# California water shortage



## alpha6 (May 12, 2008)

Interesting clip about Calf water problems and how the EPA and other "environmental" groups are the cause. One clip shows the reporter in an almond field with bees in the background. (so its bee related in a way)

http://www.foxnews.com/video-search/m/21864995/empty_salad_bowl.htm

I said it long ago that there is going to be a huge backlash against the environmentalist when people who have never gone hungry or thirsty or without jobs do and then no one is going to care how much of the environment is destroyed. There has to be some kind of balance. When one cuts out the other completely (as in zero water allocation) then that is when the problems are going to occur.


----------



## wayacoyote (Nov 3, 2003)

Alpha6,
I'm sure you've got a specific image in mind when you mention "environmentalist." There are some who don't want people to go hungry or thirsty or without jobs. (Then again, if we destroy the environment, won't everyone go hungry, thirsty, and without jobs?)

"There has to be some kind of balance." I agree with you. I think it can be found. But it won't be found by one side of the issue or the other. It will be found by those seeking it, those who realize that the solution includes those that wear the other "title". It will be found by those who don't have knee-jerk reactions to the other side, but those whe want to build a bridge that allows both sides to not only meet in the middle, but cross to the other side as well.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

maybe turning off that lawn sprinkler might be a good start,


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

While the recent storms have been good ,and more is on the way,apparently it isn't going to be enough to fill the reservoirs.Just enough rain to mess up the almond pollination ,perhaps.
http://www.redding.com/news/2009/feb/17/drought-nowhere-close-to-ending/


----------



## JBJ (Jan 27, 2005)

"I said it long ago that there is going to be a huge backlash against the environmentalist when people who have never gone hungry or thirsty or without jobs do and then no one is going to care how much of the environment is destroyed" A6

If one thinks we have hunger and thirst now; wait until the environment is destroyed. It wont sustain bees or people. All living things are linked somehow in the food web.

Ian I love that sentiment, death to lawns... they feed nothing and divert precious resources that could be used for food production. How about xeriscaped pollinator forage for our front yards instead? Lawns and pavement make for poor bee forage so we should all plant locally adapted species to benefit pollinators and minimize water consumption.


----------



## alpha6 (May 12, 2008)

Your are preaching to the choir. You would be amazed at how many people think that meat and veggies come from the store and have no clue as to how it gets there. How many people that bite into a hunk of steak say "man, I hope when they put the bolt into this cows brain it didn't suffer much."


----------



## HAB (May 17, 2008)

It will be a hard sell to the people of California that Food, so long taken for granted, is far more important than swimming pools, hot tubs and lawns. A finite supply of fresh water and ever growing demand equals drastic hardship. Californians just don't know what hardship is. But are probably going to start learning.


----------



## JBJ (Jan 27, 2005)

In the last long term weather forcast I heard for Southern Ca I believe the phrase "dust bowl" was used. If this is the case there will be major long term implications for the almond pollination scnenario.


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

>Californians just don't know what hardship is

Thats probably true of most Americans. 
(Except us ******* mountain people who know all about gardens,hand pumps,outhouses ,sharp knives and firearms.)


----------



## JBJ (Jan 27, 2005)

...and bees and moonshine


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

And of course my Bible for those cold winter nights with no electricity(I have lots of beeswax candles ).
The Northern orchards should be OK for water,but the Westlands may be in for reductions in acreage.The frenzied planting of recent years is over, now that the reality of a diminished water supply is sinking in,along with reduced world demand.
Whats left will be be sustainable,hopefully.


----------



## Beeslave (Feb 6, 2009)

....Hounds(blueticks) and Whitetails!!!!!!


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

Give me a pack of Walkers bred for bear and cat, and a fresh snow and I am outta here.
t:t:


----------



## cow pollinater (Dec 5, 2007)

My sister, who grew up running running around on the same farm I did where we grew most of our own food, has since gotten her masters and run off to la. The last time she visited she told me that farming was a complete waste of time as when she needs a head of lettuce or a gallon of milk all she has to do is run to the grocery store.:doh:
There was no arguing with her... believe me I tried.


----------



## swabby (Jun 6, 2008)

I had just about talked myself out of planting a garden.Now I got it back on my mind. :doh: The Exodos from California could be just as greart as the rush to Ca. during gold rush days and dust bowl days during the Great Depression. The milk is going sour in the land of milk and honey?


----------



## learning (Jan 19, 2009)

When I was in school in SD one of the ag fraternity boys was giving a tour to parents. One of them wanted to see were they sheared pigs. Ends up she thought bacon was cut off the sides like wool. When he finally convinced her what bacon was she nearly fainted. She didn't even get it was muscle and fat!

I grew up in yuppiville and still knew were food came from.


----------



## Daniel White (Feb 9, 2009)

*bees and moonshine*

and more moonshine


----------



## JohnK and Sheri (Nov 28, 2004)

Looks like LA might start rationing water again.
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE51H0AL20090218
Sheri


----------



## wmgysi (Feb 14, 2009)

*Environmentalists to blame?*

Lets face it, there is not enough water to go around in that area. If the ecosytem of the source for that water to the farmers collapses then not just the farmers will suffer but 23 million others for lack of potable water. You can chose I guess now but make a wise choice. Of course you can say all is fine now so let the fish die and take the chance. Its up to you but I think it is not fair to blame the environmentalist for the situation that California is in. maybe the farming methods have to change to low water consumption crops to make it sustainable. Obviously at present it is not. Sorry to be so harsh but it is going to get worse over the next 10 years, just watch it and be prepared. At that time there will be too much water along the coasts, flooding most low laying area during high tides. Those areas are now used to grow most of the foods for our consumption. We will then blame the environmentalists for not having said enough about global warming. Talk to you in 10 years. After all its none of my business, sorry to worry you.



alpha6 said:


> Interesting clip about Calf water problems and how the EPA and other "environmental" groups are the cause. One clip shows the reporter in an almond field with bees in the background. (so its bee related in a way)
> 
> http://www.foxnews.com/video-search/m/21864995/empty_salad_bowl.htm
> 
> I said it long ago that there is going to be a huge backlash against the environmentalist when people who have never gone hungry or thirsty or without jobs do and then no one is going to care how much of the environment is destroyed. There has to be some kind of balance. When one cuts out the other completely (as in zero water allocation) then that is when the problems are going to occur.


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

It does seem a shame to keep all those L.A.lawns going when water is being cut off to the growers .I would be more impressed if I saw some clover and dandelions in that grass
California has always been a land of floods and drought.Nothing new there . The only difference is now there are way too many people here for the amount of water available during the drought years.Could this be the start of a 200 year drought?
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpa...AA25754C0A962958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all


----------



## Tom G. Laury (May 24, 2008)

*Mike the Logger*

Took the words right out of my mouth...sometimes I think that an extended drought is the only thing that will save the state!


----------



## BEES4U (Oct 10, 2007)

*It does seem a shame to keep all those L.A.lawns going*

Golf courses
Golf courses
Golf coursesand more Golf courses
Ernie


----------



## BEES4U (Oct 10, 2007)

*Lake Oroville level stats*

The lake is up only 4'
http://lakelevelalert.com/oroville-current-lake-level-california.php
Ernie


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

Here is another local article:
http://www.redding.com/news/2009/feb/22/farmers-fret-over-lack-of-water/
And here is what some are doing about it:
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b278/loggermike/100_0050.jpg


----------



## JohnK and Sheri (Nov 28, 2004)

I keep hearing about orchards being bulldozed because of water shortages but on the East side where we basically were I didn't see any orchards down except the old old trees and there was still lots of planting going on. Thousands of acres of new trees. So, why the discrepancy in location? Do the folks on the East side have wells or do they get more rain or was it just a coincidence that we saw what we saw.
Sheri


----------



## Keith Jarrett (Dec 10, 2006)

The east gets it's water through MID, TID ect... local water district, the west side of the vally gets a large amount from a canal from the Sacramento river, with the smelt issue and low run off they fall under State & Fed regulation.


----------



## JohnK and Sheri (Nov 28, 2004)

Thanks Keith, that explains it.
Would you (or anyone else) have any idea of what the percentage of trees in each area is? Is the lack of water on the West side, perhaps resulting in the increase of acreage in almonds on the East side, or are the new plantings just part of the projected increase we have known about for the past few years?
Sheri


----------



## mbholl (Dec 16, 2007)

West valley growers are drilling wells to try and get water. One grower just put in well -- went down over 1200 ft and spend close to a million dollars.


----------



## Keith Jarrett (Dec 10, 2006)

mbholl said:


> West valley growers are drilling wells to try and get water. One grower just put in well -- went down over 1200 ft and spend close to a million dollars.


Many growers are on a two year waiting list with the well drillers.


----------



## Tom G. Laury (May 24, 2008)

Sheri I don't think anyone is planting in response to lack of h2o westside. Even east siders are extremely cautious about taking any risks right now with the price of nuts so low.


----------



## mbholl (Dec 16, 2007)

Article from LA Times yesterday.

http://www.latimes.com/news/science/environment/la-me-water21-2009feb21,0,6270887.story


----------



## Tom G. Laury (May 24, 2008)

*Golf courses*

Do look extravagant but we can learn from them. Virtually all of the courses surrounded by these "planned developments" are irrigated with reclaimed ( think sewage treatment plant) water. Probably saves on fertilizer too! Aren't the water hazards pretty? No swimming allowed.


----------



## RayMarler (Jun 18, 2008)

Tom G. Laury said:


> Sheri I don't think anyone is planting in response to lack of h2o westside. Even east siders are extremely cautious about taking any risks right now with the price of nuts so low.


That explains why peoples say I'm worthless


----------



## JohnK and Sheri (Nov 28, 2004)

Tom G. Laury said:


> "Golf Courses"....surrounded by these "planned developments" are irrigated with reclaimed ( think sewage treatment plant) water.


Yes, but wouldn't that water grow veggies too?

Some Californians (thinking mostly city folk here) seem to have forgotten or more likely never understood they live in a desert. 
My grandfather had a couple acres in Santa Maria. His hobby was gardening. He had native and non native desert species as the basis of his landscaping. His one luxury was his collection of fruit trees, including walnut trees (but no almonds), which required watering. He did NOT have a lawn OR a swimming pool. We were taught to conserve water, even though he had his own well.
I find it unbelievable that California is choosing the suburban swimming pools, lawns, car washes and yes, golf courses over water for growing FOOD. Don't they know where their groceries come from? If the city populations don't know, those making the decisions to allocate the water certainly do. But I suppose it comes down to how many farmers vote vs how many suburbanites do.
And to top it off, some try to blame the problem on a little fish.:scratch:
Sheri


----------



## Tom G. Laury (May 24, 2008)

*Water*

Reclaimed water as we know it now is best not used to irrigate food that will be directly consumed, health problems dontchano. I resent the impacts overdevelopment of housing is causing, water use being high on the list. However, growers in the Westlands water district ( The district with lowest priority ) are definitely not hayseed hicks. These are educated, scientific operations. They knew full well when they planted those trees that years would come when surface water would be extremely scarce. The reason they are at the back of the line has to do with their distance from the source of water, hence their lower priority rights.


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

It feels strange to be reading this:
http://www.westlandswater.org/wwd/pr/pr20090220.pdf?title=Water Allocation 0%
while watching the rain pouring down outside.


----------



## JohnK and Sheri (Nov 28, 2004)

Tom G. Laury said:


> Reclaimed water as we know it now is best not used to irrigate food that will be directly consumed, health problems dontchano.


"as we know it now" is the key phrase here. There are ways to make it safe for drinking, (once you get past the Yuck factor) so perfectly acceptable for irrigating farm fields. And in the case of fruit or nut trees where there is no direct consumption it might actually be safer, from a public health standpoint, than spraying it on publicly trammeled golf courses.
The percent of actual "sewage" in waste water is small. Grey water would need much less treatment to be safe for irrigation. 



Tom G. Laury said:


> However, growers in the Westlands water district ... knew full well that years would come when surface water would be extremely scarce.


Yes, I can see where that would be true. I wonder, though, if the fields under irrigation have expanded at the rate of residential water needs. In other words, are increasing water quantities being shipped past these growers to service growing Southern California cities?
And I wonder if costs of water for nonessential residential use (or misuse in a severe drought) have risen to the point of hampering demand. If not, they should. Perhaps they should have done it before they were to this point of crisis. There aren't enough pool cleaning, lawn care or car wash jobs to employ those losing their ag jobs now, that is for sure.
Sheri


----------



## Tom G. Laury (May 24, 2008)

*Safe food*

Sheri: what are you referring to? Reclaimed water is not suitable for use on food crops in USA. It's good for other uses though, reducing demand on cleaner water.


----------



## Tom G. Laury (May 24, 2008)

*Demands*

Most of the west side perennials have been planted within the last ten years, paralleling the planting of houses every where else.


----------



## Tom G. Laury (May 24, 2008)

*Reclaimed water*

Think about our export markets


----------



## JohnK and Sheri (Nov 28, 2004)

Tom, if you google "recycling sewage treatment water", you will see that there are places in the world that treat waste water to the point where it is usable for irrigation and even drinking. Cost as always is an issue, but the math makes more sense as the scarcity worsens.
Realistically, many cities get their water from rivers downstream from where another city dumped their treated water. It is a matter of dilution, filtration and treatment.
I am not suggesting it is easy but plan A isn't working, we better start figuring out plan B. I'd at least be trying to avoid having to deal with that YUCK factor mentioned earlier as long as possible.

There are ways to better allocate the rare and becoming rarer resource of water in a much smarter manner than we have traditionally done in this country in general but especially in the drier parts of the country in particular. 
Like another resource we don't manage very well, oil, we bury our head in the sand until a full blown crisis is at hand then face painful consequences that could have been avoided with a little forethought. Collectively, people can be so stupid.:scratch:
Sheri


----------



## Tom G. Laury (May 24, 2008)

*The yuck factor*

Would that be , like, e.coli?


----------



## Tom G. Laury (May 24, 2008)

*What*

Would be the better than traditionally done? What are you referring to?


----------



## JohnK and Sheri (Nov 28, 2004)

I am not suggesting untreated sewage be sprayed on our tomatoes. 

Traditionally we mix the small amount of "sewage" a home generates with the large amount of grey water it generates and send it all to the treatment plants. Why not use that grey water to wash the car or water the lawn? Why not then send this grey water, treated as needed, to agricultural use?

This link discusses waste water recycling
http://www.austmus.gov.au/factsheets/waste_water_recycling.htm
an excerpt:
"_However, it is possible to collect and reuse waste water in our homes, offices, factories and farms as it can be treated to the standards required for agriculture, industry and even drinking. Waste water can be redirected prior to treatment, such as when shower water is directly re-used for flushing toilets, or after treatment, such as when *treated sewage effluent is used for irrigating golf courses and orchards*._" (my emphasis)
Sheri
PS The YUCK factor is the thought of drinking perfectly safe clean treated water that was recently in someone's toilet. Think Space Shuttle here. They drink recycled urine. http://news.cnet.com/8301-13772_3-10097499-52.html
There are cities doing this now.


----------



## Tom G. Laury (May 24, 2008)

*Rants*

Like mine about all the crowding out here

Whaddaya do?


----------



## JohnK and Sheri (Nov 28, 2004)

Tom G. Laury said:


> Like mine (rants) about all the crowding out here
> Whaddaya do?


Crowding and water shortage, uh, do ya think maybe they're related? :doh:
I think y'all should require everyone coming into the state to have their round trip return ticket. 
Sheri
PS Make them bring their own water with them.


----------



## Tom G. Laury (May 24, 2008)

*Good thinking*

Sheri re/; difficult problems


First define: then move on;


----------



## Tom G. Laury (May 24, 2008)

*Everyone*

Except beekeepers, right?


----------



## Tom G. Laury (May 24, 2008)

Gawd I love to stir the pot!!!


----------



## JohnK and Sheri (Nov 28, 2004)

LOL, Tom
In the case of beekeepers, we are _special_, they need us so badly out there, they should PAY us to come in. Oh WAIT, they do!!
At least the out of state beeks leave; too bad so many of them come out there it skews the supply/demand equation and hurts pricing. The growers do love it though.
Sheri


----------



## rainesridgefarm (Sep 4, 2001)

*rain barrel*

Very profound posts. If houses had rain barrels to collect runoff to water lawns and grey water was reused for flushing most of this would be a non issue. There are many areas in asia that do this now. We are such a entitlement society we feel that it is the other persons issue. We all need to take a roll in this. I have plenty of water but still use a rain barrel for water to the chicken coop. Rain water off the honey house to wash with. put a fine screen on it to keep bugs and leaves out toss in a 1/4 cup of bleach and you are ready to go. like the Nike commercial 'JUST DO IT'


----------



## brooksbeefarm (Apr 13, 2008)

Reclaiming water and recycled water has been going on for over a hundred years or longer. People build a house and go to one side of it, dig a hole and crap in it (septic tank and laterals ). Then go on the other side of the house and drill a well.(for drinking water). The reasoning i hear for this, is that after water runs through 10ft. of sand and gravel it's supposed to purify it. I wonder:scratch:.Jack


----------



## HAB (May 17, 2008)

brooksbeefarm said:


> Reclaiming water and recycled water has been going on for over a hundred years or longer. People build a house and go to one side of it, dig a hole and crap in it (septic tank and laterals ). Then go on the other side of the house and drill a well.(for drinking water). The reasoning i hear for this, is that after water runs through 10ft. of sand and gravel it's supposed to purify it. I wonder:scratch:.Jack



NO WAY 10ft of sand and gravel will purify water. That's why most rural wells are now "Deep" wells of 100 or more feet. Even then chloroform bacteria from human and animal waste can still sometimes be found. Ground water all around this country is constantly being found to be contaminated with chemical and bacterial content even at depth.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

HAB said:


> NO WAY 10ft of sand and gravel will purify water. That's why most rural wells are now "Deep" wells of 100 or more feet. Even then chloroform bacteria from human and animal waste can still sometimes be found.


While I'd agree that 10ft of sand and gravel wouldn't necessarily purify water, I'd argue that, at least in my neck of the woods, deep wells are now common because those deeper aquifers are more dependable. Coliform bacteria in wells is mostly the product of the bacteria 'spilling' into the well. Wells in pastures or too near septic systems are usually at fault. Coliform bacteria cannot survive a trip through the soil to reach even a relatively shallow aquifer. Once it penetrates even a few feet into the soil there is no longer sufficient oxygen for it to survive.


----------



## brooksbeefarm (Apr 13, 2008)

HAB said:


> NO WAY 10ft of sand and gravel will purify water. That's why most rural wells are now "Deep" wells of 100 or more feet. Even then chloroform bacteria from human and animal waste can still sometimes be found. Ground water all around this country is constantly being found to be contaminated with chemical and bacterial content even at depth.


I hope your not going to challenge the great minds sitting on the feed sacks at the local MFA feed store. That's where i got my info. and i have seen what happens to those who don't agree. My well is 340 ft. deep through gumbo and limestone so i don't worry. One thing i see happen alot around here is that when some of my neighbors have their septic pumped out they let them spray it back on their pastures. YUK, don't know if that's a good thing or not?:scratch: Jack


----------

