Despite the fact that agriculture uses 75% of the water in California, the
state implemented 500 dollar fines today against suburbians who wash their
car without a nozzle!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...o-500-per-day/
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...715-story.html
http://www.marinij.com/sanrafael/ci_...ap-hefty-fines

Talk about misplaced politics!

"Lucia Gallo" wrote in message
...
Despite the fact that agriculture uses 75% of the water in California, the
state implemented 500 dollar fines today against suburbians who wash their
car without a nozzle!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...o-500-per-day/
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...715-story.html
http://www.marinij.com/sanrafael/ci_...ap-hefty-fines

Talk about misplaced politics!

agriculture feeds people. cars cleaned while wasting water do not.

On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 20:01:24 -0700, Pico Rico wrote:

agriculture feeds people. cars cleaned while wasting water do not.

Agriculture has power.
The people do not.

So, why not fine BOTH agriculture and people for wasting water?
Nope.

That would make sense.
No.

They fine PEOPLE for washing their cars, to the tune of $500/month!

It's all just a propaganda ploy.
It makes it look like they're doing something, when, they know themselves,
they're doing absolutely nothing.

And you fell for it. Hook. Line. And sinker.

"Lucia Gallo" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 20:01:24 -0700, Pico Rico wrote:

agriculture feeds people. cars cleaned while wasting water do not.

Agriculture has power.
The people do not.

So, why not fine BOTH agriculture and people for wasting water?
Nope.

That would make sense.
No.

They fine PEOPLE for washing their cars, to the tune of $500/month!

It's all just a propaganda ploy.
It makes it look like they're doing something, when, they know themselves,
they're doing absolutely nothing.

And you fell for it. Hook. Line. And sinker.

water deliveries to farmers have been cut like crazy. And not so you can run
a hose into the gutter while you wash your car.

On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 20:33:06 -0700, Lucia Gallo
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 20:01:24 -0700, Pico Rico wrote:

agriculture feeds people. cars cleaned while wasting water do not.

Agriculture has power.
The people do not.

They have the power to turn on the water.

So, why not fine BOTH agriculture and people for wasting water?
Nope.

That would make sense.
No.

They fine PEOPLE for washing their cars, to the tune of $500/month!

Was it his first offense?

Anyhow, water in California is an ongoing problem that will last for 50
or 100 more years. If you have to hit a few people hard so that
everyone learns the rules, maybe that's the way to go.

It's all just a propaganda ploy.
It makes it look like they're doing something, when, they know themselves,
they're doing absolutely nothing.

And you fell for it. Hook. Line. And sinker.

Lucia Gallo wrote:
Despite the fact that agriculture uses 75% of the water in
California, the state implemented 500 dollar fines today
against
suburbians who wash their car without a nozzle!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...o-500-per-day/
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...715-story.html
http://www.marinij.com/sanrafael/ci_...ap-hefty-fines

Talk about misplaced politics!

would you rather wash your car or have water to drink?
Here in NTX, due to water restrictions you can't even wash
your car unless you use a powerwasher. You can only water
your yard once every 2 weeks.
Handwatering w/nozzle is allowed everyday before 10am and
after 6pm

Pico Rico wrote:
"Lucia Gallo" wrote in message
...
Despite the fact that agriculture uses 75% of the water in California, the
state implemented 500 dollar fines today against suburbians who wash their
car without a nozzle!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...o-500-per-day/
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...715-story.html
http://www.marinij.com/sanrafael/ci_...ap-hefty-fines

Talk about misplaced politics!

agriculture feeds people. cars cleaned while wasting water do not.


Hi,
In this city washing cars is against city bylaw, period.

"Lucia Gallo" wrote in message ...
Despite the fact that agriculture uses 75% of the water in California, the
state implemented 500 dollar fines today against suburbians who wash their
car without a nozzle!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...o-500-per-day/
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...715-story.html
http://www.marinij.com/sanrafael/ci_...ap-hefty-fines

Talk about misplaced politics!

Who washes their car without a nozzle on the hose? LOL!!

**** ADVERTISEMENT ****

Hurry! Hurry! Hurry! Step right up!
Get your Nozzle here!
$50 each or three for $100
Cash only. Call BR-549.

Guv Bob

Guv Bob wrote, on Tue, 15 Jul 2014 21:58:38 -0800:

There is evidently either no one in Sacramento with any scientific brains,
or someone is trying to pull a fast one. My bet is #2.

Mine too!

They aim their divining rod at the 1/8th of the people on public water who aren't the ones wasting it
and leave the 7/8ths alone who have the money to implement real water conservation measures.

ChairMan wrote, on Tue, 15 Jul 2014 23:55:56 -0500:

would you rather wash your car or have water to drink?

That's not the real question.

The real question is:
Would you rather a politician did something, or made believe
they were doing something by fining the wrong people for the
wrong task, but not fining the people who actually are wasting
the water?

Which would you fine?
The one wasting 7/8th of the water?
Or, the ones not wasting the water?

"micky" wrote in message ...
On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 20:33:06 -0700, Lucia Gallo
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 20:01:24 -0700, Pico Rico wrote:

agriculture feeds people. cars cleaned while wasting water do not.

Agriculture has power.
The people do not.

They have the power to turn on the water.

So, why not fine BOTH agriculture and people for wasting water?
Nope.

That would make sense.
No.

They fine PEOPLE for washing their cars, to the tune of $500/month!

Was it his first offense?

Anyhow, water in California is an ongoing problem that will last for 50
or 100 more years. If you have to hit a few people hard so that
everyone learns the rules, maybe that's the way to go.

It's all just a propaganda ploy.
It makes it look like they're doing something, when, they know themselves,
they're doing absolutely nothing.

And you fell for it. Hook. Line. And sinker.


There is evidently either no one in Sacramento with any scientific brains, or someone is trying to pull a fast one. My bet is #2.

FWIW, anyone who looks up the actual data will see that these droughts are regular and predictible. Just for fun, I plotted the data just before the June primaries, when the first alarmist politicians were stirring things up.

Here are the start & end dates for the previous 2 droughts according to the data. If you compare these dates to the official dates for the droughts, they are different because I used the dates of peaks and valleys, which are more accurate for what I was doing. (That's like using the dates of actual hard economic times vs. official dates for recessions.)

Apr 3, 2001 to Dec 28, 2004 (Duration 45 months)
Dec 19, 2006 to May 4, 2010 (Duration 41 months)

The current drought started Jan 3, 2012. Extrapolating for 43 months, it should end today July 16, 2014. Although this is just an estimate, we did have thundershowers yesterday in the mountains, deserts and some valleys in So Cal. Scattered sprinkles most everywhere else.

Also, weather dudes have been calling a good chance for El Nino this fall, which will end all the talk about droughts and start a conversation about flooding. I put more creedance in the weather service than the political manipulators. Unfortunately the "breaking news" networks only report the extreme news.

There was a big drought in the mid-1800s that killed 10s of thousands of cattle in Calif and helped to do in the bison, followed by swarms of locusts that wiped out agriculture.

Droughts ain't nothing new. And definitely are NOT caused by power plant emissions.... (Another political slight of hand trick) Duheeeeee....

would you rather wash your car or have water to drink?
Here in NTX, due to water restrictions you can't even wash
your car unless you use a powerwasher. You can only water
your yard once every 2 weeks.
Handwatering w/nozzle is allowed everyday before 10am and
after 6pm

Wait until they go to stage 9 water restrictions (the same rules
that will be used by the Mars One mission):

Each person gets about 50 liters of water (including recycled water)
per day for all uses. There will be reserves of about 1500 liters
of water per life support unit for use during periods of low power
(night and during sandstorms). I think that equates to 750 liters
reserve per person, with a 4-person mission and, I think, 2 life
support units.

Mandatory recycling of urine, and sweat. Probably they'll try to
extract some of the water from bowel movements and semen also, and
recycle it for the garden.

There will probably be population control, initially at least, since
additional person adds considerably to the water demand. A 180-pound
man (babies grow up eventually) has about 55 liters of water in his
body. (The body is 55% - 78% water, and 1 liter of water weighs
about 1 kilogram) and will probably want 50 liters per day (including
recycled water) like the others.


Compare this against typical single family *INSIDE* home use: about
200 liters per day per person, assuming conservation.

Another chart shows Texans using about 2700 liters per day per
person, 60% agriculture, 15% industry, and 25% home (as of Dec.
2007). That's about 675 liters/day/person for just home use. A
lot of that seems to be going to lawns and car washing.

"Najid" wrote in message ...
ChairMan wrote, on Tue, 15 Jul 2014 23:55:56 -0500:
would you rather wash your car or have water to drink?

That's not the real question.

The real question is:
Would you rather a politician did something, or made believe
they were doing something by fining the wrong people for the
wrong task, but not fining the people who actually are wasting
the water?

Who is actually *wasting* water? People who grow the food you eat or
someone washing a car on the street where the water is not recaptured and
reused (like a drive-in car wash)? Even on the East Coast I (and many
others who buy California-grown produce stand to gain something from water
used to grow crops. No one but the lone, nozzle-free careless California
car washer gains anything from one person washing their car with a hose.
That, IMHO, is an important consideration when using a shared resource like
water.

Which would you fine?

The idiot washing his car with ever-more precious water without a nozzle to
reduce the amount of clean water wasted.

The one wasting 7/8th of the water?

You'd have to prove that was happening. Just making the claim someone's
"wasting" 7/8ths of the water doesn't make it true. It certainly doesn't
*sound* true from the claims you've made.

Or, the ones not wasting the water?

The issue is really about using the water for high purpose (growing food) or
a low one (making sure your car is nice and shiny and being too cheap to use
a car wash with water recovery systems).

Sorry, but you'll get no sympathy here. Locally, in Virginia, they just
passed a law making car washes to raise money illegal because it a) wastes
prodigious amounts of water and b) allows untreated soap-laden water to
reach the storm drains and then the Chesapeake Bay and aquifiers.
Commercial car washes capture, filter and reuse that runoff before it hits
the public sewers.

http://www.newsmax.com/US/Virginia-A.../23/id/573158/

Oddly enough, it was a Republican controlled legislature that passed the law
that all the anti-government anti-nanny state ninnies are foaming about.
(-: Kudos to them for realizing that the way to keep waterways clean is to
not dirty them up in the first place, even if it's allegedly for a good
cause.

http://ballotpedia.org/Partisan_comp...f_state_houses

--
Bobby G.

On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 11:33:06 PM UTC-4, Lucia Gallo wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 20:01:24 -0700, Pico Rico wrote:



agriculture feeds people. cars cleaned while wasting water do not.



Agriculture has power.

The people do not.



So, why not fine BOTH agriculture and people for wasting water?

Nope.



That would make sense.

No.



They fine PEOPLE for washing their cars, to the tune of $500/month!



They don't fine people for washing their cars. They only fine them
if they do so with a hose without a nozzle, which is pretty dumb,
wasteful, and which I can't even recall seeing anyone do. Aside from
wasting water, it would be a PIA to wash a car without a nozzle.





It's all just a propaganda ploy.

It makes it look like they're doing something, when, they know themselves,

they're doing absolutely nothing.



And you fell for it. Hook. Line. And sinker.

You deliberately misrepresent the actual law. What does that make
you?

On 7/16/2014 8:11 AM, trader_4 wrote:

They don't fine people for washing their cars. They only fine them
if they do so with a hose without a nozzle, which is pretty dumb,
wasteful, and which I can't even recall seeing anyone do. Aside from
wasting water, it would be a PIA to wash a car without a nozzle.

Seems like over regulation, to me.


--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 19:58:55 -0700, Lucia Gallo
wrote in

Despite the fact that agriculture uses 75% of the water in California, the
state implemented 500 dollar fines today against suburbians who wash their
car without a nozzle!

Isn't California fun!!

I used to live in San Diego. We moved away 30 years ago and haven't
looked back.
--
I kill-file all messages posted through Google Groups.

On Wednesday, July 16, 2014 8:14:09 AM UTC-4, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 7/16/2014 8:11 AM, trader_4 wrote:



They don't fine people for washing their cars. They only fine them

if they do so with a hose without a nozzle, which is pretty dumb,

wasteful, and which I can't even recall seeing anyone do. Aside from

wasting water, it would be a PIA to wash a car without a nozzle.



Seems like over regulation, to me.



Why is that? CA has a drought emergency. If a cop or code officer
sees someone with a garden hose spewing into the street with no nozzle
while they are washing their car, why shouldn't they be able to tell them to stop? If you have regulations as to how much you can water a lawn,
I'd be mighty ****ed if I was complying and my AH neighbor was letting
a hose run water straight down the sewer.

On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 9:57:31 PM UTC-7, Guv Bob wrote:
"micky" wrote in message ...

so your thesis is "The drought MAY end so there is no need to take any action?

The real fact is that California is short of water even when there is no drought.

Harry K

In ,
Najid belched:
ChairMan wrote, on Tue, 15 Jul 2014 23:55:56 -0500:

would you rather wash your car or have water to drink?

That's not the real question.

The real question is:
Would you rather a politician did something, or made believe
they were doing something by fining the wrong people for the
wrong task, but not fining the people who actually are wasting
the water?

define the people that are actually wasting water


Which would you fine?
The one wasting 7/8th of the water?
Or, the ones not wasting the water?

Again, define who is who.
The one washing their car with no nozzle is one of those that is wasting
water.
Who is the other 7/8th?

"Guv Bob" writes:
"Harry K" wrote in message =
...
On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 9:57:31 PM UTC-7, Guv Bob wrote:
"micky" wrote in message =
.. .
=20
so your thesis is "The drought MAY end so there is no need to take any =
action?

SNIP

That's not the impression I meant to give. Yes, the drought WILL end. =

Will it?

As they say on wall street "Past performance is no indication of future results".

And, in fact, California has been historically much drier than it was
in the 20th century. A return to those conditions would be harsh for
both ag and the coastal communities.

"Harry K" wrote in message ...
On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 9:57:31 PM UTC-7, Guv Bob wrote:
"micky" wrote in message ...

so your thesis is "The drought MAY end so there is no need to take any action?

SNIP

That's not the impression I meant to give. Yes, the drought WILL end. Any conservation action is always good, but realistically it's too late to have much effect on this one. The state has done a decent job of managing droughts, fires & floods in my opinion, considering that politics is always involved.

On Wednesday, July 16, 2014 11:10:06 AM UTC-7, Scott Lurndal wrote:
"Guv Bob" writes:

"Harry K" wrote in message =

...

On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 9:57:31 PM UTC-7, Guv Bob wrote:

"micky" wrote in message =

.. .

=20

so your thesis is "The drought MAY end so there is no need to take any =

action?



SNIP



That's not the impression I meant to give. Yes, the drought WILL end. =

Will it?

As they say on wall street "Past performance is no indication of future results".

And, in fact, California has been historically much drier than it was

in the 20th century. A return to those conditions would be harsh for

both ag and the coastal communities.

Scanning this entire thread, I saw no mention of the dirty politics that gave agribusiness the same water rates that had been set by Congress for small farmers.

So of course they felt free to plant water-thirty crops like cotton and rice, which should NEVER be farmed in a drought-prone area. Result: THE GROUND WATER IS RAPIDLY BEING DEPLETED. This is fossil water; when it's gone, nothing will replace it.

A way back, on ? thread, I posted a brief history of water wars in California. You can find summaries on-line if you want the Big Picture rather than assorted more-or-less knowledgeable comments.

Discussing whose (water) ox is being gored by the new fines is like re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Of course the pigs will continue misusing home water and cooperative people will conform.

But that doesn't deal with the overall problem of politically-generated misallocation of water rights and growing inappropriate crops in drought areas.

Too bad we don't have a Congress that doesn't understand it was elected to serve the people. This one is as bad as (long) memory serves.

HB

On 7/16/2014 3:04 PM, wrote:

This goes far deeper than just a drought.
Most of the US is using water faster than the replenishing rate, even
in wet years. The ogalalla aquifer in the central part of the US is
dropping very fast and that is fossil water that built up over
thousands of years. It is not coming back.
The Colorado river has gone from a raging river to a trickle by the
time it gets to southern California. All of the big dams are low.
Even here in Florida where we get plenty of rain, our aquifers are
dropping fast. We suck it out and pump it on (mostly) grass, faster
than it can get back down there.

Well, isn't it obvious? The wet people didn't
aquify their fair share. We need to raise
taxes on the wet.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 7/16/2014 3:08 PM, Higgs Boson wrote:

Scanning this entire thread, I saw no mention of the
dirty politics that gave agribusiness the same water
rates that had been set by Congress for small farmers.


HB


What clause of the Constitution gives Congress the
power to set price of water?

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 7/16/2014 3:08 PM, Higgs Boson wrote:

So of course they felt free to plant water-thirty
crops like cotton and rice, which should NEVER be
farmed in a drought-prone area. Result: THE
GROUND WATER IS RAPIDLY BEING DEPLETED.

HB


If the free market were working, the drought
would result in higher water prices. Farmers
would switch to less thirsty crops.

Much like energy deregulation allows the market
to set energy prices to provide for production,
delivery, and profit.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"Scott Lurndal" wrote in message ...
"Guv Bob" writes:
"Harry K" wrote in message =
...
On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 9:57:31 PM UTC-7, Guv Bob wrote:
"micky" wrote in message =
.. .
=20
so your thesis is "The drought MAY end so there is no need to take any =
action?

SNIP

That's not the impression I meant to give. Yes, the drought WILL end. =

Will it?

As they say on wall street "Past performance is no indication of future results".

I'm convinced it's already ended. Check this thread again in November, after the rains start.

And, in fact, California has been historically much drier than it was
in the 20th century. A return to those conditions would be harsh for
both ag and the coastal communities.

You're right. All theories aside, conservation is the way to go.

On Wednesday, July 16, 2014 1:02:09 PM UTC-7, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 7/16/2014 3:08 PM, Higgs Boson wrote:



Scanning this entire thread, I saw no mention of the

dirty politics that gave agribusiness the same water

rates that had been set by Congress for small farmers.





HB



What clause of the Constitution gives Congress the

power to set price of water?

Silly question.

HB



--

.

Christopher A. Young

Learn about Jesus

www.lds.org

.

On 7/17/2014 6:36 PM, Higgs Boson wrote:
On Wednesday, July 16, 2014 1:02:09 PM UTC-7, Stormin Mormon wrote:
What clause of the Constitution gives Congress the

power to set price of water?

Silly question.

HB

Silly person, not to be concerned about the
abuse of government powers.


--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"Stormin Mormon" wrote in message
...
On 7/16/2014 3:08 PM, Higgs Boson wrote:

Scanning this entire thread, I saw no mention of the
dirty politics that gave agribusiness the same water
rates that had been set by Congress for small farmers.


HB


What clause of the Constitution gives Congress the
power to set price of water?


I guess the same clause that got FDR elected. He really made a mess of
things.

"Lucia Gallo" wrote in message
...
Despite the fact that agriculture uses 75% of the water in California, the
state implemented 500 dollar fines today against suburbians who wash their
car without a nozzle!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...o-500-per-day/
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...715-story.html
http://www.marinij.com/sanrafael/ci_...ap-hefty-fines

Talk about misplaced politics!

And yet I can see that. I'm in Washington and we are almost always on water
restrictions here. This summer they are rewarding those who conserve with a
lower price per however they charge us...gallon? And penalized with a
higher price per if we use over a certain amount.

There have been years when hoses were banned in Seattle. If we had a
garden, we had to lug a watering can.

"Lucia Gallo" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 20:01:24 -0700, Pico Rico wrote:

agriculture feeds people. cars cleaned while wasting water do not.

Agriculture has power.
The people do not.

So, why not fine BOTH agriculture and people for wasting water?
Nope.

That would make sense.
No.

They fine PEOPLE for washing their cars, to the tune of $500/month!

It's all just a propaganda ploy.
It makes it look like they're doing something, when, they know themselves,
they're doing absolutely nothing.

And you fell for it. Hook. Line. And sinker.

It's not just there. Apparently water is abundant where you are. It's not
here in WA.

On Thu, 17 Jul 2014 22:51:27 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:

I'm in Washington and we are almost always on water
restrictions here.

Doesn't it rain a lot in Washington?

On 7/18/2014 1:51 AM, Julie Bove wrote:

And yet I can see that. I'm in Washington and we are almost always on
water restrictions here. This summer they are rewarding those who
conserve with a lower price per however they charge us...gallon? And
penalized with a higher price per if we use over a certain amount.

There have been years when hoses were banned in Seattle. If we had a
garden, we had to lug a watering can.

Ban on garden hoses? Wow, that gets me to
thinking. I can't quite picture that.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 7/16/2014 1:19 AM, Tony Hwang wrote:
Pico Rico wrote:
"Lucia Gallo" wrote in message
...
Despite the fact that agriculture uses 75% of the water in
California, the
state implemented 500 dollar fines today against suburbians who wash
their
car without a nozzle!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...o-500-per-day/

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...715-story.html

http://www.marinij.com/sanrafael/ci_...ap-hefty-fines


Talk about misplaced politics!

agriculture feeds people. cars cleaned while wasting water do not.


Hi,
In this city washing cars is against city bylaw, period.

Sounds like law that has been in force in Florida for many years; Fla.
also uses a lot of reclaimed water for lawn watering. Several years ago
they banned sale of lawn fertilizer in summer because so much washes
into waterways. With an extreme drought, I'm wondering what took Cal. so
long. Fla. has water patrols in some cities and give a polite knock on
the door if you water on wrong days or times....watering on a hot windy
afternoon is insane, 'cause it wastes most of the water. Of course, the
sprinklers that run off into the street are usually on city property )

Big industry in Fla. is lawn care/pest control; you sign up for monthly
applications of chemicals (whether you need them or not). "Buy some
fertilizer and we will throw in insecticide or herbicide" kind of a
deal. And so many people think if "some" is good, "more" is better.

Stormin Mormon writes:
On 7/18/2014 1:51 AM, Julie Bove wrote:

And yet I can see that. I'm in Washington and we are almost always on
water restrictions here. This summer they are rewarding those who
conserve with a lower price per however they charge us...gallon? And
penalized with a higher price per if we use over a certain amount.

There have been years when hoses were banned in Seattle. If we had a
garden, we had to lug a watering can.

Ban on garden hoses? Wow, that gets me to
thinking. I can't quite picture that.

That's not surprising. Your horizons don't extend past the end of
your nose.

Even England has been known to ban "hosepipes" as they call them
(two years ago, during the summer drought). (The use, not the
possession thereof).

On 7/18/2014 10:26 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Stormin Mormon writes:

Ban on garden hoses? Wow, that gets me to
thinking. I can't quite picture that.

That's not surprising. Your horizons don't extend past the end of
your nose.

Even England has been known to ban "hosepipes" as they call them
(two years ago, during the summer drought). (The use, not the
possession thereof).


Since you know me so well, what did I have
for breakfast?

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..