California's new water rules WTH?

LOL not 10 million illegals in the country and CA may have 25 % at best .
But thsi post is about water shortages not illegals whoa re a drop in teh bucket lol

Are you all this utterly blinded by party affiliation that you can't figure out how building a sprawling megacity and agricultural zone in the middle of a desert might conceivably have some tiiiiiny issues with water supply? But no, keep on believing that this is some sinister liberal plan to steal your precious bodily fluids like some kind of Saturday morning cartoon villain.

originally posted by: midnightstar
LOL not 10 million illegals in the country and CA may have 25 % at best .
But thsi post is about water shortages not illegals whoa re a drop in teh bucket lol

2.3 -2.6 million by conservative estimates out of population of 40 million.
www.fairus.org...
My guess is around 5 million as they don't show up on forms used to create figures.
Hardly a "drop in the bucket" in either case.

BS.....again.....do right-wing rags EVER WRITE THE TRUTH!!......how about Liberals who feed ground up dog to known trump voters....or hey....democrats gave trillions to SJW's!!.......trump voters will believe everything we say.

beitbart to writers.....find what we can lie about today to piss off our base, call trump and Hannity, and they'll take it from there....our readers will believe anything we tell them

a reply to: jimmyx

What portion of it is wrong? Did California sign the law? Does it set a cap of 55 gals per person per day? Is there a system of fines for exceeding that cap? Does the average shower use 17 gals and a washer load use 30-40 gals? Is 55 gallons per person per day a ridiculously low cap?

Please, tell us what is "BS" so we can see you contributing something other than your fingers in your ears and lalalala noises coming from your mouth.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

I think the "BS" is supposed to be the idea that the state of California will shut off your water after the meter hits 55 gallons, or send jackbooted thugs to beat the fine out of you, or something like that. But we all know those fines will be passed on to the consumers one way or another, and that the industries/farmers/golf courses that consume most of the water will be given loopholes, if not outright exemptions.

originally posted by: Gargoyle91
a reply to: FyreByrd

What do you think the water districts will do to the customers using more then 55 gallons a day just how will they encourage us?

I don't know but I don't think it is an unreasonable individual goal. Between technological improvements, conservation and just plain mindfullness it can be accomplished.

What I hear is "I'm going to have to change the way I do things and be careful about my use of resources" and that is simply shortsighted and selfish.

Composing toilets would go a long way to solving the problem and build a whole new industry. They aren't hard to use once you learn (key point) how and produce valuable compost from human waste. Think of what benefit widespread use could bring to the planet not the least of which is minimal water use.

How about using (requiring) drip water systems in agriculture rather then spraying water everywhere.

Want to make the US 'great' again, get on the cutting edge of progress not while about 'the good 'ole days' and blame 'govnent' for everything.

a reply to: FyreByrd

Look at one locacation in the state nestled was found to be taking water on a permit that expired in 1988 at said location they bottled 64 million gallons if that water is. Bottled up as individual 20 ounce bottles and sold for 1.50 that's like 500 million bucks off that one location where they pay a fee of 675 dollars a year if your in such a bad drought bottling by corporations for profit should be illegal.

It's just another step towards liberal utopia. Complete state control of every area of life - what you can eat, what you can say, what you can wear, when you can wash...it's never-ending. Perhaps Californians will actually wake up one day and kick their lords out.

So at a ration of 55g/day, California really will be populated by stinky hippies.

How much water are y’all using? In months our sprinkler system isn’t running, we use about 3,000 gallons/month for 2 people. That’s 50 gallons/person/day. And we’re not exactly doing anything special to conserve water. Our shower has two shower heads, and I enjoy a nice long shower.

A family of 4 could use 6,600 gallons/month and not exceed the 55 gallon/day number.

a reply to: Gargoyle91

I’m not for this kind of rationing. It sounds like they should fix their leaking infrastructure. And what about the rich people and their lawns? Every 10’ by 10’ piece of grass requires over 60 gallons of water. With that in mind, how is it possible for a commoner to water their lawn?

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
a reply to: burdman30ott6

I think the "BS" is supposed to be the idea that the state of California will shut off your water after the meter hits 55 gallons, or send jackbooted thugs to beat the fine out of you, or something like that. But we all know those fines will be passed on to the consumers one way or another, and that the industries/farmers/golf courses that consume most of the water will be given loopholes, if not outright exemptions.

Ugh. See, to me this bill doesn't require any hyperbole because what it actually does is reprehensible enough on it's own merit. It's a BS piece of legislation. If it only impacted California, I'd probably laugh and move on, but it never stays there. Their disease spreads like cockroaches as their refugees flee to other, saner western states, bringing all of the problems they started in Cali with them to the receiving state. Watch how quickly Oregon, Washington, Nevada, and Colorado implement similar laws and watch how quickly Arizona, Alaska, Idaho, and New Mexico start seeing politicians pushing for the same (albeit against voter bases which are still conservative enough to say "go screw yourself" to the pusher.)

a reply to: Gargoyle91

This is straight out of UN Agenda 21. I've been talking about Agenda 21 here for years. Hello....is anybody home???

1 Agenda 21 recognised that freshwater resources are needed for all aspects of life; it recognised the interconnected nature of water across sectors and geopolitical boundaries and that to protect them effectively would need management strategies that were far-reaching and dynamic. Primarily the intention was to shift the common approach from the supply-oriented mindset to a more holistic catchment-conscious approach,2 integrating all stakeholders, users, polluters and regulators to inform governance processes and develop compatible monitoring systems to inform those processes. Although there have been significant developments in integrated management, technologies, and water quality in some regions, the state of global freshwater resources is more precarious today than ever before.

Effective solutions to these challenges are available and in the developed regions widely used at political, institutional and societal levels. However, there remains a very high degree of variability in the implementation of adequate regulatory regimes. There is still an inequitable level of access for vulnerable people to exert any influence on the management of local water resources and gender inequality in defining legislation, policies, and programs that promote the improvement of water quality and equitable distribution of water resources.20 More impetus is needed to support effective measures

sustainabledevelopment.un.org...
One can only guess what those measures of management of local water resources and GENDER INEQUALITY are. California is a prime example. While it may sound really good on paper, the truth is reflected in such measures as practiced by California in implementing ridiculous and Draconian measures and rationing.

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: Gargoyle91
a reply to: FyreByrd

What do you think the water districts will do to the customers using more then 55 gallons a day just how will they encourage us?

I don't know but I don't think it is an unreasonable individual goal. Between technological improvements, conservation and just plain mindfullness it can be accomplished.

What I hear is "I'm going to have to change the way I do things and be careful about my use of resources" and that is simply shortsighted and selfish.

Composing toilets would go a long way to solving the problem and build a whole new industry. They aren't hard to use once you learn (key point) how and produce valuable compost from human waste. Think of what benefit widespread use could bring to the planet not the least of which is minimal water use.

How about using (requiring) drip water systems in agriculture rather then spraying water everywhere.

Want to make the US 'great' again, get on the cutting edge of progress not while about 'the good 'ole days' and blame 'govnent' for everything.

And you do know that the Elites who are pushing these regulations are not the ones who are going to sacrifice.....this is Agenda 21 stuff. Agenda 21 has an ultimate goal of major depopulation in spite of how nice their platitudes sound.

originally posted by: dragonridr
Now yoir just being silly ok even if your water district is fined if they spread it out among users. It would add less then a penny to most water bills. If by chance your in a wayer district with a low number of people you might have ti go as high as 50 cents. Dont think this is going to break the bank. However those same fines can be used to expand facilities so its a win win.

These fines are just Agenda 21 hidden taxes. Used for ultimate management of water and other resources...errr that is to regulate them and pay salaries to the bureaucratic apparatus and personnel.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

If you don't want water rationing, maybe you should take climate change a bit more seriously.

Here's a page that talks about how Gov Jerry Brown speaks at UN conferences often, and it also mentions how many communists were in the founding of the UN.

According to Governor Brown’s website, “Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. was named Special Advisor for States and Regions ahead of this year’s United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 23) by the Prime Minister of Fiji Frank Bainimarama – incoming president of COP 23 – today at a ceremony where Fiji became the latest government to join the Under2 Coalition.

When reading the 300 page, “Earth Summit Agenda 21 The United Nations Programme of Action from Rio,” you see a common theme come up for the United Nations endorsed Agenda 21 “Action Plan.”

“Population reduction (limiting the size of families), mandatory civilian national service for youth, the virtual elimination of private property ownership, government control of fishery and farm harvest, exclusion of humans from “wild areas”,the abolition of single family homes and fascist “public-private partnerships” are just a few of the worse.”

bolenreport.com...

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: burdman30ott6

If you don't want water rationing, maybe you should take climate change a bit more seriously.

Seriously? You are a great advertisement for Agenda 21 water rationing programs.

originally posted by: darkbake
a reply to: Gargoyle91

I’m not for this kind of rationing. It sounds like they should fix their leaking infrastructure. And what about the rich people and their lawns? Every 10’ by 10’ piece of grass requires over 60 gallons of water. With that in mind, how is it possible for a commoner to water their lawn?

This only applies to indoor water use. And really, it doesn’t apply to individuals. The law applies to water companies. The company has to keep indoor water use below 55 gallons/month per capita in aggregate, or face a civil fine.