Eber: Soap on a rope

California voters, several years ago, approved $2.7 billion to build water storage facilities—the Democrats refuse to spend the money.  Guv Newsom is spending over $300 million of our money to demolish dams in Oregon—that bring water and energy to California.  California government allows millions of acres a day of water to flow into the ocean, mostly to protect some fish or too lazy to save the water.  Literally, the active policy of Sacramento is to LIMIT water for the people of the State.

President Trump offered Federal funds to expand the Shasta Dam by 100 feet—no State money was needed—and Guv Brown and Lt. Guv Newsom turned it down.

“So what can be done to improve the quality and quantity of water throughout the State?  While conservation of existing resources will continue to play a large role in making allocations to agricultural and residential needs, such work does not provide long term solutions.

Neither does construction of desalinization plants.  While these facilities prove to be popular with environmental groups, they are expensive to operate and currently do not offer enough output to change existing conditions.  In addition these desalinization plants require a huge amount of energy to operate.  Solar and wind power sources do not make even a minor dent powering these huge projects in Southern California.

Water is available—California Democrats do not want you to have it.

Soap on a rope by Richard Eber

Richard Eber, Exclusive to the California Political News and Views, 10/8/21 

As a child the gift of choice for my Grandmothers was soap on a rope. When Nana and Nam, received this present they always said “Richie, how did you know?  This was exactly what I wanted” Years later when these ladies passed, we found drawers filled with these items.

My Mom said these ladies didn’t have the heart to tell me that my gifts were unwanted. Instead they always chirped, “The thought that counts is all we care about”

A similar situation exists in California today in the way we are handling of water production to meet current and future needs.  While the Golden State might be winning ecological thought that counts award, at they are destroying our way of life in doing so.

For years Progressive leaders in charge of California politics have surrendered their authority to environmentalist groups to monitor the use of H2O.  Instead of building new reservoirs, increasing the production of existing ones, and enlarging underground storage, they have utilized bureaucratic road blocks to stifle progress.

A good example is adding to the height of Lake Shasta Reservoir by 18 1/2 feet. Doing this could provide 200 billion gallons more each year to the residents of California.  Since this proposal was presented by former President Donald Trump, it was rejected out of hand by Gavin Newsom.  In addition environmentalists have used the California Wild and Scenic Rivers Act passed in 1968 to block this project should it come to fruition

Coalitions of fisherman, Native Americans, and environmentalists have inserted themselves at Mount Shasta and in other parts of the State.  As a result virtually nothing gets done while water storage capacity shrinks during the current draught.

Indicative of this is the vast majority of funding from the 7.5 billion dollars allocated in 2014 to stockpile additional water resources. Thus far most of the funds have been spent has been used for improving existing sources and for ecological uses such as saving fish.  Increasing water capacity has not been a priority.

As a result more pressure has been placed on utilizing (rationing) water use.  This has been found in the residential, agricultural, and industrial sectors of the economy.  As the draught continues, people are taking a closer look at what needs to be done to meet current and future needs.

No current problems can be solved blaming climate change for all that ails us.  While weather patterns play a major role with water production, it is a known fact that California has a long record of feast or famine with precipitation levels over the last 300 years.

With this said, in addition to increasing water storage, we must consider:

  • Better use of groundwater resources: This means diverting run-off to ground water basins rather than flowing to the sea.
  • Improved flood management:  By building up levees in flood plains such as the Sacramento River, this assists with both flood control and increasing underground water storage.
  • Building means of water conveyance:  Often during wet periods, it is not possible to capture run-off and send it to areas that are experiencing a shortage of water.  Improvements are badly needed for the California Aqueduct System, Friant Kern Canal, and other neglected means of transporting water resources.
  • Better Forest Management:  Experts have stated that improved management of the forests will improve stream flow thus allow for additional water to flow into reservoirs.  Also, having fewer forest fires will also improve conditions in watersheds throughout the state.

Of course the elephant in the closet that will play a large role in determining expansion of water resources in the State is what if anything the State will do diverting run-off from the Sacramento River basin to the Southern California.  Several ideas from a peripheral canal to a massive tunnel have been proposed over the years.

Such remedies have proven to be unpopular, especially in the North. It does not appear that any sort of a consensus will take place soon.   It is also thought that even if an agreement could be reached, lawsuits would halt any project for at least 25 years.

So what can be done to improve the quality and quantity of water throughout the State?  While conservation of existing resources will continue to play a large role in making allocations to agricultural and residential needs, such work does not provide long term solutions.

Neither does construction of desalinization plants.  While these facilities prove to be popular with environmental groups, they are expensive to operate and currently do not offer enough output to change existing conditions.  In addition these desalinization plants require a huge amount of energy to operate.  Solar and wind power sources do not make even a minor dent powering these huge projects in Southern California.

So what is Gavin Newsom doing other than imposing Draconian rationing programs for California residents?

Remember, it was the Governor who opposed expanding the capacity of Shasta reservoir. Even worse he has played a major role in the agreement to tear down dams on the Klamath River.  Doing this would reduce flow into the Sacramento Delta and cause additional problems to this ecologically threatened area.

This scenario involves Warren Buffet, who stands to make millions from the destruction of the Klamath dams. This is a vivid example of how borrowing from Peter to pay Paul asserts itself when formulating water policy.

Every new project involving water impacts another area.  Cause and effect are always going to exist.   The question is how different needs can be met.  Political leaders need to emerge who understand this complex subject.

More than anything decision making should be in the public sector rather than with the courts.  Demand is so great to increase the supply of water that screwing around for another generation of legal entanglements will have dire consequences for the State.

Poor decision making in this critical area by political hacks such as Gavin Newsom won’t play. Donations to political campaigns and maintaining support from environmental extremists, does not provide solutions for what lies ahead.

No longer can “It’s the thought that counts” be at the forefront of determining future water policy. If this trend continues, other tasks will be found for soap on a rope.

About Stephen Frank

Stephen Frank is the publisher and editor of California Political News and Views. He speaks all over California and appears as a guest on several radio shows each week. He has also served as a guest host on radio talk shows. He is a fulltime political consultant.

Comments

  1. Richard Cathcart says

    The coast-sited desalination “cure-all” is not useful. Any freshwater produced must be pumped UPHILL through costly new pipelines–systems separated from existing facilities. The depredations of Newsom and the Democratic Party are becoming ever more obvious–no potable water in pipes someday if the reservoirs continue to shallow. Glossy pamphlets from various regional water authorities feature smiling socialites and other technically uneducated persons. Yet, these are people making consumer-relevant distribution and sale decisions that affect many in this State. These ungifted but wealthy persons toddy to Sacramento and their Elite-class peers, not the people on the farms, ranches and small inland cities. Folks, what we have here is an “inversion of professionalism” that is detrimental to life, liberty and the the pursuit of happiness.

  2. Dr. Trent Saxton says

    U-Haul is an American moving equipment and storage rental company, based in Phoenix, Arizona, that has been in operation since 1945. their number is 1-800-GO-U-HAUL. (1-800-468-4285} Need I say more?

  3. A passing thought. What if the San Andreas-Cascadia rendered this all moot?

Speak Your Mind

*