7thriv

You would think that maintaining an adequate water supply would be the sort of bi-partisan no-brainer gov't initiative that would not require too much attention from the newspapers, but CA's politics are so dysfunctional that it's tough to deliver even the basics: Parched State Searches For Ways To Expand the Water Supply

Water is anything but a simple issue in California, where politicians have long fought over how to divvy up one of the West's scarcest resources.

With some of California's reservoirs now holding as little as 21% of capacity, 60 urban water districts have instituted mandatory water conservation, up from six last summer. The current drought is hurting the state more than inthe past, partly because California's population has grown to 38 million people, from 29 million two decades ago.

State officials warn the situation could worsen. "If next year is average or below average in water, we'll have very serious problems," said Lester Snow, director of the California Department of Water Resources.

The linked article describes the work of a mysterious seer known as a "federal judge," who apparently has the power to dictate where water, the most ubiquitous substance on earth, shall or shall not go:

One complication is a thicket of recent environmental restrictions that curtail how much water can be used.

In 2007, a federal court in Fresno ordered water managers to protect the ecosystem of the San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta, in part by reducing how much water is pumped through it. That cut water shipments from the mountains of Northern California to arid Southern California by about 30%.

Mr. Snow estimates roughly a quarter of the state's current water shortfall -- which he calculates at about two million acre-feet -- is due to the protections. An acre-foot is 326,000 gallons, or the average amount of water a family of four uses in a year.

Here's a newsflash for the reporters and editors who worked on this story. Federal judges don't just wake up in the morning and start issuing orders. They are always responding to lawsuits and asked for a particular ruling. Sorry to have to spell this out, but there are plaintiffs bringing lawsuits resulting in the sort of environmetally correct rulings like the one above, and their names desrve to be well known when questions as to the cause of CA's decline is discussed. There is a mini-industry (well, maxi-industry) of environmental lobbyists, non-profits, and legal affairs groups bringing these lawsuits and then scurrying away when voters start wondering why their water supply is always in a perilous state. At that point, all the political class has to do is shrug its collective shoulders and blame "the federal judge" whenever they are asked why it's so hard to deliver water in the state.

Most people in CA would say they are environmentalists, but what they really mean is "I like blu skies, going bike riding on the weekends, and don't want to live next door to a rendering plant." I don't think most Californians would say they support the sort of draconian environmental regulations that result in (1) the diversion of 30% of CA's water supply; (2) a 25% shortfall in their water supply and; (3) the expenditure of billions for construction of a canal to get around the killer regs.

And, you're not going to believe this, but any attempt to increase water supplies through any sort of construction will be met with the inevitable:

But even as Republicans and Democrats have hammered out a water package in a rare show of unity here, any big-ticket water projects are likely to face intense opposition from environmental groups.

The groups say California already has 1,400 dams and that lawmakers need to fix leaky pipes, as well as better manage state groundwater.

"It's not dams that are needed," said Jim Metropulos, a Sacramento lobbyist for the Sierra Club. "You need to expand the existing water supply."

Sheesh! Who made these guys the last word on California's water supply, anyway? No dams for you! Dams are for unsophisticated states like Arizona!

The Governator has expressed his determination to get this done in his own inimitable way:

"We're going to get that water done this year," said Gov. Schwarzenegger last month at a budget speech in Fresno, Calif. "This is the year of the water. It's that simple."

Last year was high speed rail, the budget, and global warming, all of which have apparently been resolved. I feel thirsty already