California Is Considering Permanent Water Restrictions

Photo: AP
Photo: AP

California officials are considering whether the time has come for permanent water restrictions.

Advertisement

Folks in the Golden State remember all too well when their four-year-long drought forced them to watch their daily water use. The drought emergency officially ended in April 2017, but it’s returned to parts of the state, and the snowpack is crazy low. Governor Jerry Brown was clear he wanted water conservation to remain a “way of life” for Californians—but wasteful water use is up in some cities.

Now, the California Water Resources Board is deciding whether that way of life should become more, well, formalized. The board will decide by April 17 (after pushing back the date from Tuesday to extend the public comment period) whether the state should regulate its water the way it did under the drought. That includes no watering of lawns, no hosing down sidewalks, and no automatic glasses of water with dinner—or potentially facing a $500 fine.

Advertisement

However, water district representatives aren’t too happy about this proposal, reports The Associated Press. While some don’t take issue with the restrictions themselves, they are taking issue with how the state is planning to make those restrictions legal: under the state Constitution’s prohibition on the “waste or unreasonable use” of water.

“Erratic individuals can occupy great positions of power in government, and you had better believe they will occupy your chair someday,” said Jackson Minasian, an attorney for Stanford Vina Ranch Irrigation Co., a local water company that’s defended water rights against the state water board in the past, to the AP. “Their view of what is ‘waste and unreasonable use’ will be radically different than yours.”

Regardless what the water resources board decides, farmers who depend on the federal government for their water won’t be receiving as much as they might’ve expected: Those who receive water from the Central Valley Project will receive just 20 percent of what they requested.

“Given what we know today, and what we see in the forecast, we must be very conservative with our allocation,” said David Murillo, the Mid-Pacific regional director for the Bureau of Reclamation, which owns the Central Valley Project, in a press release. “If this lack of rain and snow continues, we could very well be right back in drought operations.”

Advertisement

This Murillo’s got a point. Climate change makes everything so much more unpredictable. California’s already seen what can happen when it’s not conservative with its water resources. As climate change throws more stress on these water systems by reducing rainfall, states like California will have to make difficult decisions around water use.

Yessenia Funes is climate editor at Atmos Magazine. She loves Earther forever.

Share This Story

Get our newsletter

DISCUSSION

dnapl
Dense non aqueous phase liquid

This is going to be really interesting going forward. Trump’s infrastructure plan for transportation and utilities relies on sources of investment other than the state and federal governments. This is called public private partnerships.

Water investors make money on metered use and/or usury rates. Water restriction plans prior to privatization may require higher flat rates in addition to usage rates. The problem with flat rates is they don’t incentivize water conservation as much as use rates. That is, the user ends up paying a large bill regardless of how much water is used.

Private water companies simply want to pump and sell. Conservation isn’t in a private entity’s wheelhouse. Neither is really quality standards. It’s the old wagon of shit sales plan.

I recommend following California water closely as Trump further unveils his infrastructure plan. Trump is even OPMing for Australian pension funds for his US infrastructure plan. The last thing we got from Australia was Rupert Murdoch. And look at what that dickhead did to our country. Kangaroo fuckers. That was satire.