Cali water shortage, What`s at stake for MMJ ?

[Bulldog11]

This is all a big game to those in power. There is no water shortage, only bad management. Remember, we in Cali are only three years out from one of the wettest seasons on record.......So where is all that water? So much water they were letting the water out of reservoirs due to them overflowing. Well I say, store more water! I know that involves flooding a natural environment, some as beautiful as Yellowstone. However, we need water.

Here in Sonora the water company was charging twice the normal rate if your over last years water usage. They have two reservoirs full, which are used for recreational areas in the summer. They keep the water in the reservoirs until summer is over then release the water to other reservoirs for the public. So where is the shortage?

If that isn't bad enough, the water companies can reach into private properties and claim water as their own, in the case of emergency.....Even though they have an entire lake as back up. For example, the golf course here in Sonora was running out of water and the city wouldn't sell them water in case of an emergency. So they needed to find another source, which they did. The new source was a cave system that was on private land right off the golf course. Before they could pump the water, they needed to test the water, find the total volume of water in the cave system, pipe the water to the golf course. Well, after all this the city came in and said the private seller couldn't sell the golf course water because they might need it in an event of emergency........Anybody notice how often governments use the "emergency" clause on almost anything now?

 

[markscastle]

If the water was on privet property then the city has no claim to it and the land owner should be able to do as he pleases! Our Government(s) have lost all respect for the rights of property ownership ! This is something that should have been put into the Bill of Rights!

 

[Bulldog11]

Yes, unless in a state of emergency remember.........the loop whole

I have to disagree a little with you guys on fracking. I believe it has single handed saved our economy to the worst recession ever, from another depression. Not saying it's good for the environment, but it's been driving America's economy and job growth. I will give it that.

 

[markscastle]

I was warned last year by the game warden that I could have my water rights suspended for a few weeks during the time the fish spawn . I don`t have fish in my creek as it`s got a few water falls they can`t get up but it does run into a larger creek that has trout in it. My water is colder and keeps the other creek from becoming to warm for the trout. I don`t have a big problem with that because I can store enough water to get through on one hand but what bothers me is they could use the same law to stop me from my water rights so my creek would serve water interests of others in the southern part of the state. It isn`t right ! They have the larger population so they can take what ever they want? This is why so many people in Northern Cali want a new state or even to brake away from the United States altogether! This has been brewing from before our state was a territory of the united states. We almost broke away from the United States just before ww2 started and ended the movement as it was a very popular issue along with Oregon and southern Washington State. I believe Alaska and Hawaii were also very interested in joining the movement when Pear harbor got bombed it kind of ended our separate and individual identity for the time.

 

[trippinballz]

Wayyyy interesting to see the differences in how water is allocated/used in Cali vs. CO.

If Cali broke free from the US and didn't use all of that CO River water....do you think your water situation would improve statewide? How so? (we would love this up here.. please break free....LOL) Talk about water from one place going to another....

It seems "Water rights" in Cali come with property ownership. Buy the land..own the water on it or that falls on it. Store it...dam it....use it

In CO the water is separate from the land/not every piece of ground has a water right. If you don't own a water right, you don't own the water on the land. You may have a well right... but chances are it will be a household use only right. (no irrigation/storage/etc) CO sends water to Cali/AZ/NM/KS/NB/OK/TX/and more... Cali sends water where? Oh yeah...to Cali!

Either way.....it is what it is....and I hope ya get some moisture out there......

 

[Seamaiden]

Not necessarily (with regard to water rights/ownership), it's very different in the populous areas and in fact having water & mineral rights was a new thing to me buying up here. As we discussed elsewhere, many do have their rights grandfathered in.

Yes, unless in a state of emergency remember.........the loop whole

I have to disagree a little with you guys on fracking. I believe it has single handed saved our economy to the worst recession ever, from another depression. Not saying it's good for the environment, but it's been driving America's economy and job growth. I will give it that.

I disagree so strongly here. We can't eat money, we can't drink it, it is not vital to life. Fracking destroys that. Being economy focused is screwing our collective goose.

 

[Bulldog11]

I didn't realize Cali got water from Colorado? Thanks for the info, dam Californian's. I been saying for a while we should ship water here. My idea was from Washington st. because our weather systems compliment each other. Then the jet stream hits lower, Cali gets the water. When the jet stream is a little higher, it hits Washington. I figured we could average the rain fall between the two areas, to help fix the water shortage. Didn't realize we already ship water a far distance from Colorado. Thanks again for the info.

Colorado River Aqueduct
The Colorado River Aqueduct, or CRA, is a 242 mi (389 km) water conveyance in Southern California in the United States, operated by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD). The aqueduct impounds water from the Colorado River at Lake Havasu on the California-Arizona border west across the Mojave and Colorado deserts to the east side of the Santa Ana Mountains. It is one of the primary sources of drinking water for Southern California.

Originally conceived by William Mulholland and designed by Chief Engineer Frank E. Weymouth of the MWD, it was the largest public works project in southern California during theGreat Depression. The project employed 30,000 people over an eight-year period and as many as 10,000 at one time.[2]

The system is composed of two reservoirs, five pumping stations, 63 mi (101 km) of canals, 92 mi (148 km) of tunnels, and 84 mi (135 km) of buried conduit and siphons. Average annual throughput is 1,200,000 acre·ft (1.5 km3).[2]

 

[Bulldog11]

I disagree so strongly here. We can't eat money, we can't drink it, it is not vital to life. Fracking destroys that. Being economy focused is screwing our collective goose.

not sure how you feed your family, but I pay for most of my food, with money. You have any articles that prove fracking is bad? Just out of curiosity, some people just repeat things they read off facebook. Would love to see that study, because as of yet, I can't find any proof fracking is back. Please enlighten this poor fool.

 

[Seamaiden]

not sure how you feed your family, but I pay for most of my food, with money. You have any articles that prove fracking is bad? Just out of curiosity, some people just repeat things they read off facebook. Would love to see that study, because as of yet, I can't find any proof fracking is back. Please enlighten this poor fool.

Unfortunately, a HUGE part of the problem I'll in presenting you with what you ask is that oil companies don't have to tell us what chemicals they're using to frack, but I'm thinking maybe you missed a recent story out of the Bay area about it. We don't need fracking to have a viable economy. We need more sustainable energy resources to be developed, and that could, can and would develop economy. EG; Sweden. Subsidies? Yeah, sure, why not? Why not remove soybean and corn subsidies, and start giving them to alternative energy developers, and to develop that infrastructure?

I think this one link is a good place for you to get started. Studies, not study. I have a *lot* more if you like. :)
http://journalistsresource.org/stud...ng-shale-gas-health-effects-research-roundup#

Ok, one more: http://environment.yale.edu/envy/stories/fracking-outpaces-science-on-its-impact

Ewps! Sorry. One more:

<looks embarrassed> http://munews.missouri.edu/news-rel...-may-harm-human-reproduction-and-development/

Please note that I am picking and choosing the news resources carefully. I'm avoiding all sources that align with my beliefs, and going for universities, etc, instead. More... I'm hoping more balanced reporting.

D'oh! http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/health/case_studies/hydrofracking_w.html

 

[Bulldog11]

maybe more studies are needed, you have more to share? That report said a lot, but not backing your argument IMO.

"Hydraulic fracturing — commonly known as “fracking” — has lead to a boom in U.S. energy production, with a number of beneficial effects. According a 2014 report from the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, in states where natural gas fuels a significantly higher proportion of power plants, average electricity prices have fallen. Because natural gas emits far less carbon than coal, fracking can help states meet rules proposed by the EPA in 2013 that limit carbon emissions by power plants. Research has also shown that the new rules could financially benefit states — even those that oppose them — by creating new demand for natural gas. - See more at: http://journalistsresource.org/stud...effects-research-roundup#sthash.cbSME1oK.dpuf"

"While lower electricity prices and a potential cut in greenhouse-gas emissions are good things, it’s essential to better understand and weigh the environmental and health effects of fracking. - See more at: http://journalistsresource.org/stud...effects-research-roundup#sthash.cbSME1oK.dpuf"

"Leakage of shale gas into water supplies isn’t supposed to happen, but reports indicate otherwise." So no proof, just speculation?

"and the impact on local roads and infrastructure can be severe: Heavy trucks must haul in gravel, pipes, water and chemicals, then haul out liquid fuels and waste — anywhere from 600 to 1,000 one-way trips for the fracking phase alone. - See more at: http://journalistsresource.org/stud...effects-research-roundup#sthash.cbSME1oK.dpuf" O no, you mean cars will drive on roads......O my god, the humanity.

I think this one says it all:
"Below is a selection of studies that provide insight into the potential health impacts of shale gas extraction and fracking: - See more at: http://journalistsresource.org/stud...effects-research-roundup#sthash.cbSME1oK.dpuf"
No proof, just "potential helth impacts"

Maybe I read it wrong.......

 

[Seamaiden]

You're picking and choosing what you want to read on this one, Bulldog. Read more, please. No proof, yet? but if we actually knew what was being used, do you think we'd be able to prove it that much more quickly? Cuz I sure do.

I thought the reproductive harm study was fairly cut & dry.

 

[Bulldog11]

I read the entire thing. The reason I didn't quote any further is because everything from that point on was speculation, which I quoted directly.

I can see the dangers, for sure. All I ask is the evidence gets laid out before people condem an entire industy which is vitally important to the United States. I believe in innocent before PROVEN guilty.

The world needs energy right? It seems fracking is cleaner than both drilling for oil, natural gas and coal production. So what is the other answer? Solar power? I think Barry and Solyndra proved solar energy isn't up to the task. The world, IMO, isn't black and white. You have to weigh the pro's and cons. We stop oil, coal, natural gas and fracking, the United States doesn't exist this time next year. So what' the happy medium? No idea. I just choose to give credit where credit is due, and fracking has saved America from an even more historic crash. If evidence comes out that fracking is polluting our waters to the point of poisoning humans, I would change my mind in a heart beat. However, it would need to be presented in a factual matter, not possible what ifs.

If it were in our drinking water, it would be extremely easy to detect and prove harmful. That hasn't happened to my knowledge.

Just my two cents.

 

[SpiderK]

...........“The loop hole refers to the Energy Pol icy Act of 2005, which exempts the hydraulic fracturing process, also known as fracking, from federal over sight under the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974. Then Vice President Dick Cheney did have a hand in getting the exemption put into the Energy Policy Act. He chaired President Bush’s Energy Policy Task Force, which recommended fracking be excluded. And Cheney is a former Halliburton executive. Hallibur ton, by the way, began fracking in the 1940’s to extract for oil. But the use of fracking, com bined with horizontal drilling, has only recently been used to mine shale gas.The loop hole does have an exception. If drilling companies use diesel fuel to frack a well, they do have to get a federal permit.

Also amended in the 2005 Energy Pol icy Act was the Clean Water Act. Congress enacted the CWA back in 1972 as a way to regulate discharges into the country’s rivers and streams. The CWA was amended in 1987 to include storm water run-off. But oil and gas production are exempted from those regulations. And in the 2005 Energy Pol icy Act, those exemp tions included oil and gas con struction. Environmentalists worry about run-off from well pads, pipelines and con struc tion sites." ..........

 

[mojavegreen]

fracking? we have no idea of the environmental dangers involved. i do know they consume massive amounts of water in their processes. they are taking more than their fair share so as to maximize their profits! people's private wells are running dry. petrol is a massive consumer of water. who owns that water? petro companies? no, you can keep your fracking. i'll ride a bike to work.:D

 

[Bulldog11]

Lets not forget about the NSA using a million plus gallons a day in the driest state in the United States to cool their super spy computers. That one rubs me the wrong way!

 

[trippinballz]

I didn't realize Cali got water from Colorado? Thanks for the info, dam Californian's.

More info.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_River_Compact

Note the percentages of water allotted. California gets/uses MORE water from CO than CO itself uses! Amazing stuff that folks just don't think about.

Even more amazing to me is that we have a very dynamic water rights system here that accounts for every drop...and as residents we cannot use the water without a right...yet in Cali...who uses our water as well..there are no controls and you can dig a pond/damn the creek/do whatever you please on your own land? Make no sense here...but it obviously is what it is...

for now. Gonna expect that augmentation plans and well metering are soon in Ca's future statewide...as it is here in many areas.

Good luck out there.........

 

[Bulldog11]

I would love to see some meter reading jack ass try to come on my property and meter my well. That individual will have a very bad day.

 

[trippinballz]

LOL. Here the state will just weld your wellhead shut and nix your right to have a well whatsoever if you decided you were above complying. The Water folks have any/all right to enter your land legally here...and retaliation towards them would have you drinking from the community fountain at the prison in Canon City PRONTO. LOL

One of my properties has a well meter and you must record/notify the state of how much water you used 2X a year...the other has no meter on the well. The difference is that at the one place with the meter..there have been historic trials and court cases over the water and the court decreed that ALL water must be accounted for. At the other place...there hasn't been a challenge that would bring about such an action but I wouldn't be surprised to see the ripple from Cali's drought change that fact since we evidently must account for our uses and you Cali guys are just...um..."special". LOL

good luck out there.....

 

[Seamaiden]

<cough>Chinatown.</cough>

Again, to reiterate, the HUGE problem someone like me has proving my argument is that the chemicals used are considered proprietary, and therefore drilling/oil companies don't have to report them. Yet higher rates of illnesses are noted as proximity to fracking locations is increased. Coincidence, really? Again, ask the folks of Hinkley what they think of all of this.

No one will *ever* convince me that money is more important than water.

 

[Bulldog11]

Chemicals are proprietary, for sure. However, if those chemicals were in drinking water it would take a simple lab test for under 500$ to identify the individual compounds that would make that water unsafe. I have yet to see any water tests with those results.....Why would one ask somebody in Hinkley? Does somebody in Hinkley have evidence? I am not saying a simple test would show what compounds they add to the water in it's original form, however it would show the individual compounds and if they are a hazard or not.

I get my water tested at my house once or twice a year. Shouldn't be that hard for these people that are supposedly victims of water pollution.

@Seamaiden - If so much water has been contaminated, then were is the simple evidence?

With all that said, money will never be more important than water. If it's black and white like that, then that is my answer. However, we do all realize that 99% of America pays for the water they drink right?