In sweeping water curtailments stretching from Fresno to the Oregon state line, cities and growers in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta watershed have been ordered to stop pumping from rivers and streams.
The cutbacks, announced today by the State Water Resources Control Board, will affect about 4,500 water rights in the Delta watershed, including 400 or more held by 212 public water systems, beginning Wednesday. But they’re concentrated around the San Joaquin River and its tributaries, where state officials expect “significant, very deep cuts.”
[...]
California’s water rights system operates on the basis of seniority — those with the oldest claims are typically the last to be cut back. But even those with rights in the San Joaquin watershed that date back to 1900, before California enacted its water rights law, are expected to be hit with the curtailment orders.
[...]
Public water systems that could be affected by the curtailments include the cities of Lodi and Vallejo, and San Francisco’s Regional Water System, according to a water board document. Many cities have a variety of water sources, such as groundwater and stored supplies, and it is not immediately clear how much water they will lose.
[...]
The news of the curtailments comes as Californians once again fell short of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s entreaties to conserve water. New data released today shows households and businesses in cities and towns increased water use by 17.6% in April compared to two years ago.
Urban water use decreased in northern coastal and mountain regions by about 10 to 14% and flatlined in the San Francisco Bay Area. But it increased everywhere else — from 2.2% in the Sacramento River area, to more than 40% in the deserts of southeast California. The increase once again cut into the state’s total water savings since last July, which now sit at 2% overall relative to 2020.
Probably barking up the wrong tree here, since I imagine their water usage is relatively constant, but as someone who flies over said deserts relatively often, I'll never get over seeing all the...
more than 40% in the deserts of southeast California
Probably barking up the wrong tree here, since I imagine their water usage is relatively constant, but as someone who flies over said deserts relatively often, I'll never get over seeing all the golf courses in the Palm Springs area from above. Just seems insane to be keeping that much grass alive in so many places all relatively close to each other in the desert.
It absolutely is insane, horrifying, ridiculous, wildly destructive, and altogether a very bad thing to pump so much water into the maintenance of golf courses. It is also by no means the biggest...
It absolutely is insane, horrifying, ridiculous, wildly destructive, and altogether a very bad thing to pump so much water into the maintenance of golf courses.
It is also by no means the biggest issue, generally speaking. No, that would be agriculture. Of the totality of water used in California, on average, half is for environmental purposes (essentially, it's water they either just let flow freely or redirect to key locations for environmental protection purposes- yes, they count that as 'used'), then 40% is for agriculture, and the remaining 10% is for urban usage.
From there, you also have to consider that individual water use isn't necessarily the biggest part of the data involved here- I couldn't readily find the breakdown beyond "10% urban". But some types of manufacturing use more water for a single large-scale factory than a city of millions for day-to-day use (particularly semiconductors and such- those require INTENSE amounts of water for cleaning, etc). Once you consider all that, even a luxurious golf course is relatively insignificant... Though it's still an incredibly wasteful and environmentally destructive abomination.
From the article:
[...]
[...]
[...]
Probably barking up the wrong tree here, since I imagine their water usage is relatively constant, but as someone who flies over said deserts relatively often, I'll never get over seeing all the golf courses in the Palm Springs area from above. Just seems insane to be keeping that much grass alive in so many places all relatively close to each other in the desert.
It absolutely is insane, horrifying, ridiculous, wildly destructive, and altogether a very bad thing to pump so much water into the maintenance of golf courses.
It is also by no means the biggest issue, generally speaking. No, that would be agriculture. Of the totality of water used in California, on average, half is for environmental purposes (essentially, it's water they either just let flow freely or redirect to key locations for environmental protection purposes- yes, they count that as 'used'), then 40% is for agriculture, and the remaining 10% is for urban usage.
From there, you also have to consider that individual water use isn't necessarily the biggest part of the data involved here- I couldn't readily find the breakdown beyond "10% urban". But some types of manufacturing use more water for a single large-scale factory than a city of millions for day-to-day use (particularly semiconductors and such- those require INTENSE amounts of water for cleaning, etc). Once you consider all that, even a luxurious golf course is relatively insignificant... Though it's still an incredibly wasteful and environmentally destructive abomination.