High Sierra Topix

The entire series of water systems throughout California and the south-west - including Hoover/Colorado (1936), Central valley project (1933) & Calif water project (1960) - were initially financed by the economy of Los Angeles county. The Bay area, central valley, Las Vegas, Phoenix, et al wouldn't even exist in their current states unless the present water systems - financed by SoCal - had been built.

For many, this type of information seems to be lost in the mists of time. However, for those who understand the development of the west, in particular the specifics of how San Francisco and Los Angeles came into being, the pieces fit neatly together. Consider that while LA's aqueduct is 223 miles long, it required nothing but gravity until a single section over the Grapvine where it is pumped. Hetch Hetchy, on the other hand, is 167 miles long, but required the building of O'Shaughnessy Dam. It's also relevant to point out that LA's was completed in 1913, while SF had to wait 21 years later - 1934.

Because the LA basin is so large, and the weather so perfect, all it took was the addition of cheap, plentiful water - decades before others - to super-charge both agriculture and real estate development activities. The result was a massive population influx - that is still occurring to this day - that created the economic titan that represents the 8 SoCal counties. For almost 100 years now, approx 50% of the entire state's population lies somewhere within a 80-100 mile radius of downtown LA.

I've mentioned before that I grew up in the Bay area, and still travel a few times a year up to the city. Having just got back from yet another NorCal road trip, it's remarkable just how dominant an influence the LA region has on the state. In fact, as a form of short-hand, it's almost easier to just consider LA as California. If you use that metric, then everything else pertaining to public works projects, development activities, government finance, etc, begins to make a lot more sense.

Using that orientation, the north doesn't "own" any water ie it's not "theirs"; rather, it's simply the place where the rain happens to fall (and is collected). In reality, the entire west is essentially a vassal to the SoCal region. Ever wonder why the desert garden look began in Phoenix & Las Vegas? It's not just because it's hot, it's because their water allocation of the Colorado river is pitiful. When you drive into Palm Springs, what you see is extensive greenways, golf courses and colorful flowers.

Rather than building additional dams (never gonna happen) in California, the next stage of development will probably involve tapping into the Columbia. Oregon will simply be no match for the combined Federal electoral influence of California, Nevada & Arizona.

An interesting article on central valley subsidence.

http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/califo ... 27953.html

I do my part to send water to southern California...every time I flush my toilet.

Just like Russ, I'm on a well here too. To make things worse, I'm among the massively expanding vineyards with their mega deep wells and HUGE above ground pumps sucking the aquifers dry. We gave up on our "lawn" four or five years ago. Earlier this month our water pressure went so low it was unusable in the house, had to have our well pump lowered 40 foot. Also reconfigured our system such that the below ground pump fills an above ground tank, then a booster pump draws from the tank and provides pressure to the house.

The point is with all of this, the vast majority of water consumers in metropolitan areas have no concept whatsoever about their water delivery system, conservation of water, where the water comes from, or give a damn about using it for needless activities. I think there is a correlation among this negligent use of water and apathy towards environmental issues.

Hobbes wrote:Rather than building additional dams (never gonna happen) in California, the next stage of development will probably involve tapping into the Columbia. Oregon will simply be no match for the combined Federal electoral influence of California, Nevada & Arizona.

You make a good point supporting my fave, "The state of Jefferson."

Lake Tahoe is closer. put at tunnel in about 1200' down, and voila! I didn't want to hurt TahoeJeff's view of the lake that much if they take that much. this is tongue in cheek; It would definitely impact their water supply and the Truckee river.

We do need more dams. It took a LOT of work to get LA to back off of Mono Lk a bit. And they need to quit taking water from the north as our Salmon populations will hurt more than has already been dealt out.

My water supply is pretty solid:



And don't any of you low-landers come up here looking to get any of it.....

If the water doesn't flow toward the people, the people will flow toward the water

Troutdog 59 wrote:I'll likely get Eric mad at me for this...

Ha! I...must..not..read..this..thread!
I come here to escape from work. You all carry on and have fun think-tanking your own fixes to California's water woes (armchair silver bullets and all that). I try to stay clear of the political stuff on here. You all know that.

Brother, ain't that the truth. LADWP was the best thing that ever happened to the Owens valley. Any long-term California native knows the name-of-the-game is to figure out where development cannot legally take place. It's quite satisfying to know that the E Sierra will never, ever, be developed - it will always remain in pristine condition.

When Roosevelt signed an EO in 1908 first establishing the Inyo FS (just a few years after his Sierra camping trip with Muir) to protect the watershed of the Owens river in Long Valley (ie Mammoth) for Los Angeles (not coincidentally, the same year the project began), he began the process by which Inyo's territory has progressively grown over the years.

There's not many places that are absolutely off-limits to development, but the few that are seem locked in time. As the rest of the entire state falls to the bulldozers, knowing where these places are located becomes imperative. You can hurl all the invective you want, but if a region isn't protected by law, residents cannot arbitrarily declare that they want landowners to cover the cost of open space for their personal enjoyment.

That's why, while north county San Diego put up a gallant fight, they had no chance against becoming another cog along the lines of south county OC in the great SoCal sprawl. Protesting, being depressed, fighting back, etc, had no effect - only Pendleton prevents a complete merge.

Look at the central valley - there's absolutely nothing preventing Sac, Fresno & Bakersfield from continuing to spread & grow. So, while population pressure will continue to drive development in those regions, other, select places will still enjoy their la-dee-da moments as the world spins around them.

Sac valley is on a sprawl fest, indeed. They want the ppty tax money. W/O water it will haunt them later. At least here in Sonoma county, they're trying to curb development growth. Salmon runs still trump the vineyards here, or at least the law is in the fishes favor.