Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

samrock

(590 posts)
Thu Apr 2, 2015, 10:03 AM Apr 2015

I will not take serious California's water conservation steps until....

Actions are taken on crops allowed to be planted in the state,, 80% of the water used in California is by agriculture. Until the drought is declared over the planing of rice and cotton ( why these are allowed in an arid area is beyond me.. I know I know.. because they can and greed rules) should be prohibited and all planting of new almond orchards should also be halted.. BUT that would piss off big corporate farms, therefore not likely to happen no matter how bad the drought gets.. BUT until it does I will not take the steps being taken seriously..

12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

HassleCat

(6,409 posts)
1. Upside Down
Thu Apr 2, 2015, 10:13 AM
Apr 2015

They're fining people for not installing low-flow toilets. Then I drive through any of the agricultural valleys, and I see old style irrigation, spraying water into the air so half of it evaporates. They declare rice a "high value agricultural commodity" so they can continue to use $100 worth of water to grow $1 worth of rice. I don't mind irrigation for agriculture, but they need to get serious about what they grow, and how they irrigate it. This will be a great summer. Trillions of gallons of water will be sprayed on alfalfa fields, and the cops will be putting handcuffs on some mom who turned on her sprinkler to cool off the kids.

 

Sparhawk60

(359 posts)
2. Growing Rice is the Real WTF??
Thu Apr 2, 2015, 10:15 AM
Apr 2015

" Rice cultivation is well-suited to countries and regions with low labor costs and HIGHT RAINFALL, as it is labor-intensive to cultivate and REQUIRES AMPLE WATER."

Why in the world would any one plant rice in California?

 

Daemonaquila

(1,712 posts)
10. Don't fool yourself that it's low-water.
Thu Apr 2, 2015, 11:39 AM
Apr 2015

Yes, it's lower water than in other parts of the world, but it still uses crazy amounts of water. Just go visit the fields in Texas and Louisiana. It should not be grown in CA.

Brother Buzz

(36,428 posts)
11. Many rice farmers are not planting this year and are selling their water to Los Angeles
Thu Apr 2, 2015, 11:48 AM
Apr 2015

The farmers are being offered $700 Per Acre Foot

Just last year, rice farmers were amazed when they were offered $500 per acre foot. This new price means growers will earn a lot more money on the fields they don’t plant, making water itself the real cash crop in California.


*****


Rice is grown in regions that normally have tons of water; areas that are often under water during the normal wet season. California rice is planted by air then mechanically harvested, and is no a whole lot more labor intensive than growing wheat or barley.

BlueCaliDem

(15,438 posts)
3. Until the very wealthy California elite stop hogging up the water! THEY are the problem.
Thu Apr 2, 2015, 10:30 AM
Apr 2015
[font color="black" size="8" face="face"]Meet California's Biggest Water Hogs[/font]


New data shows residents of some wealthy Southern California cities use more than 10 times as much water per day as their northern counterparts.

*snip*

Who are the biggest water consumers? From September to October, residents of Rancho Santa Fe, a San Diego County enclave often listed as one of the nation’s richest zip codes, used 584.4 gallons of water per person. Per day.

San Franciscans, on the other hand, consumed a scant 45.7 gallons of water per techie daily, the lowest rate in the state, according to the data.

That means although the Rancho Santa Fe area water district only has 2.3 percent of the population of San Francisco, its customers use the equivalent of 22 percent of the water delivered to the Bay Area metropolis.

Los Angeles residents consumed 92.8 gallons per person a day, for those of you keeping score in the perpetual L.A.–San Francisco rivalry.

http://www.takepart.com/article/2014/11/04/meet-californias-biggest-water-hogs


I'd be more inclined to believe Gov. Brown's seriousness regarding California's drought if he would include in his order that the California elite drop their water usage as a rule, and not tie that into "higher rates" - which they can easily afford while the vast majority of Californians cannot.

raouldukelives

(5,178 posts)
4. Up north the wineries are really taking a toll.
Thu Apr 2, 2015, 10:33 AM
Apr 2015

Aside from the huge amount of wildlife they kill. They take water directly from creeks & rivers illegally and if they are a caught (a big if) the fine they are assessed costs less than it would be if they acquired the water legally in the first place.
If people truly value Redwoods, animal life & conservation of what little is left of our natural world, avoiding California wines is a great start.

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
5. My guess is about 5 million gallons of water per day are drunk by California milk cows
Thu Apr 2, 2015, 11:01 AM
Apr 2015

that's a rough estimate based on California dairy herd and the amount of water used by a lactating cow per day, and that's everyday, day after day...all year long... I went by herd size that's from 2013, so the herds may have been downsized in face of the drought

I think it's important to consider what is 'commonly known' about ag water use... A person in a car going down a highway can actually see the water sprayed onto fields, water consumption by livestock isn't nearly so conspicuous but it may be quite substantial

I'm not sure what irrigation of cotton vs dairy would look like for California. Similarly I have no idea about rice culture in California...but if it involves flooding fields early in the growing cycle that would likely appear as enormous amounts of water per acre.
It would be interesting to know how the water uses compares.

It would also be interesting to know how each type of water use is supported by the public. I think it's probably a safe bet to suppose the uses are not supported equally.



hobbit709

(41,694 posts)
6. Elimination of Californian rainmakers and using drip irrigation would help too
Thu Apr 2, 2015, 11:05 AM
Apr 2015

Those giant sprinklers waste about 90% of the water used.

procon

(15,805 posts)
7. don't forget alfalfa.
Thu Apr 2, 2015, 11:23 AM
Apr 2015

I live in the Mojave desert where the only water source is from deep aquifers that are fed by mountain snows. Alfalfa growers are mostly out of state, even international investment groups that are only here for the money. They sink a well to serve several fields in a 1 sq mile site they can lease on the cheap, and after they freshly till virgib desert land, then build a berm around the each smaller fields, flooding it with water ever 3-4 days.

They don't care if water breaks occur and washes across roads or creates streams that cut through the desert. Or that water runoff is polluted with pesticides and fertilizer. The water is free for the taking, even though locals like my comminuty based water company is trying to negotiate an equitable use plan to keep the giant water users outsoide our area from sucking the whole thing dry and leaving us without any source of water.

samrock

(590 posts)
9. Over using the aquifers is a BIG danger..
Thu Apr 2, 2015, 11:38 AM
Apr 2015

Aquifers are NOT like sponges.. When a sponge is drained of water you can refill it.. When an aquifer is drained it collapses upon it self. When that happens it is gone! done!! it can NOT be refilled.. I hope we wake up before we destroy many aquifers in California...

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I will not take serious C...