AHC/WI: The US More Environmentally-Friendly Regarding To Water In The American West

The American West is facing so many water problems because there is TOO many people. And I was wondering on how can the U.S. not make the decisions that cause the overuse of so much water and lead to the modern-day shenanigans? Or would it require more people living in other water-abundant regions?
 

Driftless

Donor
Or adapt to a much less water-consumptive life style - agricultural, industrial, civic, and residential. That would very likely require a heavy hand of governmental intervention to control consumption at an early time (tough to enforce in many cases), some prescience about what could happen, and social intolerance for over-consumption.
 

Driftless

Donor
More than anything you need less people.

Absolutely, but California in particular has had the historic cachet' of the Gold Rush, the great Mediterranean climate in the south that drew Okie's & Rust Belters alike. The Rust Belters wanted that water intensive eclectic mix of manicured Bluegrass lawns, with exotic Palm Trees. The wonderful warm sunshine filled days were perfect for movie makers, along with some manufacturers and that adds to the overall appeal.

Honestly, how do you keep them out?

Conversely, I do not get the appeal of the Vegas or Phoenix areas - at all. Just too @#$%$%&^ hot... One visit to each has filled my lifetime quota..... I'll take the cold, snowy Wisconsin winters over that.
 
Last edited:
Public ownership of water with rights allocated by Dutch auctions would be a good start. Riparian rights as practiced in the east would also help, though not as much as public ownership. Hell, prior appropriation with a free water market would work, since allocations would eventually go to the most efficient users (i.e. urban areas) and the price of water would go up as supplies get tight. The current system of mixed private and public ownership with fixed prices and very limited markets is pretty much the worst possible system for efficiently allocating water.

Oh yeah, and get people to embrace the brown and love local flora would do nicely. The desert can be just as beautiful as any lawn on the East Coast or Europe. Seriously, fuck green lawns in the desert.
 
Public ownership of water with rights allocated by Dutch auctions would be a good start. Riparian rights as practiced in the east would also help, though not as much as public ownership. Hell, prior appropriation with a free water market would work, since allocations would eventually go to the most efficient users (i.e. urban areas) and the price of water would go up as supplies get tight. The current system of mixed private and public ownership with fixed prices and very limited markets is pretty much the worst possible system for efficiently allocating water.

Oh yeah, and get people to embrace the brown and love local flora would do nicely. The desert can be just as beautiful as any lawn on the East Coast or Europe. Seriously, fuck green lawns in the desert.

The last part is starting to happen. My in-laws retired to Vegas (I don't get the appeal either) and everybody in their neighborhood has rocks or astro-turf for lawns. No grass lawns.
 
Public ownership of water with rights allocated by Dutch auctions would be a good start. Riparian rights as practiced in the east would also help, though not as much as public ownership. Hell, prior appropriation with a free water market would work, since allocations would eventually go to the most efficient users (i.e. urban areas) and the price of water would go up as supplies get tight. The current system of mixed private and public ownership with fixed prices and very limited markets is pretty much the worst possible system for efficiently allocating water.

Oh yeah, and get people to embrace the brown and love local flora would do nicely. The desert can be just as beautiful as any lawn on the East Coast or Europe. Seriously, fuck green lawns in the desert.

Amen on lawns!

I'm curious, why would a Dutch auction be the best way to allocate water rights? Wouldn't the rights most likely be bought up by the wealthy for ornamental purposes? I'm also wondering of agriculture really has the deep pockets to compete with even municipal governments; profit margins are notoriously low on agriculture, are they not? But then maybe "less agriculture" is also a part of the solution?

Incidentally, I did a guest post for Shift In Priorities where a worse Dust Bowl led to Dryland Farming legislation, with controls that conformed to annual rainfall of a given county. Standards could be strengthened or weakened based on the political ground game, but at least the mechanism for control was in place.
 

jahenders

Banned
Early on it's very hard because there wasn't so much a shortage as a shortage of water where it was wanted. The prolific use of water in California (esp for agriculture) was a huge contributor to its attraction to lots of people from elsewhere.

In 1900, or 1920, etc it wasn't a bad idea. Only later (say 1950-60) did the water usage start outstripping the supply.

The real failure was that there were no real adjustments to usage in the 70s/80s, or more recently. If they wanted to, the state of CA could simply say, "If you live in these counties and you're getting any state money, you're not allowed to have a lawn." So, individuals getting state aid would have to let their lawns die, schools wouldn't have lawns, etc.

The American West is facing so many water problems because there is TOO many people. And I was wondering on how can the U.S. not make the decisions that cause the overuse of so much water and lead to the modern-day shenanigans? Or would it require more people living in other water-abundant regions?
 
Perhaps California's love of technology could lead to a more technological managing of the water supply. This could be in the public or private sector, and could be on the allocation side or the use side. (Perhaps a wider use of drip irrigation or xeriscaping?)
 

Driftless

Donor
There's many variations on this kind of list: California water consumption by plant

h20-graph-735.png


I find a number of the entries surprising: that carrots, beets, and watermelon! are comparatively lower in water needs and that nuts such as Almonds & Walnuts are so high. I did expect that raising beef would be water consumptive, both from liquid water the animals drink and the volumes used in growing feed as used in industrial feedlots. With un-irrigated pasture raised animals, it's more the drinking water consumption.
 

jahenders

Banned
Interesting list.

That could suggest some mechanism whereby water for agriculture is charged relative to the pounds of food produced. So, if a guy is doing Almonds, he might pay 2-10 times as much per gallon as a guy doing sugar beets. Alternately, the fee could be based on the market cost of the food produced per gallon.

There's many variations on this kind of list: California water consumption by plant

h20-graph-735.png


I find a number of the entries surprising: that carrots, beets, and watermelon! are comparatively lower in water needs and that nuts such as Almonds & Walnuts are so high. I did expect that raising beef would be water consumptive, both from liquid water the animals drink and the volumes used in growing feed as used in industrial feedlots. With un-irrigated pasture raised animals, it's more the drinking water consumption.
 
There were greenification projects under Roosevelt. Many been groves to add stability to the water table. A permaculturalist named Geoff Lawton visits one of these sites here. This kind of agriculture has the benefit of stabailtizing the water table but adds to the biomass through the support of diversity. More food, more kinds of food, less land and input.
 
Last edited:
Having the Colorado River Compact settle a lower yearly maximum consumption for the Lower Basin of the Colorado would be a start, either based on a more preservationist view going into the Compact's negotiations or more accurate estimates of the Colorado's flow. Also, Arizona ratifying the Compact earlier would help so they get a better share of the Lower Basin and California gets less share and SoCal can't develop as much as OTL.
 
A more efficient use of water in agriculture, industry and private households would go a long way towards a more sustainable water management. Look at Israel and how much less water for irrigation is used there to produce the same agricultural output by simply applying more effecient irrigation methods. But as long as water remains dirt cheap (significantly cheaper than in the Netherlands or Denmark) hardly anyone is going to invest into water saving measures like drip irrigation.
 
Last edited:
Top