This is an apparent reference to diverting more of the Sacramento River for agricultural use. But does anyone think that enough water could be diverted to erase the drought for the whole state? And of course the “3-inch fish”, which is actually the Delta Smelt and on the brink of extinction, would cease to exist, plus the people downstream of the diversion, or anyone else living around San Francisco, will not particularly like their river turning into a dry ditch.
Amazing, yet there are people who still see him as the only hope for America!
Which should lead to questioning whether that hope really exists!
Really though, he’s opened a serious question. Are endangered species worth **all **possible sacrifice?
We need biodiversity, but we also need agriculture!
California is where people want to live, and people need water to live.
The climate of California is dry, and in all likelihood is entering in a an even dryer phase.
And yet people are still streaming in, and that means that there needs to be adequate infrastructure.
When an irrepressible force come upon an unmoveable object, something has got to give.
I would hope that the needs of people are also taken into account, and not be trumped by the needs of the fish.
I lived in Los Angeles for several months. They are most definitely in a 9 year (or 7 ?) drought. Although I was amazed that no one acted like it. There are numerous large fountains throughout the city which I constantly questioned people about but was repeatedly told that it was “recycled water”. But what about the water that was evaporated and had to be replaced? Being from the Eastcoast I was dumbfounded because out here if we are in a drought for even less than a month water usage restrictions will be enforced.
In Seattle two years ago, I once heard, “What will we do, it hasn’t rained in two weeks!!!”
Being from a part of TX having a Middle Eastern, as opposed to Mediterranean, type of climate (it had camel patrols in the mid 1800s), it was all I could do not to bust out laughing.
I suspect he is more upset about how it affects his golf course at Palos Verdes than he is about the farmers.
To quote the Catechism:
“It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons.”
Mr. Trump doesn’t know what he is talking about here.
We’ll be winning so much we’ll be sick and tired of winning.
And of Trump.
Great source! Not.
For the past several years, in rainy Washington State, the majority of bottled water in the stores (i.e. Arrowhead, Crystal Geyser) have been from…
You (should have) guessed it. There may be a problem with water distribution, but California has plenty of water to sell.
Mr. Trump knows that there are only seven of the 3" delta smelt left.
And Trump knows that it is [politically incorrect word] to shut down water management [divert half of California’s drinking water] for seven 3" bait fish.
He also knows that proper water management includes building reservoirs and installing desalination plants. California USED to build reservoirs. [And they may do so again.]
San Diego just now opened a desalination plant. It took more then ten years to get it approved and built. But they do that all over the world.
Mr. Trump comes from New York City. They know that rainfall is cyclical. New York City spends a lot of its money on aqueducts and water supply management. They have reservoirs.
People all over the world do this.
Except, evidently, in California.
California is dumping a trillion gallons of fresh Water in the ocean. Only liberals would declare a water shortage disaster after spending years dumping good, fresh water into the ocean to protect a non-endangered bait fish.
Yes, I am in favor of desalination plants and water recycling plants. And California should be building many more of these, except that many Californians and many of their politicians are not too smart. But it doesn’t change the fact that there is a drought in southern California. That there is a drought is evident by measurement of rainfall and by observing the change in the water height of any one of the few lakes in southern California and how the water level has decreased over the years.
The Northeast has plenty of rainstorms and so people from that area may not realize that southern California doesn’t get as much rain as they do.
Yes, California politicians should be working to recycle water instead of throwing it into the ocean. That much is true. Toilet to tap is feasible, even though it doesn’t sound too good.
You’re treated to another headline about Trump usually based on yanking a single sentence out of an extended speech . The gist of Trump’s speech was that California politicians have missed managed California water resources and that is the reason they’re having a water problem . It would appear to be that what he says is true
That is something I do agree with. But I don’t agree with the idea that there is no drought in California.
California’s [roughly ten-year] rainfall patterns have been widely known since the beginning. Around 1900, California built its first major water management system by Mr. Mulholland and has updated the system regularly.
Everybody knows that.
Except the current Governor Brown.
[The previous Governor Brown did know that and constructed major water works.]