What a full lake looks like

[Scott V]

Incase you have forgotten what a full lake looks like in California, here is Pyramid lake in southern California. I stopped to take a few pictures on my way down south last Sunday. Is this where some of our water is going? All I know is it must be nice to have a full lake.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y85/PsychoZ/Pyramid/IMGP0976.jpg

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y85/PsychoZ/Pyramid/IMGP0977.jpg

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y85/PsychoZ/Pyramid/IMGP0978.jpg

[Phil Synhorst]

A good portion of it is going that way. One of my customers in Vacaville went to San Diego about 2 months ago. He said he kept seeing commercials on TV about saving water, that their source, Lake Oroville, was in a severe drought.

[Bill Kiene semi-retired]

That's probably our Nor Cal water?

[Darian]

Believe it or not, there's another, larger lake on the opposite side of I-5 (not visible from the highway) just south of Pyramid called Castaic Lake. It's full too. As are most of the SoCal reservoirs that connect to the Canals.

And with all of that, it's only 15-20% of all of the water imports from the Delta. The balance goes to San Joaquin Vally agriculture for growing cotton.... Happy drought folks. ](*,) ](*,) ](*,)

[Black Cloud]

Darians right, the majority of the water in the valley goes for COTTON. A huge amount of water could be saved if another crop was grown. Big ag rules and they only pay a fraction of what we pay.

James

[flyfishingdad]

Black Cloud,
Please do not blame agriculture for our water problems in the state. Agriculture is the largest industry in the state and provides a large percentage of this nations food at low costs. You are very wrong about all the water going for cotton, in fact, cotton acreage has declinded from around 500,000 acres in 2004 to a projected 125,000 in 2009. Your comment on cheap water is wrong too. Water is a high cost component in the production of any crop, but more importantly crops do not grow and yield without water. Your comment suggests that you believe that agriculture can change crops on a whim and provide you with water. What about the investments to grow crops and the ability of your land to grow new crops and what about markets? Blame the state elected officials for our water crisis not agriculture.

[dave earl]

so flyfishingdad, is it your contention that farmers pay the same market rate for water that the rest of us do?
Most people I know don't think that's true.
Most people think agriculture's water bill is subsidized therefore thwarting the effects of a real market

[Darian]

FFD,.... I'm at a loss to understand how your assertion that agricultural activities are not at the center of water problems in this state is accurate.... This is a highly complex issue. However, I believe that for no other reason that agri-business is so large, it cannot deny the negative impacts it has had on the economy and environment of this state. Since we cannot address every issue involved in water problems here, I'll address only a few. :cool:

I concur that water grows crops and that cotton is not the only crop grown by central valley growers. Further, that agri-business is one of the largest enterprises and produces low cost food/non-food products. :cool: However, nothing in the posts that I've read indicates that the author thought that crops may be changed at will. What was said was that agri-business (water distributors/growers) in the central valley (specifically, the San Joaquin Valley) use the largest portion of water from the federal/state water projects (anywhere from 80 - 85 %, annually). How about considering retiring some of the land that adds natural pollutants (mineral salts like selenium, mercury, etc.) from production :?: :?: Thereby, reducing polluted run-off from agricultural fields.

I can't disagree with your point about water being one of the higher cost components for growing but that cost is subsidized by tax dollars or it would cost a lot more than it currently does. Increased cost of irrigation water might encourage more efficient usage.... In normal rainfall years, water allocations for agri-business are always met while others are always encouraged to conserve.

Cost rates for water distributors are supposedly set by agreements with providers that establish prices for periods ranging from 20 to 50 years (as has been published many times). Surely that results in lower costs of units delivered over time. I've read that rate was as low as $28 per acre foot. :eek: Certainly this price is below the market rates for most others. :rolleyes: Water is treated as a commodity for sale to the highest bidder now days. A distributor/grower may choose to sell their excess water allocation to downstream users, reducing the overall costs again. Not to mention crop subsidies and tax breaks.... :-\" :-\"

IMHO, the fact that most of the water used by central valley growers is supplied by the pumps in the South Delta and that it is by far larger than that supplied to any other distributor from that source, means that agri-business stands at the center of "the problem" as it currently exists in the Delta (the largest single estuary on the Pacific Coast) and, therefore, in this state.

Does that mean I want to close agri-business down :?: :?: Absolutely not. It means that it's time to make agri-business accountable/responsible for the negatives they create. If the shoe fits, they need to wear it. =; =;

[Bernard]

For what it's worth, So. Cal. mountains are made of such loose and unstable "stuff" that every time I pass this lake, I can all but see the silt building inch by inch, second by second esp. during winter storms. I have walked the miles above the lake along the primary feeder and as you near the lake, you are on a sand bar like none other imagined. Other smaller dams in the same mountain range or geological region have suffered to the point of uselessness as a result of the accumulation of silt. I am not sure if they can/will ever dredge this lake at the pace that it fills. I vaguely recall a rumor that the lake is at a substantially smaller degree of original capacity due to all the silt. Hopefully this brings some comfort.

B
p.s. Speaking of lakes that never seem low, I grew up fishing Lafayette Reservoir. Shoreline growth abounding and pretty surrounding hills ....

[Black Cloud]

FFD
I have no problem with ag as a food source. The problem with cotton is it is water intensive and is a pesticide heavy crop...I think everyone on this board understands how that effects our waterways. And you are correct about cotton acreage going down, mainly because the crop is totally irrigated making production costs higher than the rest of the U.S. Also the 25,00 cotton farmers in the U.S. are heavily subsidized at a rate of $2 billion per year.

[OceanSunfish]

IMO, CA is now ungovernable. It's time to split it into two.

The question is: what half needs the other more?

Fire away!

BTW, nice pictures of a very full lake. Is there a sign at the inlet that says 'such and such river' or is there just a big old pipe?

[Tracy Chimenti]

It's well known that AG takes 85% of the developed water IN ca. I'm Not against the farmers, as I am a small farmer as well.

I want to see and end to water export increases--- I want to save the salmon and steelhead before they're gone. I have been a farm bureau member for 15-years and the corporate farming industry is in complete and utter denial. Last week's issue had an editorial (or a letter) about how efficient and forward thinking CA Ag has been, example given: the Kern Water Bank. PEOPLE... this has been documented thoroughly in journals as a WATER HEIST! The corporate farming machine really thinks we are ignorant.

I would love to see major coastal communites-- LA, San Diego, San Francisco go with nuclear powered de-sal and return about 2-million a/ft back to the north state to enhance the nurseries and livability of the rivers. The big farmers, like the rest of us, need to make some changes, but right now I'd rather take it from the cities. We need the food. There is a massive ocean coming to the doorstep and all we have to do is tap it and our aquatic ecology problems are under control.

We need the food. We just don't need any more INCREASES IN EXPORTS.

[troutnut@pacbell.net]

The Environmental Water Account is a taxpayer-subsidized scheme that enables corporate agriculture to get around state and federal endangered species acts.



2 million acre feet is 2 Folsom lakes!

2 million acre feet is 2 Clear Lakes!

Lake Almanor at full capacity is 2 million acre feet+/-.

Lake Berryessa at full pool is 1.6 million acre feet.

or it is enough water to cover the entire delta region including all the islands 2 1/2 feet deep!

If you want to see true corruption, read about our "friends" in BIG AG.

http://www.citizen.org/documents/Water_Heist_lo-res.pdf