Scooter wrote on Oct 30, 2008 12:34 PM:Ration this: Single families living in single family homes. Water (and utilities)that were designed for a single family cannot support multi family homes. My 3 person family should not have to pay for the home across the street with 15 people showering, using the toilet, doing laundry, etc.

I'll keep using the water (and, yes, I do conserve) that the three of us need. Ration the same amount to the family across the street, and the millions of others using a single home as a boarding house, and we have a solution.

That was easy.....

Alf wrote on Oct 30, 2008 12:49 PM:If we have water rationing,
will cities STOP ISSUING NEW WATER METERS????
OR are we being rationed so that new meters can keep being added.
Regards, Alf.

Go Find Water wrote on Oct 30, 2008 2:16 PM:that is what we pay you to do. Drill, build a desal plant whatever, go get it. Sure glad these clowns weren't in charge when the aquaduct system was built. They would be standing around preaching conserve.

good comments wrote on Oct 30, 2008 2:29 PM:Yes Scooter, I agree. My family is 2 people, same size next door is 6..but we pay the same as it's a condo. Plus how annoying to hear their water run for hours a day!! If they had to pay for their OWN use, they couldn't afford their bill.

Derek wrote on Oct 30, 2008 3:48 PM:Metropolitan would love that, wouldn't they? Forcing people to conserve, with water police paid by taxpayers, sure beats having to compete with desalination plants!

John E wrote on Oct 30, 2008 4:00 PM:There is no single solution. We need to develop new water sources, including desalination and reclamation; we need aggressive conservation, including drought-tolerant landscaping and on-site gray water reuse; we need pricing incentives, including sub-metering of multifamily dwellings; and we may need at least a partial moratorium on new construction.

Humans second wrote on Oct 30, 2008 6:48 PM:As long as hard line enviros keep suing and winning in court to stop water deliveries to southern California, our supply will continue to dry up. The wacko enviro's also sued to stop the Desal plant, and they almost won! Time to adjust everyone. Dead lawns, rationing, water police, empty homes all equal VICTORY for the hardline environmental movement. The only way to make them (hard line enviros) happy is to pack your bags and move into public housing in downtown L.A. (Of they will continue to live out in the country while you dodge bullets). And don't confuse the hard liners with common sense folks who conserve and are reasonable. It's just that the reasonable enviro's are not the ones in charge any more.

strange wrote on Oct 30, 2008 8:11 PM:Isn't it strange that our own state is cutting off water to us? Seems like they are treating us (So Cal) as if we are the enemies...why do they get to control this?

Infrastructure Needs wrote on Oct 30, 2008 9:11 PM:The Water shortage in Southern California is much like the oil shortage for the US, it has been talked about for years and nobody has done anything about it for years. There was plenty of time to build Desal, Reclaim and build more holding facilities etc. It is long past time to rebuild our infrastructure and that will take higher taxes. If you object for paying for better infrastructure, get use to living in a desert...

anotherview wrote on Oct 30, 2008 10:34 PM:Statewide, farmers overuse and waste water. Farming activity now consumes about 85 percent of the available state water supply. Households use about 5 percent. The rest goes to government, industrial, and commercial. Simple math shows that forcing farmers to lower their water use by only 5.88 percent would free up an amount equal to household water use. Further, about 30 percent of farm irrigation water runs off the land to waste. Via political pressure, however, farmers resist (1) improving their farm irrigation practices and (2) recycling farm water runoff. The Golden State has plenty of water available, but the distribution and use of this water does not happen rationally. Farmers grab most of the water, and then waste nearly a third of it. So any fair and sound solution to the water supply problem must require farmers to stop using and wasting so much water. Then others will have enough water.

Encinitas Local wrote on Oct 30, 2008 10:43 PM:I am sure Glad Jerome Stocks and Jame Bond approved all those new subdivisions with water meters.

Oside Mom wrote on Oct 30, 2008 10:50 PM:I see two partial solutions for this:

Stop developing open land! Every empty space does not need a densely populated housing development on it! Also, we don't need any more medical offices (why is it any new office buildings I see are for the medical profession?)!

Also, maybe make automatic sprinklers illegal. They seem to water everywhere but the grass! Our driveway gets a nice daily cleaning from our neighbor's sprinklers! There is a river of run-off constantly streaming down neighborhood streets from the sprinklers going overboard!

pfft wrote on Oct 30, 2008 11:24 PM:And Temecula, I mean Naggar's buddy, wants to build a water park. Yeah, good luck with that!

To Scooter wrote on Oct 31, 2008 1:01 AM:RATION THIS, "SCOOTER":

Kick those DEVELOPMENT LOVING CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS!!! IMMEDIATELY!!!

Ain't that right, Scooter!!! C-Ya - wouldn't want to be YA!!

Out there!!!

JSten wrote on Oct 31, 2008 6:55 AM:Durned if "anotherview" isn't right for more information from the Feds, see:

http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/qausage.html#HDR1

Probably time to get the pitchforks, torches, and the tar and feathers, and head for Sacramento.

Water District Engineer wrote on Oct 31, 2008 7:04 AM:anotherview, you hit the nail on the head! John E you also get it; however, a building moratorium is completely unnecessary if the farmers conserve. how about a proposition on the ballot to mandate change to the current flood irragation practices used by the farmers? this unfortunately means another tax, but may be cost effective considering the investment and o&m $ necessary for local water production.

Dave wrote on Oct 31, 2008 7:05 AM:A past article put the amount of water used per day per person at 140 gallons.
Now if we could just get control of our unchecked immigration into this country!

Time for the wrote on Oct 31, 2008 7:11 AM:taxpayers to slash taxes sent to Sacramento.

Less people wrote on Oct 31, 2008 7:13 AM:means less water needed. DEPORT THE ILLEGALS! Geeze how dumb is the government?

Jim In Oceanside wrote on Oct 31, 2008 7:33 AM:Several of you hit the nail on the head! We need to cut the enviro nazi's off at the ankles! Build multiple desal plants and recycle waste water. The technology is there and proven. Recycled waste water is safe and you cannot tell it from non-recycled water. The problem is in the heads of people and that can be cleared through education of the facts. Stop the law suits, make it impossible to shop around for a "friendly" judge. I agree regarding slashing taxes and spendable funds to Sacramento. Government is way too big and too redundant. First thing to get rid of is the multi-layered education system (both Fed and State) and return education control to the people/communities.

To Alf wrote on Oct 31, 2008 7:47 AM:I usually think your comments are idiotic, but you are right on the money today.
"Do as I say, not as I do" is what our government is preaching. They will continue to build, expand, and fail to enforce current regulations but will punish those who are NOT the problem to begin with.
California is an awful place to live, I'm already making plans to leave; enjoy the "utopia" you've all created.

ribeye2k wrote on Oct 31, 2008 8:24 AM:How many "20-gallon challenges" are negated every time San Diego city has a water main break and they can not shut it off due to under-maintained valves?

Scooter wrote on Oct 31, 2008 8:37 AM:"To Scooter": Not sure I understand your post, or how it applies to the water issue. You must think I'm somebody in particular, and whoever that is, you obviously have a problem with them!

Once again, water "rationing" on single family homes that have multi families living in them would be an immediate start (I think that would probably fall under code enforcement), and desal plants and the such would be longer term fixes. It really isn't the single family homes that are the largest water users, but that is where the bulk of the conservation damage is being levied.

To John E at 400 p.m. wrote on Oct 31, 2008 8:42 AM:Common sense will not be tolerated on these blogs!

Scorpion wrote on Oct 31, 2008 8:54 AM:As always, the pocketbook is the best solution. As I've noted on other water stories, set up pricing "tiers" based on reasonable usage levels, just like the electric companies do. I don't know what that amount should be, but if the average person uses 140 gallons a day and the average household has four people in it, then houses using 560 gallons a day (as an example) would pay about what they do now for water. But houses that use more than that should pay escalating amounts for each 100 9or 1,000) gallons after that. If they use double their allotment, they might pay four or six times as much for the extra water. Pretty soon people would conserve for themselves because they don't want to pay $500 a month for water.
Farmers would need a separate rate structure but the same principle could apply. That would give them great incentives to recycle their runoff.
Self-interest is what drives 98% of the people in the world. Hit people in the pocketbooks and they'll adjust their habits very quickly. (This would also satisfy the Scooters on this blog, because those multi-family houses would get the same allotment as the single-family households. Two birds, one stone.)
Why is this so hard for the politicians and water authorities to figure out?

Scorpion wrote on Oct 31, 2008 8:56 AM:Oh, ans one more thing to our city and county leaders:
QUIT APPROVING APARTMENTS AND CONDOS THAT DON'T HAVE METERS FOR EACH UNIT! There is no incentive for people to conserve if they don't have to pay for their water. Sure it costs more to meter each unit in the short term, but it costs a lot more in the long term not to.

Dave from Oceanside wrote on Oct 31, 2008 9:01 AM:Farm should be required to use the water-retaining gel that has the capacity to hold 400 times its own weight in water.
This is mixed into the soil and would hold the runoff for the plants to use until it is needed.
How many times have you walked past this stuff at Home Depot?

No-Spin wrote on Oct 31, 2008 9:19 AM:If it wasn't for the construction and housing meltdown, we would have NO water. Build more houses,allow un-controlled overpopulation(illegals)and we will have NO water.

To Scooter wrote on Oct 31, 2008 9:48 AM:It was late I missed a couple of words. First, for clarification:

You opened your comment with "Ration This". I considered it to be a pretty antagonistic approach and responded in kind when I wrote: "RATION THIS, "SCOOTER": Kick those DEVELOPMENT LOVING CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS (I meant to write "TO THE CURB") IMMEDIATELY!!!

I think my next comments were clear: "Ain't that right, Scooter!!! C-Ya - wouldn't want to be YA!!"

I closed by stating: "Out there!!!"
I meant to write: Outta there!!!

Just to clarify. Wink. Wink.

To Scooter wrote on Oct 31, 2008 10:01 AM:You wrote: "Not sure I understand your post, or how it applies to the water issue. You must think I'm somebody in particular, and whoever that is, you obviously have a problem with them!"

1. I am sure you were able to grab the gist of my post, despite a couple of missed words.

2. Removing a development loving city council will help because development will slow down (obviously). It doesn't have to stop, it just has to sustain. The last 6 years have been a prime example of over-building!

3. No Water = No Major Residential Development! If you only have WATER for 6 million people you can't invite 8 million to live in the city.

4. Sounds like you have a guilty conscience. Like Sherlock Holmes, you dedueced that I was implying you were someone else. Hmmm. Doth thou protest too much. I doth think soeth!

5. "Scooter" I know who you are...remember you told us before! You are an "almost 49 y.o. construction worker who has lived in Escondido all your life" who blogs often.

6. "Scooter", I have two questions for you, now:

A. If you are a construction worker, then WHY ARE YOU COMPLAINING ABOUT ANYTHING THAT MAY DRUM UP SOME WORK FOR THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY?

B. As a construction worker, are you really THAT involved in the politics of our city, state and nation?

(Oh yea...in a whispered voice...I say to you: I don't believe for one milli-second that you are a construction worker - I know plenty of them - and you ain't the type)!!!

Scooter wrote on Oct 31, 2008 10:18 AM:"To Scooter";

"It was late I missed a couple of words. First, for clarification:

You opened your comment with "Ration This". I considered it to be a pretty antagonistic approach and responded in kind when I wrote: "RATION THIS, "SCOOTER": Kick those DEVELOPMENT LOVING CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS (I meant to write "TO THE CURB") IMMEDIATELY!!!

I think my next comments were clear: "Ain't that right, Scooter!!! C-Ya - wouldn't want to be YA!!"

I closed by stating: "Out there!!!"
I meant to write: Outta there!!!

Just to clarify. Wink. Wink".

Thank you for the clarification. I still am interested to find out who you think I am, and why you are so angry at them.....

Who cares wrote on Oct 31, 2008 11:02 AM:None of you can stop the cities/water district from charging more; you are powerless to do anything.
What will you do, elect another lying politician who won't do anything but tax you more?
It is out of your hands, "they" can triple the cost of water, cut it off, or do whatever they want and none of you have any say; so can it!

dave from oceanside wrote on Oct 31, 2008 11:07 AM:A water-retaining gel has also shown its effectiveness in large scale farming, especially at the time of germination and development of the root network due to good aeration of the soil. The storage of rainwater or irrigation water delays the wilting point and thus makes it possible for certain plants to begin to be well established while waiting for the water regime to become adequate. Water -retaining gel ensures a good population and an even growth of plants even very permeable soils.

To Who cares wrote on Oct 31, 2008 11:10 AM:You talk like a loser.

Mr. Know-It-All wrote on Oct 31, 2008 11:30 AM:It's all very simple ... supply and demand. The fact is, in the San Diego region (and in all of Southern California for that matter!), city councils, with their greed for more money, have created more demand than there is supply.

STOP DEVELOPMENT NOW!!

Funny wrote on Oct 31, 2008 11:59 AM:I have been emailing all types of plans to Oceanside City Staff on this subject.

We are in a Water Crisis, yet lets just keep using good drinking water for our yards- WE CAN PUT INTO ACTION GREY WATER...if people wanted to use that concept.

Why if the State wants to control Grey Water...(not black sewer recycled water) Then Mandate all New Buildings or Permits for Remodels Have to USE GREY Water for Landscapes, and use different Pipping to our yards/landscapes......NOT OUR DRINKING WATER.

ITS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE FOLKS...WE NEED ACTION NOW! NOT later when we are out of water or it is being rashened.

Wow wrote on Oct 31, 2008 1:25 PM:Not a single one of these comments is worth a hill of beans (including this one, I admit). Is this really the intellectual level of NCT readers? Wow.

Artsyrat wrote on Oct 31, 2008 1:28 PM:We'll do our share, conserve as we have for nearly a decade. You eventually get used to it.

It's easy to blame others for the problems our communities face but it really comes right down to..."What will YOU do to better the situation?" Pointing fingers more than a couple of times is fruitless, it's just considered complaining and whining. Why not all you bloggers use less water for the sake of all of us and actually return American to a Union instead of a Division. United we stand, divided we fall. This is true in every respect including water conservation.

ToWow wrote on Oct 31, 2008 1:32 PM:Try reading them again.
Some are quite good.

WE NEED FOOD TOO wrote on Oct 31, 2008 1:49 PM:I know you said farmers statewide wast water. Can you name them. Local farmers have had a 30% mandentory cutback. Look around north San Diego county, can you see the dead or dieing groves. How about the avo. groves that have been cut back and rebudded,They tell me this saves water with smaller trees. Cuts off production also. Farmers in Imperial county have cut back water use to send water to San Diego. Your blanket statement sounds like you are for stopping food production so we in the cities can water our landscape.
Several years ago we had a chanch to vote for recycling wast water back into our fresh water system, failed to pass. This water may be cleaner than the product we recieve from our rivers. I would like to here some comment on recycling.
Every the U.S. has to much water someplace and not enough in another place. How about building a long tern system of moving water to where it is needed.

hey tooter wrote on Oct 31, 2008 3:09 PM:I mean scooter, love ya bro

To To Scooter wrote on Oct 31, 2008 3:10 PM:Dude, what are you smoking?

Grump wrote on Oct 31, 2008 6:32 PM:Have these people lost their mind? When will common sense prevail, how can the judges and water district wacos have the power to give more value to some useless two inch fish that is stupid enough to swim into pumps than humans here in SoCal who need the water? I am going to start digging my own well tomorrow!

Mexicat wrote on Oct 31, 2008 6:48 PM:Water, water everywhere but not a drop to drink. We are next door to the Pacific Ocean. Why can't they build a de-salinization plant? Is there a reason why?

JSten wrote on Oct 31, 2008 7:47 PM:Some farmers will shut down in protest.

Others will figure out ways to use water more efficiently and keep going. There is a lot of technology out there.

When the cots of water goes up high enough, people will get smarter about it's use.

As for apartments, and condos and such, the way the utilities are set up, the meter water to the building. If a landlord starts metering water it could turn them into a "utility" and subject to the same kind of rules as the big guys. It is widely recognized however that direct metering to allocate costs does encourage conservation.

Gil wrote on Oct 31, 2008 8:02 PM:WOW - the solution is so simple, yet no one will implement it. I wonder why?

Mike S. wrote on Oct 31, 2008 9:14 PM:Scorpion has the right idea. I'm down to about 70 gallons a day, and I'm a single guy in a single family home--which means I have the same amount of landscaping for one person that others have for four. But I'm only being so scrupulous because I'm an "envirowacko." I get very little monetary benefit for my careful water use. Water should cost more, period. Raise the price and desal and reclamation become easy.