by the way
She lives on a $30 million Napa winery:
I think that's a Bocci Court next to the Tennis Court..? Hazard a guess
? ZERO union people work on her winery.
correction - “Auberge de Soleil”
Nancy Pelosi and her husband and fewer than 10 other partners wanted to build a golf course and country club outside of San Jose, California, called the CordeValle Country Club. In order to get approval to build on these 275 acres, they had to comply with some very stringent county environmental regulations..
But they never followed the environmental regulations.
County Environmental Compliance Report found all kinds of environmental problems on the Pelosis golf course.
Remember with Nancy Pelosi, her commitment to the environment is not just an issue, its an ethic and a value. What does that actually mean in practical terms? Did they turn around and build this habitat and comply? No, they solved the problem the old-fashioned way: they hired lobbyists and they got the environmental regulations changed.
How dare you question the Ruling Class. You are just a mere Country Class troglodyte. You must be humbled...to silence. An IRS audit is in your future.
Its a very complex subject and in this case there were riparian, prior appropriation, and reserved water rights in play.
To simplify it, it was a issue of minimum flow.
Most people know that there is a minimum flow requirement, but they are going to disagree as to what the minimum flow should actually be.
The second smaller group says there doesn't have to be a minimum flow, and that any drop of water that reaches the sea is wasted water.
So when this issue comes up, the parties settle the dispute of what the minimum flow should be. But, the group that denied the need for a minimum flow doesn't get a seat at the table.
So in this case, those farmers with junior prior appropriation rights lost their water to minimum flow. But those farmers with more senior prior appropriation water rights and those farmers with riparian water rights retained their water.
Under prior appropriation, water rights are in a hierarchy based on "first in time, first in right". The older the right the more senior it is and the younger the right the more junior it is.
In any given year there are junior right holders who don't get any water and in dryer years there will be fewer who get their water. OTOH, in a wet year more will get their water.
Rules for thee but not for me.
Lots of illegal alien criminal insurgent invaders working for her businesses in the Napa area.