Drought: It's Never Really Over

The Merc/Times had a piece last Sunday that is still wiggling in my brain here on Friday.  The headline is "When is 'over' really over?  Answer isn't simple".  The simple-on-its-face answer is

Simply put: The drought could end this year, according to state water officials. But for that to happen, as California enters the fifth year of the worst drought in the state's history, rains will have to continue arriving in pounding, relentless waves through April to fill depleted reservoirs and dry rivers and push the Sierra snowpack to at least 150 percent of normal.

After some back and forth commentary, we get to the brain-wiggler that has bedeviled me all week

Others say California needs to make up the sizable rainfall deficit over the past four years, which almost certainly won't happen this winter. Other experts say that California has to replace billions of gallons of overpumped groundwater to have a true recovery -- which will take decades...NASA scientists using satellite data estimate that California is 12 trillion gallons of water short because of the drought -- in rivers, creeks, snowpack and, most importantly, in underground aquifers that have been pumped at record levels by Central Valley farmers. Groundwater experts say that will take DECADES to recover. And it might not ever happen.

I'm no water official, geologist or meteorologist, but I think I can read the tea leaves and I did back in June.  We will never have enough.  So planners, electeds and miscellaneous bureaucrats should get their heads around this and stop business-as-usual.  Perhaps this Hoover Institute poll will be the catalyst.  Scroll down to page 25 where you see "Deal with the state's water problem" beats out "Deal with global warming" by 40% -  77% to 37%.  Yo, Jerry!

Comments

[Joe]

The SacBee offers this today:

“They took the governor’s advice and cut back on their water use during the drought,” she said. “Now, they want something else. Naturally, they don’t want to have to water it.”

Those conversations with perplexed homeowners spurred a new arboretum series showcasing easy-care, low-water plants for Sacramento Valley gardeners: Life After Lawn.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/entertainment/living/home-garden/article54790445.html#emlnl=Morning_Newsletter#storylink=cpy
--------------------

The problem with this is I DON'T WANT "life after lawn" or life after trees, rose bushes, hedges or anything else alive around my house. For what? To accomodate a bunch of ugly "rack and stack" apartments that we don't have enough street or school capacity for to begin with?

[Peter Garrison]

Exactly: Drove down 1-5: Signs posted along the farmland: "Dams not trains."

[Steve]

What do you think goes into our water supply now? Fish do it in the water. Birds poop in the water. Grow up people.

[pat giorni]

And that's why cholormine is added. There's nothing sexier than Typhus and Typhoid.

[Joe]

It seems that little factoid in the original post about it taking decades of sort-of-normal rainfall to recover still hasn't penetrated many people's minds including the SacBee which seems surprised to write:

In another sign that California’s drought has eased but the state’s water system is far from fully recovered, federal regulators announced Friday that Sacramento Valley farmers would get full water deliveries for the upcoming growing season, but many San Joaquin Valley growers would face another year of severe shortages.

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, in an eagerly anticipated announcement, outlined the initial 2016 water allocations from the Central Valley Project, the federal government’s massive network of reservoirs, pumps and canals.

The results after a relatively wet winter and early spring: Rice growers and others north of the Delta can expect 100 percent of their contracted water deliveries. That represents a significant improvement over last year, when even those farmers with some of the state’s most senior water rights lost more than 25 percent of the water they would receive in a non-drought year.

The picture is far less rosy below the federal pumping station near Tracy that supplies farmers south of the Delta. The sprawling agricultural districts on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley were told they’re getting only 5 percent of their contract supply.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article69451732.html#storylink=cpy

[Joe]

Hot off the SacBee presses:

In a major shift in California’s urban water policy, state regulators Monday issued proposed conservation rules that would lift the mandatory 25 percent statewide water cuts in place since last June.

Instead, urban water agencies across the state would be required to conserve on a sliding scale tailored to their unique water supply conditions. A draft of the new targets released Monday by the State Water Resources Control Board would allow districts to “self-certify” how much water they expect to have in their supply assuming three additional years of drought, and the level of conservation necessary to ensure they do not run out of water.

Districts would be required to reduce water use by an amount equal to their projected shortfall. For example, in a district where three more dry years would leave a district 10 percent short of anticipated supply, the mandatory conservation target would be 10 percent.

The release of the draft rules came on the same day Gov. Jerry Brown issued a new executive order declaring that drought conditions persist and that the state must take permanent action to mitigate the likelihood of more frequent droughts.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article76553182.html#storylink=cpy
______________________

Without some meaningful revision of development rules (yes, you ABAG) this is just so much hot air.